Thursday, April 24, 2008
Radioactive man
The above North Carolina GOP ad is -- I admit -- quite unfair. That's not the point. The point is that this is the future.
We are going to see much more of this sort of thing. And I cannot freakin' buh-LIEVE that the Obamabots are trying to spin this one in their direction.
McCain tried to keep the ad off the air in NC -- not, I am convinced, because he is above making political use of Obama's former pastor, but because he wants to save that particular mode of attack for his own post-Democratic convention campaign. Obviously, he hopes Obama will win it.
But North Carolina Republicans could not resist using Obama as a cudgel against Beverly Perdue (a Democratic Lieutenant Goveror running for Governor) and Richard Moore (State Treasurer, also running for Governor).
Dig it: Obama is now so radioactive that GOP strategists believe that they can use his "cooties" to sink any downticket pol who has endorsed him or even posed for a photo op with him. Moreover, Obama has acquired that level of radioactivity even before he has secured the nomination.
Has any similar situation occurred in any previous primary election? Probably. I cannot think of an example offhand; perhaps you can.
The Obamabots are spinning like a dervish in their attempts to find some solace here. They pretend that this ad is intended to harm Obama, not Perdue and Moore -- even though everyone knows that Obama has a mortal lock on NC. And (the Bots reason) if the GOP is trying to take down Obama, then the Republicans must consider Clinton the weaker general-election candidate. See, for example, the desperate self-delusion on display here.
The 'Bots hope to convince you that the targets of this ad are not the named gubernatorial candidates. They want you to believe that the GOP does not consider footage of Wright a useful general-purpose fundraising aide. They want you to believe that Obama's Big Speech "solved" the Wright problem, nationally and forevermore, even though his words mollified only one half of his own party.
Pathetic. Just pathetic.
How can the Bots kid themselves to this degree? The fact is, this ad proves what I've been saying all along: Obama has not put the Wright business behind him. The real Wright-based attacks have yet to kick in. You may think such guilt-by association tactics are dirty pool -- but so what? The GOP are not gentlemanly fighters. Fair or unfair, these attacks are are coming -- and they will have an impact.
Moreover, this spot also disproves the blather we've heard about Hillary running a "negative" campaign. What nonsense! Hillary barely mentioned Wright in one interview -- and that comment caused the BotMedia to caterwaul about her "Rovian" tactics. If Hillary had truly gone negative, she would have plastered the faces of Wright and Ayers across every TV screen 24/7 in the recent primary.
My god, have you people forgotten what a genuine negative campaign looks like? Hillary has heretofore shown the kind of ferocity usually associated with the Pillsbury Doughboy.
Of course, the 'Bots will continue to believe what they want to believe. And they'll invite you to sing along...
(Shrill female voice)
"I'm Obama Girl
In Obama World
There is no trouble
Inside the bubble..."
(Gruff male voice)
"Come on, smarty -- kill our Party!"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
"Has any similar situation occurred in any previous primary election? Probably. I cannot think of an example offhand; perhaps you can."
Probably 10,000 times, but so what? None could compare.
For one thing, this is the first time 'videos' are so easy to make, make available, and watch. A video is worth a thousand pictures.
Another thing, 1972: Ever since, the Republicans have prevailed by associating Democrats with 'McGovern liberals', uncloaked code for radical feminists, gays, lesbians, and 'Hollywood types'.
Finally, there hasn't been a campaign like this since 1952, the last time there was no party standard bearer, i.e., a WH incumbent still in the race, who might rein in the cross-burning lynch mobs. 1952? Haha, that was when Estes Kefauver beat Truman in the NH primary and won nearly all the other primaries, but 'the party' nominated Adlai Stevenson.
P.s. You'll never forgive Nader, and I'll never forgive Johnny Carson for derailing Jerry Brown's bid with his incessant "Governor Moonbeam" cheap shots. If there is justice, Johnny struts in Dante's rings, and every day Dante groans (in McMahonesque terza rima) "Here's Johnny!" and Doc starts playing Linda Ronstadt's "You're No Good".
Although I am sticking to my prediction of an Obama victory - and I have $20 riding on this - I do not do so with a high degree of confidence. Can you imagaine the smear campaign against McCain if he were a Democrat? Sleazy ads charging him with collaborating with the enemy while he was a POW. I wonder if the Democrats will go there.
H...10,000 times? I don't think so. Remember, I'm looking for a case where a primary candidate was used as a "dirt magnet" to undo downticket pols. I mean, I'm sure it has been done -- I'm just trying to think of an example.
Gary: I've had correspondents asking me to "go there." Some of the Obama-leaning lefties have in fact gone in that direction. (In Cockburn's cyber-rag, if I recall correctly.) Any such attack will, I think, hurt the attacker.
I honestly wold not bet on this election. Then again, I'm not a betting man.
I'm just curious: why do you need to insult ALL Obama supporters by using derogatory labels like Obamabots ? Are you also a 'bot since you voted for him ? and why are you complaining of the hate you're getting in exchange from his supporters ? If you keep insulting them and using the worse propaganda BS against him, do you really expect a different result ??? So why don't you use "Clintonista" to label Clinton supporters ?
Anyway, who cares about North Carolina, are you expecting Obama or Hillary to win there in presidential election ? Bill never won North Carolina anyway. So yes, they'll be able to play on white fear of the "black man" in this state, but they wouldn't vote democrat anyway, so, who cares apart from Anti-Obama bigots ? At least, they'll stop pretending he's a secret Muslim, that toxic meme is off the table now (unless they are dumb enough to believe that he's been attending the same church for 20 years in church while he was a secret muslim).
Finaly, don't you think they have the same kind of bigoted attacks ready against Hillary if she cheat the primary process and win through the super delegates support without popular majority ?
Well, anon, at least you put a little thought into it, or I would have tossed your words into the trash heap alongside the other bravely anonymous offerings. I just want to make the point that if popular majorities are what counts with you, then perhaps you should pay attention: She now HAS such a majority, barely, if you count MI and FL. And I think it will increase.
At any rate, if Edwards were in her precise position, I think the argument would be very different. A lot of progs would be screaming "Go Johnny GO!"
So cute to see a Bot claim to be insulted. Considering the fact that you Bots usually get your information from a recent Republican who prints nothing BUT insults -- a man who has decided that neither Hillary not people like myself are even Democrats -- I don't think you are in a position to complain. I didn't notice you getting bothered when noted Bot Nora Ephron proclaimed that white men are not even "people."
You buttress MY argument when you point out that Obama will win North Carolina, a state which will not go Blue in the general. Obama is the Democrat beloved of red state Dems. But he won't win without the blue and purple states, and most of them do not like him nearly so well.
The lad cannot win.
Am I permitted to call him a "lad" in the same sense that I might have said of Hillary "The girl cannot win"?
I of course will go there, having lower standards than you. And did go there yesterday, linking to the Cockburn piece,and the full Doug Valentine piece. Of course I also covered the Larry Sinclair allegations. Equal opportunity sleaze at Covert History.
Apparently McCain did make a series of propaganda broadcasts while a POW, and if this comes out it will hurt him at his strongest point. Obama and the DNC will not go there but are hardly responsible for Cockburn and others, right? Remember, George W. said that Kerry's service was more honorable than his own.
There's a lot about McCain that might come out. Remember Senator Thad Cochran's statement: "The thought of his being president sends a cold chill down my spine."He is erratic. He is hotheaded. He loses his temper and he worries me." And stories about adultery and prostitutes.
Do you have any doubt that Hillary would go there? Without leaving fingerprints of course.
HD,
First you say, "none could compare", then you....compare this election to 1952!!
Great logic there.
Although I do take your comparison of 'Bama to Stevenson. I think there are many legitimate ones to be made.
As for the ubiquity of youtube videos, etc., I don't think that bitter white working people spend a lot of time watching them. I think that's mostly a pastime of Obama's demographic.
Bitter white working people spend their spare time drinking in redneck bars with Confederate flags on the wall, attending NASCAR rallies, and shooting defenseless animals with hunting rifles, not netsurfing.
"Bitter white working people spend their spare time drinking in redneck bars with Confederate flags on the wall, attending NASCAR rallies, and shooting defenseless animals with hunting rifles, not netsurfing."
You forgot Bowling !!!
I also forgot getting married & divorced multiple times. Blue states have longer marriages - and lower marriage participation rates.
“I honestly wold [sic] not bet on this election. Then again, I'm not a betting man.”
Yes you are (betting on this election). At the least, you are betting the future of our Constitutional republic for at least two generations, conditions worse than the Great Depression, and wars worse than WWI and WWII. Betting the lives of our children.
History:
1.) "Lessons for Denver: FDR's 1932 Victory…" “Most Americans, with even a slight degree of historical literacy, know these basic facts about the election of 1932. Few, however, know how close the nation came to a disaster at the Democratic nominating convention in Chicago; how close FDR came to being deprived of the Presidential nomination, despite a groundswell of popular support; …”
2.) The guy who is running the Obama campaign is the same guy who, managing the campaign of Adlai Stevenson III for governor, advised Stevenson he should quit the race, giving Illinois
the Republican governor who was in office another eight years. “Axelrod has been identified with the movement for political 'reforms' -- such as privatization, budget cuts, etc. -- representing the oligarchs at the University of Chicago and their financier sponsors. David Axelrod is the Obama campaign's overall director; Axelrod's partner (in the firm AKP Media), David Plouffe, is Obama's official campaign manager; and Axelrod's other partner, John Del Cecato, is a strategist for the campaign.”
3.) (We shall see how this fits into history.) “Counting the votes cast in Michigan and Florida, Hillary has received 15,095,663 votes to Sen. Obama's 14,973,720, a margin of more than 120,000 votes, a statement on Hillary's website reports. The figures quoted are from "Real Clear Politics," which derives that figure by counting all votes cast for Clinton and Obama in states which have held Democratic primaries, including Florida and Michigan. Even adding in estimates of the popular vote in four caucus states which have not released popular vote totals, Clinton is still ahead.”
1. http://preview.tinyurl.com/5atza8
2. http://preview.tinyurl.com/4rl3st
3. http://preview.tinyurl.com/3rqsvt
(Giving quotes from Sen. Clinton on ABC, NBC and CNN on this.)
"I just want to make the point that if popular majorities are what counts with you, then perhaps you should pay attention: She now HAS such a majority, barely, if you count MI and FL."
MI cannot count, because Clinton was the only candidate on the ballot. She just barely beat "uncommitted". How many "uncommitted" voters were Obama supporters? Probably most of them, but we'll never know. To add the MI vote into the total is to say that Obama would have had NO votes in a real primary which is obviously absurd.
FL is a somewhat different story. The FL voters at least had the opportunity to vote for the candidate of their choice.
Without the MI nonsense, Hil isn't leading in the popular vote. Perhaps she'll get a wider margin in Kentucky and West VA than Obama picks up in NC and Oregon. I doubt it, personally.
Can you read?
Mercy, mercy! Go back to kosland.
Dear Mr. Barleycorn,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QshvHUmSVc0
Senator Clinton garnered 55% of Michigan votes, with 40% for "uncommitted" (e.g. for Obama, Edwards, Richardson and Biden, whose names were not on the ballot), and 5% for Gravel, Dodd and Kucinich, whose names were on the ballot.
You say: She just barely beat "uncommitted".
You say 120,000 people's votes are "barely" significant as a lead. Even if none of them took more of your time by smacking you up the side of the head, it would, at 3 seconds each, take you some 100 hours of nonstop fast talking to proclaim your opinion to each of those voters individually.
Let's just have fair primaries and elections, O.K.?
Gary,
"Let's just have fair primaries and elections, O.K.?"
Yes! Sadly, no one consults me...
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QshvHUmSVc0"
Uh-huh. And Edwards too?
"You say 120,000 people's votes are "barely" significant as a lead."
It is 90,000. And against "uncommitted" that isn't terribly impressive. But yeah, every vote should count. I think you have to count the votes of the 238,000 people who voted for NOT Hillary if you are trying to figure in MI. I also think the situation with MI and FL is idiotic, but hey...
My actual point was: if you assume she had a 100 point spread, then she's winning the popular vote. Barely. But she didn't. So she's not.
"Can you read?
Mercy, mercy! Go back to kosland."
Yes, I can! Why do you ask?
I didn't come from Kosland, so I can't very well go back. I first visited this site when I became aware of vote fraud issues and the intelligent yet off-the-wall yumminess of the place sucked me in.
Later,
GMC,
You are growing on me-on my nerves that is. Not many people cause this re-action in me. Congrats!
JB,
Pleased to hear you're not from kosland. We both want fair elections. The contest for the primary is continuing, so I don't see the point in continuing to write about that disagreement. Enough already.
Later, ...
beeta,
It could be worse... DailyKos for example :-) I'd suppose LOTS of people would get on your nerves there.
Try just passing my comments by. For my part, I'll try not to overly clutter any place with them. Too many of them in this thread.
Post a Comment