Rethugs confident about beating "glass jaw" Obama, cite pastorgate, inexperience among other things

[jackson_dem]

There is a thread up asking why Obama can't win. That is the wrong question. Show us how he can win. Show us the states he will carry. If nominated, he will loses Ohio, Florida, Michigan, and probably also Pennsylvania. He is losing New Jersey. He is in a dead heat with McCain in Massachusetts. Small states like Nevada and Iowa won't offset the losses of these big states. He can't get to the requisite number of electoral votes. That is why he can't win.


The Latino factor has to be considered by anyone considering electability. McCain is popular with Latinos and has a long record. Obama has no record, no goodwill built up. He would still ultimately win Latinos but by a much smaller margin than Clinton would, given the Clintons can go toe to toe with McCain with Latinos and actually beat him based on their great, lengthy record. In 2004 Bush got 44% of the Latino vote, in 2006 rethugs got only 30%. This was an important factor in taking back Congress.

There has been some discussion of the role working folks will play and this is the part of the Democratic Party Obama is most vulnerable with. Many of them are the so-called "Reagan Democrats." They are called that for a reason, and kissing Reagan's behind won't win their votes. Obama loses a significant percentage of working folks, especially white working folks, against McCain. Where does he make it up?

-snip-

"I believe he has a glass jaw -- and he is going to get hit hard," said Republican pollster Tony Fabrizio.

-snip-

The questions raised by Clinton about Obama's lack of experience and suitability as commander in chief will be revitalized, Republicans say, as will the controversy about inflammatory comments by Obama's pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

Coupling that with Obama's weakness among blue-collar Democrats and Hispanics, and the possibility of a prolonged nominating fight that turns off Clinton backers and independents, Republicans are gaining confidence about a November race against Obama.

-snip-

Clinton was heartened by a Quinnipiac University poll this week that showed her beating McCain in three key swing states -- Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida -- and running better against him than Obama. "The polls are reflecting the arguments we're making," Clinton strategist Mark Penn said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080403/pl_nm/usa_politics_election_dc;_ylt=AkNHlqQk6BGay8HLNhYgAlJh24cA

[AX10]

1. Oh well!

[Cant trust em]

2. Things will change when it's Obama vs. McCain

as opposed to now when it's Clinton+McCain vs. Obama. As soon as the wins the nomination and can concentrate fully on McCain this springtime polling will change.

[jackson_dem]

6. It could change for the worse. Obama has yet to be touched by the rethugs...

[merh]

12. You admit that all the negatives and the smears came from Hillary

and not the RNC smear machine that others have alleged?

[Cant trust em]

18. He's already weathered Pastorgate

This was supposed to be the story that buried him, yet he bounced back from it. The republicans will do what the republicans do. If there's anyone out there who can neutralize their slander, it's Obama.

[jackson_dem]

30. In the Dem primaries...Dukakis weathered Willie Horton in the primaries too

What happened when it mattered?

[Cant trust em]

59. Obama is not Dukakis

I don't think Dukakis was packing houses the way that Obama is.

[jackson_dem]

62. Dukakis had experience...

Don't be mislead by the pop culture aspect of Obama's candidacy. There is a reason why he draws mega crowds yet does not do any better than Clinton against McCain and actually does worse in the crucial states.

There was a previous Democratic candidate who also gave electrifying speeches and had zealous supporters. He was nominated--and lost three times...

[Cant trust em]

72. The reason that he is not doing any better than Clinton is because he has to fight on two fronts

Democrats are currently split. Just look at the raw numbers of people who have voted in the primaries. Texas for example, Democrats doubled Republican turnout. Obama (who came in second) turned out more votes than all of the republicans COMBINED. I really can't imagine that the people who voted for Hillary are so die-hard for her that they will switch to republicans in the GE. Now that we're in the internet age it is much easier for a candidate like Obama to spread his positivity. Historical context doesn't mean as much as it used to. Ultimately I think that Obama's strengths mitigate his weaknesses.

[John Q. Citizen]

31. Fear not. Tremble not. Stand back a step or two and observe how to win elections you thought

impossible to win.

Not only do we have an incredibly strong, able, candidate in Obama, but we also have an extremely effective campaign. From the thousands of volunteers to the millions of small contributors, to the mid level campaign staff up to the top of the campaign, this is a brilliant and strong campaign.

Obama has beat the crap out of both Clinton and McCain in fund raising, volunteer recruitment, volunteer utilization, turn out at events, GOTV, and instant media response. I bet Obama has raised more money, put to work more volunteers, and turned out more people at events than Clinton and McCain combined.

I think Obama is going to run a strong campaign against McCain and he's going to win. I'm betting on the obvious front runner.

[jackson_dem]

35. Primary campaigns are not general election campaigns

Ask McGovern, Mondale, Dukakis, and Kerry.

Money alone does not buy elections. You raise a good point, though. With all the ad spending he has done why is he still losing to McSame?

[John Q. Citizen]

69. I'm not sure which conflicting point you are trying to make.

First you say primary campaigns are not like general elections, OK. Obama has waged the best primary by far based on volunteers, event turnout and money raised.

Until the primaries are over and a winner determined, there is no general election race. Obama isn't in the general election quite yet.

When Obama goes over 2025 delegates and becomes the presumed nominee, then there will be two candidates in the general. We can then see where the two start at and how things change over the course of the campaign.

[NightWatcher]

3. is that why Rush was begging to go against Hillary?

[jackson_dem]

7. Perception has changed over the past month or so among rethugs

Pastorgate is a wet dream for them...

[NightWatcher]

11. I thought that Snipergate would be much bigger

they would get to put up a POW against a woman who lied about getting shot at

[jackson_dem]

14. A candidate fudging a story versus a candidate being swiftboated as racist against 75% of voters

It is obvious which one is more damaging.

[Nickster]

13. You think they want the public to hear about Hagee? I'll take Wright over Hagee anyday.

[jackson_dem]

32. Hell yes they do

One is a candidate's pastor and mentor for 20 years. The other is an endorser who was sought by the campaign. One bashes 75% of voters, the other about one third. It is obvious who comes out ahead if we nominate Obama. If we nominate Clinton then we can get some mileage out of Hagee. This is another reason why she is more electable.

[TheDoorbellRang]

40. They have a plethora of wet dreams

but I try to stay well away. :-)

[C_U_L8R]

4. Let them keep thinking that and talking smack

They haven't been in the ring with Obama before.
Just ask The Mighty Clinton Political Machine.

[jackson_dem]

8. Obama hasn't been in the ring with the rethugs either

He has yet to be attacked by them yet he still can't beat McCain right now. How weak will he be once they are through with him?

[Kool Kitty]

79. I think both of our candidates will have a

battle royale against McCain. I know what everyone has said about Obama and how they will attack him, and I am sure they are just as busy readying the mighty Repig smear machine to fight Hillary, too. Bet on it. It is going to be an ugly autumn.

[tabatha]

5. fortunately the people who support Obama

and the 81% of the population who think the country is on the wrong track, wont' vote to stay on that same track with "Mr Experience".

[jackson_dem]

9. That isn't how it works. McSame is perceived as "different" by voters

It is foolish but one thing this election cycle has proven is that substance means little...

[merh]

10. Mark Penn, isn't he the guy that just left the campaign

wasn't he the one that had that NAFTA met up?

Oh, and yes, the Hillary comment will cause some problems in the GE, you know how she said McCain was more qualified than Obama, but that can be dealt with as it has in the primaries.

Relative to how he will win, go read John Kerry's statements. Also please realize, with all of his "issues" and the kitchen sink thrown at him, he is still beating the candidate you perceive vetted and the better candidate, so what's that tell you about things.

[jackson_dem]

17. Who cares? He was citing a poll, not making anything up

Everyone in the real world realizes McCain is more experienced than Obama. It isn't as if Obama is going to run on experience if he makes it to the general. No candidate with no experience has ever won in a time of war. How does Obama buck this trend?

Kerry is delusional. He also thinks Obama won't get swiftboated. :rofl:

Yeah, just like Dukakis and Kerry dominated the primaries. What happened in the general? More importantly, why did it happen?

[merh]

21. The delusional one is you

though I think it mighty big of you to admit that it has been Hillary doing the swiftboating. All the crap she has thrown at him he had dealt with and moved beyond, she is still wallowing in the negatives and still scrambling so that she trips on her words and tells more lies.

[jackson_dem]

26. Do you read what you write? None of that has any bearing on the general election

Typical knee-jerk Obamite response... ;)

[merh]

68. Yes, I read what I write and I understand it too

Apparently it is you with the deficit.

It all has bearing on the GE. Remember, it is you hillary supporters that have claimed that hillary was vetted and couldn't be touched. :rofl:

[bhikkhu]

57. 3 States, cherry-picked out of 50. Link to the full picture:

http://www.electoral-vote.com/

That is, Clinton has advantages in some states, disadvantages in others. If you only look at her strong states, you get a skewed picture. Of course, you can just say that only her strong states count.

Overall, the she is running even with Obama in head to heads against McCain for electoral votes.

[Forkboy]

15. Penn also believes Uribe is a good trade partner.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jackson_dem]

20. Which part of the article are you having trouble reading?

The article references PA and OH. Are you unable to read or do you, like a good "member", have an amazing capacity to ignore any data that causes cognitive dissonance?

[MadBadger]

22. The Q poll that is cited in your article has him beating McCain in OH and PA...Why do you still LIE?

[jackson_dem]

33. Why can you not read? Again, what are you having trouble understanding?

Odd for an alleged college student...

[MadBadger]

34. You say he will lose Ohio and PA, but yet you cite a poll that has him winning there

Where is your evidence?

[jackson_dem]

36. Do you know when the election is?

[MadBadger]

39. No clue, please tell me.

[jackson_dem]

48. Aren't you allegedly from NJ?

[MadBadger]

50. Allegedly is so.

[jackson_dem]

60. You don't realize how bad it is that Obama is losing NJ?

Cherry picking polls is foolish and can be done to show anything. Aggregate polling shows Obama losing New Jersey while Clinton wins it. Isn't this strange given how Democratic New Jersey is?

[MadBadger]

61. Looks blue to me

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Obama/Maps/Apr06.html

[rwheeler31]

74. Race dammit

Sorry to interrupt.

[MadBadger]

77. I prove you wrong and you dont respond? Typical.

[ret5hd]

19. With all your heartfelt concern, i am sure...

that you will be out working to ensure that a Democrat wins the general election. Right?




Right?









Uhhhmmmm, right?

[jackson_dem]

24. I have nothing to prove regarding my Dem credentials to internet jockeys

:boring:

Thanks for backing up the cult thread, though. Only a cult would constantly demand loyalty oaths.

[ret5hd]

27. What cult? Didn't I specifically say...

"working to ensure that a DEMOCRAT wins the general election"???

[bhikkhu]

23. The electoral vote thing has shifted radically in the past week

http://www.electoral-vote.com/

Where McCain had a significant advantage even a week ago in the projections, and Obama faired most poorly, now it is a statistical three-way tie.

Take a look at the maps again, I am curious what you think. We ran over this in a previous thread when things were different.

[Auntie Bush]

41. Agreed! That's a well thought out post. I agree with all those facts and figures.

That's the root of out problem. Too bad Obamites are so blind to the facts of life. That's why they have so many babies! :rofl: That must explain why there are so many Obama supporters.

[bhikkhu]

45. ok...but I have no idea what you are talking about.

[anonymous171]

25. lol. Remember when Hillary used to say that?

How wrong she turned out to be.

[quakerboy]

28. REthugs confidant about beating

Iraq, Alquaida, Afganistan, Iran, Sex, Evolution, etc...

How are all those going for them?

[jackson_dem]

38. They have a good track record in prez elections

1968, 1972, 1980, 1984, 1988, 2000 (close enough to steal), and 2004. The big exception? The Clintons (which is why they hate the Clintons' guts)...

[TAWS]

29. How long do you spend on DU? Go outside and take some fresh air!

[Joe the Revelator]

37. Well I guess we better not nominate him, if the republicans think he's too easy....

give me a fucking break Jackson.

[Bensthename]

42. Too bad Hillary has already shown to have a glass jaw. One fat lie and she is out cold.

[islandmkl]

43. do you have someone better in mind? you know, one of our viable primary candidates?

if it was Hillary, she wouldn't be 'explaining' and 'defining' her standing in the contest...

she would be in front....

as much as hillary and all would like to believe that THE SECOND CHOICE AMONG DEMOCRATS would be a stronger NATIONAL CANDIDATE...

there are absolutely no historical precendents, statistics, information, poll data, gut feelings, snake bones or chicken feathers that would lead anyone to conclude that Obama is unelectable WHILE HILLARY WOULD BE...

the RW will chew her up...to think they have even tried AND FAILED is fantasty....

they WANT to face Hillary...she is their red meat....

[jackson_dem]

46. Who was more electable in 1988? Gore (3rd) or Dukakis? 2004: Clark or Kerry?

1972: McGovern or Humphrey?

[karynnj]

66. Kerry was far more electable than Clark

Clark won exactly one primary - and he only beat Kerry by 3% there! He had many many stumbles in the primary. He was a great surrogate, but I seriously doubt he would have held up as well under the fire that would have hit him.

Not to mention Gore 1988 had an awful platform - he was the first DLC candidate and was for funding the Contras! He got 3% of the vote in the primaries.

[LiberalAndProud]

44. I suspect they are watching.

Can they re-use the same ammunition that has proven less than lethal? I doubt it. It is my suspicion that McCain, with the current virtual tie against either of our candidates, has reached the zenith of his popularity in this campaign. Clinton or Obama, McCain will lose, Republican pipe-dreams notwithstanding.

[JoFerret]

47. NYTimes front page ton Mccain today

gives you all you need to know.

that plus mr. glass jaw.

[Mooney]

49. If he's such a weak candidate, and Hillary can't beat him, she must be a REALLY weak candidate.

[jackson_dem]

56. Do you believe McGovern, Mondale, Dukakis, and Kerry were our strongest GE candidates?

[karynnj]

64. Kerry definately was - he nearly won a race the Clintons thought unwinnable

With a fairer media and better party support he would be president. As he lost by about 60,000 votes in Ohio - he clearly is not in the same category as the other 3. (In fact, had Bush 2 been at 40% approval for months before the election as Bush 1 was in 1992, Kerry would have been the first Democrat to get more than 50% in decades.

[gmudem]

65. The Clinton Machine is using GOP tactics in this primary

And Obama seems to be handling them just fine. You keep making this argument and it still makes no sense same as it did months ago.

[Mooney]

70. Nope.

[EffieBlack]

51. That's probably what the Clinton campaign thought a year ago. Underestimate this man at their peril

I say let the Republicans get overconfident. Makes it even easier for Obama to eat their lunch if and when the time comes.

[anonymous171]

53. EXACTLY! nt

[nichomachus]

52. The GOP was also confident about a six-week "cakewalk" in Iraq -- with candy and flowers

[kevinmc]

54. Oh no the republican made a threat ...... and the cowardly wing of the Democrats.....

wet themselves ..... Allen Keyes said the same thing about a glass jaw ... Karl Rove said they would win the house and Senate in 2006 ..yada yada yada.

[mmonk]

55. Simple. McCain will fail miserably in debates with Obama.

The pastor issue can be negated easily in debates about McCain's pastor endorsers whose bigoted comments have not been rejected by McCain. Obama can trump McCain on the war issue easily.

[jackson_dem]

58. This is very telling. Obamites think the ge will be a cakewalk

Hill supporters realize it will be a dogfight.

[democrattotheend]

84. Not this "Obamite"

I think it's going to be really tough, and we need all hands on deck if we're going to pull this off. We can't underestimate how much racism there still is in this country, and I think we might be ready to elect a black man but it's not going to be easy, and if we have a divided party it'll never happen. That's why I am against all the calls for Clinton to drop out, and I am sensitive to the way the behavior of fellow Obama supporters behave. I want to take back the White House this year and I want to make history, and it would kill me if we blew the chance because we got so caught up in our candidate preferences that half of us weren't motivated to soldier on and seize the chance. I have said many times that I will work my ass off to help whoever the nominee is get elected, and I am under no illusion that it will be easy regardless of who we nominate.

[gmudem]

63. Pastorgate did nothing

Other than show the racism of many people. And you're on drugs if you really think Obama will lose Massachusetts. I think the same pollster also showed North Dakota tied up between McCain and Obama. Do you really think that will happen?

[jackson_dem]

71. It isn't about whether he loses Massachussetts

Just the fact that he would have to put resources into Mass would be a blow to his chances in the swing states, where he is already performing poorly.

[VADem11]

67. Hillary was confident too

Remember how Hillary was supposed to crush Obama and win this thing by Super Tuesday? It didn't happen because Obama is running one of the best campaigns the Democratic party has seen. The Wright controversy barely dented him and he turned that controversy into one of his greatest moments with his speech on race. He is raising far more money than Hillary and the resignation of Penn just shows how unprepared the Clinton campaign is. Obama will be the nominee and I believe Obama will be able to wipe the floor with McCain.

[Duke Newcombe]

73. Once the GE is on..

...to quote my favorite line from Star Wars:

"Oh, no...my young Republicans...I'm afraid it will be YOU who are mistaken...about a GREAT, MANY THINGS..."

They have no idea who this guy from Chicago is, and why the shouldn't f*^& with him toe-to-toe...but they will.

Duke

[melody]

75. Talk about false bravado lol

They've got a grim, nasty, bad-tempered old man with backward ideas facing a horrible economy versus a new person
with hopeful energy and ideas.

They're dead in the water and they know it.

[ProSense]

76. Two words:

Rocky Balboa!

:rofl:

[Hugabear]

78. Yeah, and they're just terrified at the prospect of facing Hillary

no sarcasm smiley needed

[MrSlayer]

80. Right. Like running as Bush's third term is a winning strategy.

This is one more feeble attempt to get the one they really want, Hillary, in there.

[democrattotheend]

81. Do you want them to?

Just out of curiousity. I know you think Obama can't win, but if he is the nominee, do you even want him to?

[kwenu]

82. Rethugs or Hillary supporters? It's hard to tell the difference these days.

[LittleClarkie]

83. Then why is he gaining ground in Pennsylvania

He is, isn't he?

And someone with a glass jaw wouldn't have had a comeback, and he did. I thought his speech on the subject was rather good.

[Labors of Hercules]

85. Wow. I have never itched to put someone on ignore 3 times in the same day.

That's a new record. Damn you are one irritating (and thoroughly misguided) human being.

[Aussie leftie]

86. too late to recommend, but consider this post kicked

[PoliticalAmazon]

87. Yeah, that's why Limbaugh is telling dittoheads to vote for Hillary in primary. n/t