Obama's backers worried

[Alamom]

http://news.cincypost.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071106/EDIT/711060302/1003



Obama's backers worried

Column by David Broder
David Broder writes for the Washington Post

11/06/07


CHICAGO - These are difficult days for supporters of Barack Obama. This city is filled with people who have voted for, worked for, contributed to, and, in many cases, prayed for the success of the young senator from Illinois. The struggle he has had in trying to overtake Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination is wearing on their morale.

I recently heard them tell each other that while the race started months ago, it is still early going; that the crucial days in Iowa and New Hampshire are still ahead; and that there is time for Obama to close with a rush, as he did when he came from behind to capture the nomination for his Senate seat back in 2004.

But the steady drumbeat of polls showing Clinton with more support than all the other Democrats combined - and twice as much as Obama - is taking a toll. In their private moments, they wonder whether even Obama, as gifted as he is, can pull off this feat.

>

That is probably an exaggeration. Future debates may provide more openings. It is also the case that the voters in those states are far less firmly attached to their current candidate preferences than polling numbers would suggest. There is, in fact, time for Obama to rally. It's just hard for his people to believe it right now.

[babylonsister]

1. David Broder? HaHaHaHaHa! nt

[Tellurian]

3. What is interesting, Ron Paul raised $4.2 million in 24 hrs.

His sincerity and non candidate bashing shines like a beacon of light to those disgusted with the current democratic candidate campaign atmosphere. I'm glad Hillary is taking the high road and not rolling around in the mud. She makes me proud to support her.

[Alamom]

5. You did hear that Broder basically turned on Bush & Rove back in August due

to the outing of Valerie Plame........Right?



In a column marking Rove's resignation on August 23, 2007, however, he (Broder) wrote: "It is hard to generate much sympathy for someone as unrepentant as Rove, someone who at most acknowledges that his party is "a little bit behind the curve" when it comes to the voters.
One listens in vain for any sign that a decade at the center of the political-government structure has dented the sublime self-confidence of the influential White House strategist, and all one hears are the echoes of an isolated, insulated presidency.


edit grammer

[Tellurian]

7. Good to know..thanks..

I believe many who supported the Republican ideology are aghast at the summation of the Bush presidency. Hopefully they will vote this time around for a Democratic presidency.

[IndianaGreen]

23. Do you have a problem with pompous punditry?

David Broder on the byline is all I needed to know.

[opihimoimoi]

2. There will come a time when its gone....HOPELESS....

[DFW]

4. Poor Dave

Although a longtime family friend (colleague of my father for 40 years),
I'm afraid old Dave has way too often mistaken wishful thinking for careful
analysis, and has turned a blind eye to the country outside of the narrow
view of a small group of Beltway insiders.

At this point, I would view a column of his with skepticism even if I DID
agree--or maybe BECAUSE I agreed--with it!

[Tellurian]

6. The second half of Broder's article contains the insight you speak of..

his observations are spot on.. (with all due respect..he's saying: "it's the strategy Stup*d.")

"Among the Obama faithful, Hillary Clinton is not reviled. Indeed, there is a good deal of admiration for the way she has conducted herself in the campaign.

But at every turn, Obama's people feel that he has been outmaneuvered and outsmarted by Clinton's timing and tactics. Nothing is more painful to them - or more typical - than what happened on Oct. 2.

That date was the fifth anniversary of the speech that Obama gave to a rally outside Chicago City Hall, called to mobilize opposition to the looming war with Iraq. In the speech, which has been quoted many times, Obama, then eyeing a Senate campaign, defied public opinion and decried what he called a "dumb" war.

He has often cited his prescience on that issue as the best evidence that, despite his short tenure in Washington, he has the judgment to make the right calls on crucial questions of national security.

The Obama campaign, therefore, announced that the fifth anniversary would be a special day for them, the date of a major foreign policy address. After some debate, the campaign decided not to stage a repetition of the outdoor rally, but rather to have him speak in a college auditorium, a better setting for a thoughtful address.

The speech that he delivered at DePaul University here was as serious a discussion of the lessons of Iraq and the future of American foreign policy as anyone could wish. And, as I was repeatedly reminded by the Obama people, it got next to no national press coverage. It was briefly summarized on Page 8 of The Washington Post, Page 11 of the Boston Globe and Page 20 of The New York Times.

Why? Because the Clinton campaign, with exquisite timing, that same morning released its latest-quarter fundraising totals, which put her ahead of Obama for the first time in the money race. The Page 1 stories in the next day's Times and Post were simple: Clinton, leading all the polls, now leads in campaign finances as well.

The pessimists in the Obama camp worry that never again will they have such an opportunity to highlight his early opposition to the war - in contrast to Clinton's vote for the resolution that President Bush used when he ordered the attack on Baghdad.

That is probably an exaggeration. Future debates may provide more openings. It is also the case that the voters in those states are far less firmly attached to their current candidate preferences than polling numbers would suggest. There is, in fact, time for Obama to rally. It's just hard for his people to believe it right now."

[Apollo11]

14. The mainstream media wants to ignore the issues and portray this as a horserace.

The fact is that both Hillary and Obama have been raising lots of money throughout the year.

Both candidates have enough money to continue their campaigns thru the whole primary season.

The fact that one raises more than the other is really not all that important to me.

What Obama said in his speech of October 2nd was highly relevant and interesting.

It was probably the best speech of the campaign by any candidate up until that point.

But the mainstream media ignores what the candidates are saying about the issues.

They prefer to report on how much money the different campaigns have raised.

Or - even better - which candidate said something negative about one of the other candidates.

The media will only report what Obama says when he criticizes Hillary.

Therefore Obama is forced to play along just to stay in the game.

[Tellurian]

16. Inexperienced candidates are falling prey to media hype..

They are being led by the nose by the Matthews and Bitzers of this world and not paying attention to a clear cut strategy of substantive issues combined with political timing. Broder's article is the defining example of strategy
trumping opportunity.

[Apollo11]

18. All the Democratic candidates are addressing "substantive issues".

But the media is dazzled by the bright glare of a former First Lady running for President.

For the mainstream media, it seems to be the only story that counts.

In the nineties, we knew her as the wife of President Bill Clinton.

Now she wants to become the next President of the United States.

For most of the media, this is the most interesting "issue" of the campaign.

What the other candidates are saying about the real issues is mostly ignored.

Except when they say something that is critical of Hillary Clinton.

Then the media reports that fact that other candidates are "attacking" Hillary.

For Obama, Edwards and the others it would appear to be a no-win situation.

They can try to focus on the "substantive issues" and be ignored by the mainstream media.

Or they can point out their differences with the frontrunner and be accused of going negative.

It's almost as if the corporate media would prefer Hillary as the nominee ... :eyes:

[Tellurian]

27. I disagree...no one except Hillary is putting forth workable plans in detail..

except for Biden and Dodd. I don't believe Richardson is awash in details either.

[geek tragedy]

8. Originally pubilshed October 25, 2007.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/24/AR2007102402336.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

Thanks for yet another one of your lame attempts at propaganda, Alamom!

[BeyondGeography]

12. LOL...this is not the week for us to worry

That should have been her first clue.

[Alamom]

19. Published today in Cinncinati Ohio.

Lame? Proganda? I have my doubts that you would know it if you saw it.


Calling Wes Clark & Joe Wilson (both) liars in the same reply simply because they support someone other than you do is as "lame" as it gets.

[BeyondGeography]

22. He's a syndicated columnist and rag papers like this fill space with old stuff all the time

Here's a link from 10/25; it's the same column outside of a few minor copy changes:

http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/live/content/editorials/stories/2007/10/25/brod25.ART_ART_10-25-07_A11_KS897AJ.html?sid=101

[Nedsdag]

25. What do you expect from Alamom?

Her state isn't going Democrat any time soon.

Hell, Alabama voted for Bob Dole for goodness sake!

[rurallib]

9. Who would believe anything Broder said?

[ellacott]

10. They'll believe almost anything

If it is negative towards their opponents. They're even bringing up Ron Paul in this post.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend

[acmavm]

11. Broder, that freakin' idiot with the terminal overbite, shouldn't be

allowed to be published. It is too damn early to call this thing for anyone. TOO EARLY!

[PurityOfEssence]

15. If unsightliness is such a heinous crime, isn't PRINT the best place for him?

Do only the pretty deserve success?

[bunkerbuster1]

17. He's ugly on the inside.

My favoritist David Broder quote evah:

"I like Karl Rove. In the days when he was operating from Austin, we had many long and rewarding conversations. I have eaten quail at his table and admired the splendid Hill Country landscape from the porch of the historic cabin Karl and his wife Darby found miles away and had carted to its present site on their land."

[zulchzulu]

13. Now is the time to rock the house...naysayers can please step aside...

I do a lot of grassroots work for Obama and if there is anyone who is a naysayer or better yet undependable when they said they'd show up, they can just get lost as far as I'm concerned.

Everybody gets one chance. After that, whatever...

There are plenty of people who see that Obama is going to be the nominee. They show up, they do the work needed and they love it.

[Basileus Basileon]

20. You know what I'd like to see an end to?

Supporters of one candidate posting "YOUR TEAM IS DESPERATE" articles directed at supporters of another. They don't add anything to the discussion.

[Forkboy]

21. Well, if you can't trust Broder who can you trust?

:crazy:

[MethuenProgressive]

24. "These are difficult days for supporters of Barack Obama."

As one can tell from their crying in this thread.

[AtomicKitten]

26. With an 11-point shift in polling in his favor since the debate, Obama supporters are thrilled.