Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
1.5 Million Donors
Didn't see this on here yet. Barack Obama has hit 1.5 million donors for his primary campaign.
http://www.barackobama.com/index.php
Isn't this a little more newsworthy than a smart-alecky quip that Chris Matthews uttered about MSNBC being in the tank for Obama?
Advertisement
Comments (20)
Means nothing if he doesn't know how to use it. His campaign has stalled, and he doesn't seem to know what to do anymore.
May 6, 2008 2:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Except continue kicking Hillary's ass.
May 6, 2008 2:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
And as long as he's doing that .. he's doing dandy.
May 6, 2008 2:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Means nothing if he doesn't know how to use it."
You mean like paying your campaign bills and campaign staffers?
Obama's people are having huge open source events in Iowa, on a regular basis, completely unfunded by the campaign.
Hillary's Iowa staffers are still waiting on their paychecks, so there's nothing going on fr her any more, as if she does not even exist in Iowa any more.
I dare say, if they ran some of those early caucuses and primaries again, just for kicks, we would see the wounded loyalists that campaign has left on the batttlefield for the vultures to finish off.
Obama closed this deal on Bebruary 5th. Everything since then has been for the sake of media profits.
May 6, 2008 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think you'll find, in retrospect, that he knows exactly what he is doing.
It's like chess. Someone else made the analogy, and I find it brilliant. Not a game for those in a hurry, or who want constant excitement and showiness...but a thoughtful game that takes keen intelligence, patience and a gentleman's sense of fair play.
May 6, 2008 2:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
I played a game a couple of nights ago. My opponent was chiding me during the opening because I was taking a little time with my moves. By the time the end game came around, it was he who was taking the time.. because he had run out of options. I advised him to take the opposite approach in the future.
May 7, 2008 4:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
As in business, the mistakes get more costly to fix the later in a product cycle you are. I never have a problem going overschedule in a design phase as a result. I always make back the time in the manufacturing phase at the end!
May 7, 2008 4:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Nothing beats thinking ahead! And sadly, for clinton, the end of her campaign bespeaks little forethought and foresight. She is sitting in a pile of ashes - and she herself burned so many bridges to get that pile of ashes!
May 7, 2008 12:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nice metaphor, TheraP!
I think, in the end, the "inevitability" label actually screwed Hillary. Because she was "inevitable", she never had to clearly articulate a vision (those things made of "just words") of America or give us a feel of what she would be like as president. I remember reading somewhere that she never formally announced her candidacy.
Obama, on the other hand, faced long odds - remember most were even afraid to run against the Hillary money machine. So he was *required* to sit down and think long and hard about what kind of campaign he would run. As a result, he developed a gameplan -- a long-range gameplan -- and stuck to it. When you lead people, it's important for them to be confident that the leader knows where he is going. Most humans will follow the herd, despite setbacks, if they have confidence in the person leading the herd.
In a sense, the campaign ends up being a microcosm of how the candidate will run the country. I was never convinced that Hillary knew how to handle adversity when her plans wouldn't go through Congress. One thing is sure: should Obama become president, I'd be scared as a member of Congress, because it is easily conceivable that Obama can go directly to the people on TV and pressure Congress that way -- much like Reagan was able to do.
May 7, 2008 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
i'd like to see john mccain make the argument that 1.5 million donors isn't "public" financing.
May 6, 2008 2:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess we'll see after today. Internal Clinton polls had Obama up by a mere five points in NC. It just seems to me that Obama took NC for granted and/or Ace Smith ran a helluva campaign in NC to make Hillary the exciting candidate. If Obama loses NC (or narrowly wins) it's his own fault and the fault of his staff/campaign. IF he loses NC, I think Obama democrats will have to start looking past the "It's the delegates, Stupid" security blanket and realize Obama could(should?) be in real trouble.
May 6, 2008 2:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jonze, and everyone else who claims "Obama can't win even with his big money," just keep in mind where we were a year ago.
Coming so far so fast represents a huge victory for Obama, not just in the states he won but in EVERY SINGLE CONTEST, he's made up a 30-40 point difference, even in some of the most stringently Clinton states.
Trivialize the leaps and bounds he made to get so close in those presumed Hillary states, and point out the fractions she finally prevailed by.
It may be working in your own minds, but as a former Edwards supporeter who had no dog in this two-way fight, I can only say, Hillary has only lost ground, has never gained an iota of an inch, while Obama has moved a mile.
And in the process, built our party as never before, I wonder just how many new voters each campaign has hooked up with the precious gift of democracy?
Are these new, young voters the future of the Democratic Party?
Or are they just upstart outsiders, ruining our party with hope?
Circular reasoning sometimes is the only refuge of losing loyalists.
May 6, 2008 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
"If Obama loses NC (or narrowly wins)" it's his own fault and the fault of his staff/campaign
...exactly what I mean by circular reasoning.
When, and from which campaign have we heard "a win is a win is a win?"
And certainly the MSM preacher scam had nothing to do with it?
It's Obama's misspent campaign funds that caused some sort of loss even if he wins?
May 6, 2008 2:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
"IF he loses NC, I think Obama democrats will have to start looking past the "It's the delegates, Stupid" security blanket and realize Obama could(should?) be in real trouble."
LOL. What color is the sky in your world?
May 6, 2008 9:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
The claim "Obama can't win even with his Money" pisses me off. What about Hillary? Why can't she close the deal!? She's a former first Lady, Bill Clinton's WIFE? Why can't she beat this unknown senator from Illinois!?
May 6, 2008 10:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary has spent some $200 million on this campaign. An enormous sum. What does she have to show for it? They slept through the entire month of February and have gone broke twice!
May 6, 2008 10:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
ARGH!
1.5 MILLION ELVIS FANS CAN'T BE WRONG!
THAT'S ONE FOR THE MONEY!
TWO FOR THE HO!
THREE TO GET READY!
NOW GRAB YOUR RUMBALL!
ACQUIRE! MERGE! MARAUD! DILUTE! DILUTE!
ARGH!
May 7, 2008 12:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Obama will be the underdog until the moment he is sitting in the Oval Office." Michelle Obama
May 7, 2008 1:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
New Theme Music For Hillary:
http://www.imeem.com/people/6ZLAvc/music/xy5-SBoD/alexander_oneal_fake/
May 7, 2008 10:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
In light of the massive win in NC and the virtual win in IN, this can be Barack's new theme song commemorating Tuesday, May 6th:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmbmPalsRi4
Love this song!
May 7, 2008 1:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment