Now that the Newsweek poll has Obama beating all the Republicans

[Quixote1818]

and by a larger margin than Hillary; are there still those who don't think he can win in a national election?

Right now Obama is second on my list with Edwards first, but I have no doubt Obama could win and I would work my ass off for him, if he got the nomination.

On Edit: Obama was actually pulling away more Republican voters than most of the other Democratic candidates.

[yourout]

1. I am in your camp. Edwards then Obama but both can win.

[mudesi]

2. Say it with me: Charisma charisma charisma

He's got it, period.

[Quixote1818]

3. Obama remind me of the guy in High School that EVERYONE liked

Across the board, liberal, independent and even Republicans. Even if you don't agree with his politics everyone simply likes him and wants to have a beer with him.

[Selatius]

8. Geez, I hate when you said "have a beer with him." That's what everybody said about George W. Bush.

It's a sad commentary when people have become so ignorant as to vote for politicians based on likability instead of the merit of their platform.

[Quixote1818]

15. But it did help in getting Bush elected

This is a guy who many would want to have dinner or a beer with and he was smart enough to be against the War. Obama is NOTHING like Bush but you can't argue that likability is important in getting elected. It may not be a good way to chose a president but it helps.

[BeyondGeography]

33. It's a trite phrase, but you don't lose 7 of the last 10 presidential elections

by consistently nominating likeable candidates. Obama is rated the most optimistic of all the candidates in the latest Newsweek poll, which the numbers crunchers call a key determinant for electability. I'd rather focus on that than the beer thing, but a sunny disposition, optimism and beer can go hand-in-hand.

[unblock]

42. hah! i LOVE the "have a beer with him" thing!

what a way to turn around a bu**sh** argument to our own advantage!

[JerseygirlCT]

10. Oh no, not the beer thing again.

Look where that silliness got us last time.

I don't care if I want to have a beer with the guy. I care about what he or she will do for the country -- what are the priorities and how hard with she/he fight for them? How clever are they about the presidency -- will they understand how to use it?

There are lots of people who'd probably be a blast to have a drink with. I don't trust them to lead the country though, that's for sure!

[Forkboy]

12. I don't need a beer buddy.

[stanwyck]

20. Exactly. We all have beer buddies. We need a president

who isn't elected on the basis of a manufactured image. We've at least learned that much from the disastrous Cowboy Bush presidency.

[goclark]

32. Chimp is an idiot, Obama is brilliant

and a man for the people.

There is Nothing that is alike about the two,

[Enrique]

53. I don't want to have a beer with him

I think he could make a good president, but I don't especially want to have a beer with him.

[krkaufman]

54. I doubt the "have a beer with him" metric enters into it.

Hopefully, people consider him acceptable because he's NOT an average guy you'd have a beer with; he's actually intelligent and intellectually curious -- and has better things to do than sit around drinking beer.

[Bitwit1234]

4. I think the republicans know that Obama can't win, so they are pushing him

trying to get the nomination so they will have a chance.

See how they were ALL FOR HILLARY at first. They wanted her to get the nomination so she couldn't win the election. Now they are switching to Obama.

[Quixote1818]

6. So you are saying they want to pick the guy who beats their guys in the polls

by the largest margin? That makes zero sense.

I don't care what Republicans think because they are wrong about everything. What matters to me is what the polls say.

[JerseygirlCT]

7. I hadn't noticed the switch. It still seems to me that they are

absolutely fixated on Hillary.

[Colobo]

37. You think he can't win

Millions think he can.

[stanwyck]

51. Why couldn't Obama win?

Sure. I live in Georgia and he isn't likely to win this state. But, then, neither would Hillary or John Edwards. Write off the South. It's lost to the Dems.
But, then, so is the Northeast lost to the Republicans.
The Midwest and the West are up for grabs.
I don't think your "Hillary couldn't win. Obama couldn't win" is reality based. More like talk radio based.

[Tactical Progressive]

55. That only works when the rhetoric is aimed at Hillary

When Republicans want Hillary it's because they think they can beat her.
When Republicans want Obama it's because they like him.

Typical DHL rhetoric: the facts are retrofitted seamlessly into whatever interpretation they want. Exactly like Republicans.

[JerseygirlCT]

5. I don't have a primary choice yet -- don't intend to for a while

but here's the conundrum I keep hitting up against -- and maybe someone can reassure me.

I've certainly seen that Obama is hugely charismatic and obviously intelligent. I get the attraction and the excitement. But does he really have the experience yet to lead the entire country?

OTOH, I don't think Hillary would make it in the general. Too many people who just plain old loathe her - some with reason, many without. But, maybe ironically, I feel more sure that she'd make a very good president when it came down to it.

Of course, there are a whole slew of other people in the race, too -- which is why I won't be settling for a pick just yet.

But thoughts?

[Quixote1818]

13. I actually think his lack of experience is a positive

Lets put it this way, he was smart enough to be one of the few who was against the war! Experienced people like Kerry, Hillary, Edwards and many others didn't have the smarts and insight Obama had on the war.

It seems to me the longer people are in Washington, the more corrupt they get and the more connected with big business. Experience is important but I would rather have someone who is smart and has common sense surrounded by all kinds of people with experience that can give him many different viewpoints. Obama strikes me as someone who would listen to all sides and make good decisions. His position on the war shows he at least would have made a better decision on that issue regardless of experience.

[JerseygirlCT]

14. But do we *know* he's got that common sense, or are we so

charmed we're just hoping that's the case? Are there examples of past behavior for us to use to make that judgement?

That's where it gets sticky for me.

[Quixote1818]

16. I just gave you the example of his position on the war

Very few Democrats had the guts to say they did not support the war and Obama was one of these few.

[JerseygirlCT]

18. That's true. And I'd hope to see more of that.

As I said, I'm not in any way opposed here, just standing back a little...

[karlrschneider]

24. Being against the war may well prove to be even more palatable as the quagmire

continues to consume our troops. I most certainly don't want us to lose ANY more (as if that's remotely possible), but
the dynamics of the ongoing debacle, if it continues to be as bad as it is now, should work in his favor. It's a shitty conflation, isn't it?

[papau]

31. Obama says he is a small step conservative - useful for staying out of wars, not useful for

major change like single payer universal health, protecting Social Security by ending the wage cap, adding fairness to taxes by taxing investment dollars at the same rate as wage dollars (Edwards today was willing to move from 15% to 25% on capital gains), breaking up media monopolies and having a fairness rule restored to the FCC, poverty programs measured in 10's of billions instead on 10's of millions for "pilot programs" that passed via "bi-partisan" votes obtained by giving more tax breaks to corporations (this last is perhaps unfair since as a new Senator his lack of association with large dollar legislation is expected - but the "bi-partisan" via tax breaks is - to me - troubling).

He even spoke in favor more coal use (with water used for coal conversion to oil/gas) as part of his energy policy.

I understand that in the next few weeks he will be releasing major new proposals in many areas that will destroy the conservative/small step image - I look forward to those new proposals.

[Gman]

9. Right now my dog could beat any Republican

and my dog has been convicted of gambling, extortion, sex with a minor and was once caught with both a live boy dog and a dead female dog in bed at the same time.

I forgot to mention the time he was convicted for grand theft auto.

[Zynx]

17. Heh, well put.

[madfloridian]

11. Last week Edwards was beating all of them....

and more than the other two were. So it will vary.

[Ishoutandscream2]

19. I would be very happy with an Obama presidency

It would be a big step to see an African-American win, also. What would that say about our country? I would sure look at our nation more favorably.

[karlrschneider]

21. I think it would be VERY difficult. Polls are meaningless.

What a person will tell a pollster and what they will do in the voting booth are often polar opposite.

[Colobo]

38. Not in my case

Why would I lie in a poll? I want my opinion to be counted!

[karlrschneider]

40. You wouldn't lie. But a lot of people would, and do. I lived in Tampa for 17

years and I can name dozens of people there who will tell me, you, or a pollster they would have no problem voting for a black man but when election day comes around and nobody knows, they will pick anybody BUT him. (I should have said black -person-, but the observation is still valid.)

We DUers are, like it or not, a tiny minority. We ignore that fact sometimes as we reinforce each other with the high fives that don't translate into votes. It sucks but it is what it is.

[stanwyck]

22. Odd that Bill Kristol didn't mention this

in his column in the latest TIME magazine where he claims the Republicans will win in 2008. Why? Because Iraq won't play as strongly as "change" and that is what the Republican nominee will represent to the American people, since none of the contenders are actually tied to this administration.
Do you think ole Bill didn't mention this poll because he's writing for TIME? And this was a Newsweek poll?
Or because, as usual, Kristol is wrong.

[BlooInBloo]

23. I continue to think he has exactly 0 chance of winning.

[karlrschneider]

25. I often don't agree with you but I do here.

It's a goddamn rotten shame but there it is...

[BlooInBloo]

26. Yup.

[David Dunham]

28. Obama won't be the Dem nominee. He's third in NH, IA, and NV

[Quixote1818]

39. John Kerry was third of fourth in those states at this stage.

[Sick_of_Rethuggery]

43. Perhaps you should realize that...

Illinois has only 15% black population...

[BlooInBloo]

45. About like it was when I left Peoria. Thanks for the update.

[melody]

27. That's one poll ... I wish I believed this country would vote in a black man

I don't think so ... not yet anyway.

I still think it's Gore or Edwards or we're sunk.

[SoCalDem]

29. Not surprising that republicans are going to him.. We know that they just want to "win"

they don't really have such closely held principles. they will vote for a dem if they don't like their own choices..that way they can still "win"..

[earthlover]

30. If not now....WHEN?

To those who focus on Obama's race and bemoan that he is black and blacks cannot win....my response to that is if not now, when? One thing is guaranteed with 100% certainty: every single time a black candidate runs, many will claim victory is impossible, and of course some will say this with sadness in their heart. But if every time we use this type of reasoning to select our candidate....then we will be guilty of using race to have the net result of never nominating a person of color! So can we really decry racism when the end result is the same?

Obama CAN win! He is charismatic enough and has broad enough support that I don' think his race will be much of a factor if at all. He will win more votes by his charisma, his likeability, his "instinicts" for politics, not to mention his anti-Iraq record and optimistic world view than he could possibly lose by his race.

I just don't buy that he will lose votes on the basis of his race. With someone with Obama's charisma and political savvy, about the only folks who would vote against him on the basis of race would probably not vote Democratic anyway. Another factor to consider is that Obama's candidacy could dramatically increase voter turnout among minorities which tend to vote overwhelmingly Democratic but are not known for high voter turnouts. So, all in all, his race could help as much as it hurts.

Is there any other Democrat out there that is turning out the crowds Obama gets? Does his race diminish the turnouts at his appearances?

And as for those who pooh-pooh having a candidate that people would feel comfortable having a beer with....granted we need more than this....but would we rather a candidate NOT have such appeal? Who says someone can't have both appeal AND be progressive on the issues? Some Reps have won by appearing likeable....the other side of this coin is that their opponents LOST because they weren't. I dare say Obama is a LOT more to our liking than any Republican who could run....so is it a bad thing that he might actually be electable and save us from the election of a Republican? More power to him if people can relate to having a beer with him. He wins, and the drinks are on the house!!!!

[goclark]

34. He CAN win! You are so right

It is telling that Progressive Democrats can have a mind set that Obama can't win.

Sad, sad, sad

[BlooInBloo]

35. (shrug) It's just like hiring practices. Keep the negro around until the final round...

... to maintain plausible deniability, and then... poof! She/he "somehow" doesn't get the job.

And with the plausible deniability, white folks maintain their freedom to hold that race isn't a factor.

It's a great racism-protection racket.

[Forkboy]

36. It worked in the NFL and MLB for years!

[Freddie Stubbs]

41. Beware of the David Duke Effect

Every time that David Duke would run for office he would get significantly more votes than what polling would indicate. It has been theorized that some who were polled were afraid to admit to those conducting the polls that they would support a racist. But when it came time to cast their ballots in the voting both, David Duke got their vote.

There is the possibility that some, even a small percentage, of those polled won't admit that will not support Obama because their reasons are racist.

Look at last years Senate races. In every one where the candidates were polling neck and neck, the Democrat won. Except for one. Tennessee, where there was an African-American candidate. Could it be that there was a small percentage of racists who decided to lie to pollsters because they are not proud of their racism?

[earthlover]

44. Hey, Gore did not win Tennessee...

...Last time I checked, Gore was White. PS....did Kerry win Tennessee? I think Kerry is White too. Nice try, but Tennessee tends to vote Republican. Even when Dems are White.

[Freddie Stubbs]

48. But did Gore and Kerry do worse there that polls indicated?

:shrug:

[Gelliebeans]

46. I have tried to stay on the sidelines during the primary

by just reading about the candidates and learning as much as I can.

I do know for a fact that I live in a very RED area of California and I have witnessed Republicans that I know personally having Obama parties and Obama bumper stickers all over the place. He is also my parents favorite vote and they are willing to change parties to vote for him in the primary.

Just my .02 fwiw.

[murielm99]

47. That is happening all over the country.

I live in Illinois, in a very read area. Our area voted overwhelmingly for Obama. I believe they would have done so, no matter who was running against him.

My son lives in Du Page county. It is changing a bit, but still red. His precinct went 76 percent for Obama.

I think we are seeing a phenomenon much like Reagan. It was stupid of them, but people who usually voted Democratic switched parties in large numbers for that stupid old man.

I have not picked a candidate yet. But I will be watching the voting breakdowns here very closely. I know Obama will win Illinois. I want to see exactly who votes for him in the primary. I think there will be many crossovers in all parts of the state.

[skipos]

49. I think Edwards and Obama could win, it is Hillary I am worried about

Regardless, I think we should admit that Obama's race and "scary" sounding name are going to make the general election more of a challenge than if he was a white guy named John Smith.

Plenty of bigots voted for Kerry and Gore, and I am not sure we can predict what they will think of Obama.

[skyblue]

50. Not a Sure Enough Bet to PUT ALL YOUR EGGS IN 1 BASKET

[youthere]

52. I had been holding out for Clark, but since that's not likely to happen..

Obama's my man. If he gets the nom, I will gladly work for him.