Who wants to read ANOTHER simplistic opinion on why Obama won the primaries?

[last1standing]

I knew you did. :evilgrin:

Simply put, the media (and money) made this a two person contest from the very beginning. The unique opportunity to tell the story of the black "rockstar" candidate and the female "first lady" candidate caused them to shut out everyone but Obama and Clinton. I think the only people likely to disagree with that are the most ardent supporters of those two candidates.

Then when the inevitable happened and each candidate dropped out, one by one, their supporters had to make a choice on who to support next. With the exception of Richardson, most of these supporters went to Obama for another simple reason. They didn't like Hillary. Whether because of her vote for IWR and Kyle Lieberman, or her moderate record in the Senate, or that they believed the repub hype about how "evil" she is, they just didn't want to see her as president so they moved to Obama. I think the fact that as candidates dropped out Obama's numbers skyrocketed while Hillary's merely inched up bears me out on that.

Yes, there are other reasons like campaign style, organization, racism/sexism and strategy, but I think the main reasons are media focus and a dislike of Hillary by a large number of Democrats.

I hope both camps feel free to come in and tell me what an idiot I am now. :hi:

[kenny blankenship]

1. Hey how about the chance to pit two important Democratic constituencies against each other

and set them at each others' throats and perhaps derail what would otherwise be an unstoppable Democratic Party sweep of the Presidency and Congress- think the corporate media would pass up a chance like that?

[crankychatter]

3. yup - n/t

.

[last1standing]

5. I don't give them that much credit.

I'm sure they would have loved to have done that if they'd known, but I don't think any of us knew how fanatical some of the supporters from each camp would get - or how long it would last.

[crankychatter]

2. I think the Media are about more than ratings

They're owned by War Profiteers

I also think the Race-Gender hype is a cover for the internal war in the Democratic Party; between the base and the pseudo centrist elites (they're followers) that benefit from keeping the Party small

mho

But I'm just a ladder monkey, schmuck with a truck

what could I KNOW?

:-)

[last1standing]

7. Heh! I have no idea what a "ladder monkey" is.

But I'm fine with it so long as you're not flinging poo at passersby from the ladder.

[crankychatter]

10. shortspeak for "painter" - it's the drool from the fumes - we are not in high esteem

but we ARE up a ladder

[last1standing]

13. Van Gogh was a painter.

But then I think he did end up flinging a little poo by the end so try not to breathe too many fumes (or eat the paint).

[NightWatcher]

4. real simple reason: he got more votes

:evilgrin:

[last1standing]

6. Don't you get all simple on me!

I got as simple as I could. Any simpler belongs on a separate bus. :hi:

[mikekohr]

8. Obama's Superior Organizational and Leadership Skills

along with his style and inspiring message are the driving forces in this race. Everything else is secondary and/or distractionary.

mike kohr

[Lerkfish]

9. Obama weathered being pilloried by the media re: Rev. Wright

If you want to claim that the media only attacked HIllary, I'd say you'd have to selectively forget the 3 weeks of Wright 24/7 coverage.

If you intentionally ignore that, then sure, its' the media's fault.

"It's the media's fault" is just the flavor of the day in the Clinton xeroxed talking points.

[last1standing]

12. If you're going to attack me I'd suggest you attack something I actually said.

I know very well that the media swamped Obama with the Wright non-scandal, but that's not what I was talking about. I was discussing how the media used "rockstar" imagery at the beginning of his campaign, and well before it started, to give him a boost. They did much the same with Hillary when talking about "a powerful woman" or "former first lady, now presidential candidate". Both of their stories sucked the air out of the room for all of the other candidates at the beginning of the campaign when they most needed the attention. And like I said, only the most fervent Obama/Clinton supporters will deny that.

So can you call of the attack dogs or what?

[Lerkfish]

14. dogs called off

[last1standing]

17. Thanks.

n/t

[DevonRex]

11. She lost me with her IWR vote. Plain and simple. nt

[smalll]

15. Fair, but I do think the small-state caucuses were the major factor.

The rules this year are so maddeningly proportional. Once the primaries settled into a contest between two relatively equally popular candidates, the only way one could pull ahead and gain substantial extra delegates was to find a way to landslide in as many contests as possible.

It would be almost impossible to landslide in large states and in primaries, for the same reason: the electorate is so large (so many people vote) that no particular action plan could run up the score.

Small-state caucuses were the only option: in contests where only a handful of thousands of people vote, it became possible to organize a turn-out effort that could produce a landslide.

Kudos to the Obama campaign: they figured it out and set such a plan into motion: they built an internet-centric organizing system in the small western states. Allegedly, in places, people were bussed in from elsewhere.

Obama had the added advantage in this that in those small, almost entirely white states, his support would come almost exclusively from latte liberals.

There are latte liberals everywhere. Even in Idaho. Who are they? They are the "smart" kids from those states who, despite their rise into an educated, "bourgeois bohemian" lifestyle, had done it "at home" rather than leave to do it in the big leagues (LA, NY, etc.) They are also the less successful latte liberals, who end up on the tenure track at Idaho State U. rather than at Berkeley or NYU -- or who end up in a "cultural-creative" job in a hip design/advertising/video production office, except in Boise rather than in Soho. Such people will be super-consciously proud of their modest latte status, but also have self-esteem issues vis-a-vis the bicoastal centers of power and glamor: by answering the call from the Obama campaign, from the fawning press, from his celebrity supporters, and from fresh-faced young college kids setting up Obama meetups amongst the tumbleweeds and cactuses, the latte-liberal-in-exile population paid due obeisance to the centers of power they respect, confirmed their own special latte-status, and reinforced their specialness amongst the provincial population around them, the vast majority of whom are eith Repubs or average Dem voters who DON'T GO TO CAUCUSES!

[last1standing]

16. Why do you feel the need to insult people?

"I think Howard Dean should take his tax-hiking, government-expanding, latte-drinking, sushi-eating, Volvo-driving, New York Times-reading ..." -- and then his wife picks up the litany -- "... body-piercing, Hollywood-loving, left-wing freak show back to Vermont, where it belongs."

Remember that?

"Latte liberals" is a repub meme put out as a way to make educated people sound effeminate, elitist, and therefore gay. It's a code word meant to suggest to "red meat" Americans that there is something wrong with them when there isn't.

When Gephardt used that slur in the 2004 campaign against Dean before the Iowa caucus nearly ALL Dems were up in arms, angry that a Democrat would use such hateful code words against another Dem. Now, they fall from the lips of Democrats like dribble.

It's sad because this is plays into how "liberal" became a dirty word in the 80's.

Your "latte liberal" is an educated person who doesn't think that violence should be the first and only answer to any problem. Can I ask what's wrong with that?

[bigbrother05]

19. Other than the calendar, the rules were the same as when WJC won.

They had the same rules when T. McAlluffe (sp.) ran the DNC.

[roseBudd]

20. of course college graduates are much too stupid, that is why they vote for that muslim Hussian swore

on a Koran.

West Virginia whites know the real deal and would never vote for an unAmerican muslim, America hating, muslim, terrorist Arab like Obama

[roseBudd]

18. I am a female of a certain age who should have been a Clinto supporters I never was, never even

considered it because of her high negatives. Whether they are fair or wholly manufactured, it is what it is. I always thought she would galvanize GOP voters at a time when we really would prefer they stay home due to PTSD of the Bush is a failure kind.

I was wholly dispassionate about my desire for HRC not to be the nominee because I felt she was risky regarding electibility.

Since kitchen sink I am no longer dispassionate and have really come to dislike her intensely. Note my change of heart was due to HRC's actions, her campaign strategy. It has nothing to do with sexism, nothing to do with who said anything about race or when.

Snipergate was the nail in the coffin, because it framed her as a liar who will say things just to make herself look like something she isn't and that like her husband, the phrase Clintonian is not something we have moved past. Once you lose trust, you don't get it back. In addition Snipergate has video that will make great visuals for attack ads.

[2rth2pwr]

21. Boil down your argument, and you sound like Ferraro.

[last1standing]

22. OK. I don't suppose you can explain how you got that comparison, can you?

Personally, I don't see it as I've not claimed that Obama got an unfair advantage because of his race, but because of his persona, which was treated like that of a "rockstar".

But please tell me how my comments compare with Ferraro's racist slurs.

[2rth2pwr]

26. "The unique opportunity to tell the story of the black "rockstar" candidate..."

Your whole premise is based on this sentence.

[last1standing]

28. I have to disagree with that.

But if you need to believe otherwise it's certainly your right. :shrug:

[2rth2pwr]

25. .

[PermanentRevolution]

23. What an idiot you are!

Satisfied?

:evilgrin:

[last1standing]

24. You've made my day!

And sadly, it has the ring of truth about it. :)

[suston96]

27. Simplistic opinion? Huge turnout of black voters in red states went for Obama by 90% .....

....and not enough women voted for Hillary Clinton.

[VotesForWomen]

29. i think you are exactly right. there are some other contributing factors, but essentially it was med

media-driven and clinton-hate driven.

[last1standing]

30. Not "Clinton-hate". Dislike is the correct word.

Not everyone who voted against Clinton is a "Clinton-hater". The vast majority are just people who disagreed with certain policy decisions or just liked the other candidate better. However, I will agree that there is some virulent Clinton hatred out there on par with the Obama hatred.

I turned to Obama after Edwards when I felt Clinton's campaign had gone too negative (the McCain experience statements). I don't hate Clinton at all, though. I think she'd make a fine president. I just think they BOTH will and I didn't like a certain campaign style. Others have their own reasons for voting for their preferred candidate, but in the real world, few are basing it on the hatred we see here.