Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Obama Cites Need 'To Work Harder' for Blue-Collar Votes

By Zachary A. Goldfarb
Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) acknowledged today that he must work harder to win the support of working-class voters who backed Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) in droves in last week's Pennsylvania primary.

"I am less familiar with some of these blue-collar voters than [Clinton]. ... They are less familiar with me than they are with her, and so we probably have to work a little bit harder," Obama said on "Fox News Sunday."

He added, "I've got to be more present. I've got to be knocking on more doors. I've got to be hitting more events. We've got to work harder."

Howard Wolfson, a top aide to Clinton, said now that Obama has lost working-class voters in Pennsylvania and Ohio, "I think Democrats do have questions about whether or not he is going to be able to reach out and successfully win over the kind of blue-collar voters that Democrats need to win in order to take the White House back in November."

He said on CBS's "Face the Nation" that Clinton is "somebody who can appeal to working people, people who have real concerns about this economy. She won overwhelmingly with those voters who were concerned about the economy."

Continue reading at The Talk »

By Post Editor  |  April 27, 2008; 2:05 PM ET
Categories:  Sunday Talkies  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Obama Stumps in Indiana
Next: Rev. Wright: 'Different Does Not Mean Deficient'


Forgot to say, Senator Hillary is now trying to copy real change. I am different, She will stoop to anything to win. Won't happen. Time for change my American brothers and sisters, but it will not be Hillary.

Posted by: jusyadad55 | April 29, 2008 12:21 AM | Report abuse

White racist trash, The preacher did his thing and made the world understand we are all the same. Trash is a Democrat so desperate she might become an independent?? What the hell are some of you thinking of. The upper class and the Supreme court decision for valid identification for voting. What do the poorest or Blackest need? Real great timing for this to become law. The Hiltons, or should I say Clintons most likely have their money in this. I'm from Canada, and deserve a say for we will always be one. The people will win. I'm white.

Posted by: just adad55 | April 29, 2008 12:14 AM | Report abuse


Posted by: JIMMY | April 28, 2008 11:55 PM | Report abuse

obama had no problem with the white blue collar worker until hillary starting trashing him with nothing of any consequence.

she is a blight on the democrats.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 28, 2008 12:16 PM | Report abuse

This is Obama's white half that is the liberal elitist and out of touch as bitter speech well demonstrated.

Posted by: theaz | April 28, 2008 12:15 PM | Report abuse

for the idiots out there, you don't need a fortune to be elitist. obama, the pretend-messiah, has had his eyes on BIG things since he set foot in the elite bastion Harvard. from there, it was political connections aka tony rezco to the senate to a chicago mansion he couldn't afford; and now this audacious run for president.

sen. clinton has worked all her life on issues important to americans before she made her money on her book and ex president clinton on his legitimate work. the clinton's have a trackrecord of service and yes, of charitable giving.

what has obama done for us? nothing.

Posted by: mikel | April 28, 2008 11:30 AM | Report abuse

Obama's patience deserves very much respect. We all know well that this so-called connecting issue's nature - the older, less educated, and more rural people still hold PREJUDICE racially against a candidate who happened to be biracial. What is resentful is that the Clintons consciously and purposefully are taking advantage from this unfortunate American history burden. They know that it will be hard to tell why, they taught the racially prejudiced how to reason: Obama is "elite"! Obama is "out of touch"! When HRC shamelessly asked publicly why BHO could not close the deal with the PA primary, she deserved a huge slap on her face by the people.

Posted by: pinepine | April 28, 2008 10:21 AM | Report abuse

It is quite obvious that Sen. Obama has a problem connecting with blue collar white workers and older white Americans. In other words, a large percentage of the Democractic Party base. If the Democrats had had closed primaries as the Republicans have had, Sen Clinton would have been the winner in most if not all of these contests.

Sen. Obama needed the Independents to win in these primaries, especially the caucuses, where they had a clear majority. He has not been able to gain a foothold in the base except for the African-Americans.

When you ask someone who is favoring Sen. Obama why, you only get the answer 'change.' They want change but these people have no understanding of the issues and what he stands for. Change to what, for what and where are questions that Obama supporters can't ever seem to answer. A vague look appears on their faces that wonders why you asked that question. They are in awe of his voice. Words flow ever so sweetly from his lips. He doesn't have to answer hard-hitting questions; he only has to smile and switch the subject to 'change,' just change. One wonders 'where's the beef?'

If Sen. Obama wins the nomination, I would suggest to those people who say that they will stay home or vote for McCain, DON'T. If you can, write in Hillary Clinton's name. It will be interesting to see how many votes she garners in write-ins.

But the primary elections aren't over yet. And there is still hope that the Democratic voters will choose HIllary Clinton as their standard bearer. If she can keep it close in North Carolina; win a close one in Oregon and win handily in Indiana, West Virginia and Kentucky. She might just make the super delegates think twice before caving into the threats from Obama's supporters that Denver will look like the Convention of '68 in Chicago. Obama comes from Chicago, so he knows how to fight and manipulate votes. He's not above dirty politics,just ask his former opponents during his state senate years and the first time he ran for the House of Representatives. And any one would have won runnning against Alan Keyes for the U.S. Senate in Illinois.

So, for those of you who still favor Sen. Clinton, it's not over yet!

Posted by: shaynag | April 28, 2008 9:43 AM | Report abuse

So now he's courting blue-collar workers. Go figure, the man that claims to be there for the poor and needy has failed to show them how much he cares. That's what happens when your words are not supported by your actions and vice versa. It is, once again, an indication that his interest in this race is not the American people, but the Oval Office.

Posted by: EGGArgost | April 28, 2008 7:18 AM | Report abuse

If obam wins the nomination McCain wins the Presidency. While obam may win 90% of the black vote their are still far more white voters.

Then it's

Listen everyone. Calm down. All that has happened here is the gloves have come off.

It's ok to be assoicated with a group that teaches hate. It's ok to be a bigot and run for president.

The only point I can see that has been strongly made is "it no longer matters if we attend a hate church or association" we can be whatever we wnat to be and still be President of the United States.

We are truly liberated. If it's ok for blacks then it is ok for everybody. Never more will we have to concern "ourselves" with our words or associations with a hate group.

Racism will never die because people will not let it. Again, thank you Rev. Wright for pointing out and liberating American to be free and proud to open and embrace this new concept.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 28, 2008 5:39 AM | Report abuse

Thank you for your reply and my apologies for lumping you with the latte crowd.
I am not under the impression that everybody who votes for Obama belongs to one of the major demographic groups which have been identified as his supporters in the exist polls. My post, obviously, was meant for them more than you.
That said, I think if you expand your search, consult some of the 'left-wing' blogs and go over more threads, what you will find is that Obama supporters are the ones who tend toward vicious comments and simple assertion rather than well-reasoned arguments.
Coming from a blue-collar background, I also am more than a little put off by what I have heard from Obama, the media in general, who seem to imply that not voting for Obama is tantamount to being a racist while voting for him merely shows. . .what?
When I began to follow the elections in January, I had no preferences. The first thing I did was to begin to read, Obama's website, Clinton's website, the media, everything I could reach -- what I found was, at least to me, disconcerting. There was no substance to Obama and his message of hope had little to those who were not better educated, minorities, young, or entreprenurial. Clinton is only marginally better, but she is a known commodity, and if I had to boil everything down to one symbol of the campaign, it would be health care. Indeed, Obama's refusal to discuss his plan, which is basically neo-liberal and unworkable for most people, while he attacks Clinton's plan, which at least offers some hope of affordable universal coverage -- something the lower 50 percent of Americans desperately need, then the choice is easy.
In any case, if my response was a bit sharp, it was not to your reply only, but in reply to what I have seen from the Obama camp and the media -- I am still waiting for a 'real' debate and a 'real' discussion of the issues and the candidate's plans -- and, Lord!, I would dearly love the question of race to go away and people to look at serious questions of who gets what in this society and what needs to be done to help those who do not have the cash for MacBooks, health plans, hybrid cars, and the other accoutrements of the upper middle class.
For the record, I was shocked that both Obama and Clinton seemed more concerned to control the payroll tax on the top ten percent of income earners than help the rest of us.
Guess that tells you I have never struck it rich, huh?

Posted by: Jim | April 28, 2008 4:09 AM | Report abuse

Those of you who claim that Sen. Obama doesn't speak well without a teleprompter obviously didn't see him this morning on Fox with Chris Wallace. He did an excellent job, handled it "deftly" according to the LA Times, and no teleprompter in sight. He answered the questions thoughtfully and intelligently. With all the talk about his not connecting to working class voters, why does no one question Sen. Clinton on her inability to connect with young people, those with higher education, or higher income? All Americans, regardless of race, social, or economic status, should have an equal voice in determining the Dem. nominee. No one "demographic" is more important than another. Their primary concerns might differ, but as a white, college educated, older woman, I still have concerns about the economy and inability to save for retirement due to the high cost of living, the war in Iraq which is costing over 100,000 human lives and billions of dollars, rising college cost, healthcare and on and on. Hillary Clinton is a multimillionaire who is no more "working class/blue collar" than Barack Obama, so I believe for her to call him elitist is the height of hypocrisy.

Posted by: Denni | April 28, 2008 1:55 AM | Report abuse

Hillarrhea can only screw up the Democratic chances to win this year. Talk about swift-boating -the Repubs have about 20 videos already in the can to blow Hillarrhea out of the water . If she gets the nomination you will see that Bosnia tape about 3 times an hour in October.

Posted by: LetthemdrinkCrownRoyal | April 28, 2008 1:38 AM | Report abuse

It's okay to be a disappointed Hillary supporter, but blame her staff and campaign team that's full of loyalists instead of skillful experts.

It may be over, but they won't even be able to spin North Carolina in a way to keep her putting pressure on securing a VP nomination...

Posted by: eljefejesus | April 28, 2008 1:34 AM | Report abuse

For Obama to be the losing candidate he is sure getting more press than any of them.

Posted by: Cheryl L | April 28, 2008 1:17 AM | Report abuse

So when will even more voters wake up or
detox from drinking all that Obama Kool Aid
and realize that without his teleprompter
and speechwriters Barack Hussein Obama is
just another empty suit Democrat mixed up
extremist liberal loser? And when will they
see how Barack Obama has become as big a
liar and as arrogant as the current GOP
looney toons in the White House George W
Bush and as big a phony to boot? NOBAMA!

Posted by: Sherry Kay | April 28, 2008 1:12 AM | Report abuse

Ho! Hum! Yawn! So why waste time on even
bothering to read this particular piece of
typical WAPO Pro-Obama Spin anyhow? Since
the fact remains that village idiot serial
liar cocaine addict Chicago political hack
and street punk thug Barack Hussein Obama's
own stupid big mouth and arrogance has dang
sure already alienated all these "Typical
Small Town American Gun Owners Hunters and
Church Going Blue Collar Workers totally.
Just Say No to Left Liberial Socialist
Democrat Loser Barack Hussein Obama.

Posted by: Claudine | April 28, 2008 12:16 AM | Report abuse






Bill Kristol, Charles Krauthammer, Rush Limbaugh, Pat Buchanan,
Joe Lieberman, Rubert Murdoch, Dick Cheney, Carl Rove.......

William (Bill) Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard and prime pusher of invading Iraq re: Hillary Clinton:

"I like to be on Hillary's side"

"She is a good candidate"

"I am with her. I am with her",2933,352785,00.html

Posted by: Anonymous | April 28, 2008 12:01 AM | Report abuse

I haved wondered how Obama has been raising so much money. Soros and moveon may be funneling in cash and getting awy because of a loop hole in finance reform. The FEC only requires campaigns to list the donors and dates of contributions that surpass $200 for the entire election cycle. So, small donations from new donors are not put on reports, instead contributions of $200 or less are listed in lump sums as "unitemized contributions." Obama has reported over $79 million in these donations. So, it is possible that some of Obama rich contributers are contributing millions and some Enron type bookkeeping could make it look like thousands of new donors giving less than $200.

Posted by: skinsfan1978 | April 27, 2008 11:41 PM | Report abuse

Me wrote: I have it on good authority that radicals within the powerful rightwing Jewish Lobby including [AIPAC] American Israel Public Affairs Committee are vexed, frustrated and displeased with Barack Obama's refusal to accept special interest money and consequentially seek his crucifixion.

Good gravy, Me. I hope you intended this as a satirical piece. If not, here's a saying that would apply: "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean people aren't out to get you."

Posted by: Bill | April 27, 2008 11:32 PM | Report abuse


The 44th president of the United States:

President Barack Obama


Posted by: Anonymous | April 27, 2008 10:56 PM | Report abuse

My read it as follows:

Right now is the hardest part of Obama becoming the next president.

After he becomes nominated, I think he'll easily beat McCain. More than that, his ability to raise money will help insure a large Democratic majority in congress.

Hillary could, were she nominated, perhaps also beat McCain (less sure), but she would not be able to bring in a large Democratic win in congress....desirable and necesssary if one wants significant change in Washington.

Only Obama can do this.

This is the hard part; what follows will be a piece of cake.

Posted by: Truman | April 27, 2008 10:54 PM | Report abuse

....and I think many Hillary supporters associate her last name with the prosperity that America enjoyed during those times.

But, that was due mostly to the tech bubble...and had very, very little to do w/ the Clintons.

Regardless of who is president, those "good times" will not be fact it's going to be a very different and difficult time for America,

thanks to position that America has been in, by Bush and (I may add) by Hillary's vote for the Iraq Invasion.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 27, 2008 10:49 PM | Report abuse

I am an Obama supporter. The question most Hillary supporters should be asking about any presidency is what does experience mean in politics? I keep hearing experience, experience, experience. This is politics, not medicine or science. Hillary and Obama are attorneys by education, and poor McCain barely graduated from the Naval Academy.

If experience is the criteria that most Hillary-supporters go by, then Bill Clinton would have never been elected in 1992 because he had way less national experience that GHW Bush.

Presidential traits of honesty, openness, and temperment are more important in terms of how one governs than repeated policy details from campaign policy advisers.

I believe many Democrats support Hillary because of Bill Clinton. Knowing that Hillary has a man behind her (who happened to be a former President) makes those Hillary supporters feel more at ease in voting for her over Obama.

Posted by: AJ | April 27, 2008 10:04 PM | Report abuse


The 44th president of the United States:

President Barack Obama


Posted by: Anonymous | April 27, 2008 9:56 PM | Report abuse

Jim wrote:
However, your remarks suggest you might see yourself as "up-scale" rather than "down-scale." Could that be correct? Do you have a BA? BS? MA? MS? Professional degree? Ph.D.?

Sorry, Jim. In your effort to paint me as one who stereotypes others you have, in fact, stereotyped me. But you've got the wrong guy. I'm over sixty, have a high school diploma, don't drink Starbucks, and don't own a Mac. (But I'd guess that anyone who has posted here has access to a computer. How else would he post? So having access to the internet should in no way indicate a person's position in the social order.)
I do work fifty hours a week, wonder if I'll ever get to retire, I hunt and fish, don't go to church as often as I should, I pay my taxes, and I look down on no man.
But I do think that if a person is going to criticize a candidate, he should stick to the facts and arrange his thoughts in a coherent fashion. And, if you would read the posts that preceded mine, you'll see that a pattern does emerge.
I do have a confession to make, though. I'm from Illinois (small town - not the big city). And those of us who have watched Obama up close for the last four years are favorably impressed by the man. For proof look at the results of the Illinois primary.

Posted by: John | April 27, 2008 9:37 PM | Report abuse

I'll say right up front.I'm a Hillary supporter ..I don't think obama is experenced at all,he doesn't know the truth,,way to liberal and I certainly don't like the company he keeps....I don't see how him winning the nomination will make him more experienced.more truthful or more moderate.I will not vote for him.

can you hear me now?

Posted by: lucygirl1 | April 27, 2008 9:23 PM | Report abuse




....................HILLARY VOTED FOR THE WAR



Posted by: Anonymous | April 27, 2008 9:21 PM | Report abuse

Gosh - it is easy to paint large swashes of color across three states and call them the same. But that is not entirely true. The religious terrain is far different, and the breakdown of democratic holdings vs republican is geographically polarized. But the most interesting facet is how the larger technically driven companies have settled in towns - which gives a less alienated 'rural' area. Smaller town-like development? ... In terms of so-called "blue collar" workers who are women to focus outreach? - I ABSOLUTELY agree and applaud him! THIS is part of the participatory arena of a democracy and it has been negligent that this has been ignored for so long. Hopefully money pipelines and policies can be crafted from the federal to state levels in innovative ways. Obama is getting a tremendous opportunity to understand these arenas much better and recognize both their similarities and uniqueness. One area that is super-undersupported is adult one stop shops for future women businesses. I don't know the numbers, but women have a harder time generating or acquiring capital for their entrepreneurial visions. Like a state to small municality effort to train adults to gain more business understanding needed for opening small entities such as something for alternative health. Having grants available and sensible loans - partnerships that women can use as umbrellas to gain leverage. How can online resources facilitate certification? Do the current University sytems have satellite training centers that lead to demonstratable skills? (outside of the usual undergrad to grad stuff). How can the state redefine the types of small businesses and entrepreneurs it would like to encourage? However, putting emphasis on women - where, frankly, women may render a solution to business differently. Developing social networks across business 'centers' statewide to share knowledge base and access information without overcentralization. The training 'mechanism' itself gives jobs and the possibilities of businesses for the future would as well ... perhaps not in the short 3 year span, but certainly over time and probably highly sustainable.

Posted by: It isn't all JOBS | April 27, 2008 9:12 PM | Report abuse




....................HILLARY VOTED FOR THE WAR



Posted by: Anonymous | April 27, 2008 9:02 PM | Report abuse






Bill Kristol, Charles Krauthammer, Rush Limbaugh, Pat Buchanan,
Joe Lieberman, Rubert Murdoch, Dick Cheney, Carl Rove.......


war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war !

Posted by: ======================================= | April 27, 2008 9:01 PM | Report abuse




....................HILLARY VOTED FOR THE WAR



Posted by: Anonymous | April 27, 2008 8:58 PM | Report abuse

I'll say it right up front, I'm a Hillary supporter. I don't have anything against Obama. I don't buy in to the Wright
criticisms, don't accept the patriotism nonsense and I can see how he could've made a misjudgement about Rezco. My problem is simply that I don't think he deserves the job, he doesn't have the experience. He's not even what I would call a seasoned senator. He sprang on to the scene and has turned what should have been an easy democratic victory into chaos. But, if he gets the nomination, I will support him because he is NOT republican. There is no way that I would ever help a republican into the white house again in my life. I am convinced that they want to destroy my country and for at least 14 years have been striving to do just that. No matter the hard feelings that result from the next few months, we must ban together to defeat McCain. Please don't allow disappointment to cloud your mind and let the republicans win again.

Posted by: JR | April 27, 2008 8:46 PM | Report abuse

"Obama takes money from lobbyists. He didn't rule out state lobbyist, even though many firms do both state and federal lobbying."

Of course, without proof, I can't really take you seriously. Perhaps you have some? Besides some random e-mail?

Posted by: johnny | April 27, 2008 8:46 PM | Report abuse

There's a lot of misinformation being posted here

Wright has not made any racist sermons.

If you listen to the words before and after the parts Fox and ABC like to broadcast, you realize there is no racist content in the sermons.

Some of these people are getting paid to spam the blogs.

Jack Smith, for example, can be found posting the exact same stuff on all the blogs, day in, day out.

"Cantabrigian "

"while the African American churches have been preaching racial paranoia and anti-American sermons?"

If this has anything to do with Reverend Wright, it shows me that not only are you misinformed (Wright preaches no such thing) but you are a bigot. Why are you a bigot? Because you take one (falsified) incident and then go forth and condemn all the majority African-American churches in the land.

And btw, 50 years ago in America, black people were getting lynched, and not very many majority white churches had a thing to say about that. 50 years ago in America, blacks were denied voting rights. The majority of churches were silent on this issue too. The ones that weren't marched with MLK and were branded as radicals and leftists.

The civil rights act didn't get passed until 1965, and even then that didn't settle everything.

Posted by: johnny | April 27, 2008 8:45 PM | Report abuse

Obama takes money from lobbyists. He didn't rule out state lobbyist, even though many firms do both state and federal lobbying.

Furthermore, in his past campaigns he did take money from federal lobbyists. And he uses millions of that money in his current campaign, as well as PAC money from the past.

Posted by: Miguel | April 27, 2008 8:44 PM | Report abuse

"I am less familiar with some of these blue-collar voters."

You seemed to have considered yourself an expert on them when making your "bittergate" comments.

Posted by: MIGUEL | April 27, 2008 8:42 PM | Report abuse

People better wake up and put the man's color and their prejudice aside , Obama is the only candidate who will do the working man any good . Clinton is as corporate and lobbyist friendly as there are in DC , just look at her history and who she takes money from and do you recall her defending lobbyists and taking money from the lobbyists in one of the debates , " lobbyists are people too " she said . The Clintons are the establishment ! If you think they will try to change how things are done in Washington and level the playing field so that the average working American gets a fair shake you are 100 percent mistaken . Clinton was such a wonderful President ? Yes those were good times economically but it wasn't all because of the President . Bill Clinton's legacy ? Cigars and NAFTA in which we have lost hundreds of thousands of decent paying jobs .And don't forget both the Clintons pushed NAFTA and any one with any sense knew what the result of passing NAFTA would be ( remember what Ross Perot said ? That giant sucking sound , jobs going down the drain if NAFTA was passed , but the Clintons and the corporations won out . Now there is the Columbian free trade agreement , Bill Clinton is for it , Hillary's top campaign manager Penn is for it and by the way he is a multi million dollar lobbyist who was hired by the Columbian government and is being paid by the Columbian government to lobby for the agreement ... but of course Hillary is against the agreement ? Come on people , wake up !

Posted by: Ray | April 27, 2008 8:38 PM | Report abuse

I agree with Obama, he needs to work a little more as the nominee. He has great potential but he needs to show effort in appealing to the workers of the country. He has a great organization but wants for man to man campaigning.

To criticize Obama on lack of experience is at least reality based, although I think Hillary is not strong there either. However to say Obama lacks judgment is utter nonsense. It devalues everything you wrote.

Posted by: gator-ron | April 27, 2008 8:34 PM | Report abuse




....................HILLARY VOTED FOR THE WAR



Posted by: Anonymous | April 27, 2008 8:29 PM | Report abuse

Obama is doing pretty good when you consider the other three candidates are ganging up on him. Which three? Mama Clinton, Slick Willie and Juan McCain...All three see him as a threat to Business As Usual in Washington.

Posted by: x32792 | April 27, 2008 8:21 PM | Report abuse

I am an Obama supporter but remain amazed that for whatever reason, he doesn't play off the papers--the daily stories in the Post & NY Times.

For example, on the Fox Wallace show today, he was asked how you gonna pay for all the programs, McCain is asking. [I did not watch the show; I get this from a friend].

This morning's Times had front page story that McCain's tax cuts for the rich would put us in a far greater hole than Clinton or Obama programs would.

Now you think he would have read the story or that his aides might have mentioned it,
but he didn't refer to it. "Very good question, Chris, and the NY Times answered it this morning," he could have said.

He does not yet consistently show JFK quickness.

Madison, WI.

Posted by: Fred Willman | April 27, 2008 7:58 PM | Report abuse

Can you believe that for approximately 50 years we have been passing laws supporting desegregation, affirmative action, equal opportunities, and racial tolerance, while the African American churches have been preaching racial paranoia and anti-American sermons? This possibly explains the low level of achievement and high level of crime and apathy, with African American youth. Americans pride themselves on their church attendance and worship of God, but what kind of a God are they worshiping when their pastors preach inflammatory racist sermons against the whites within their society. It is high time the African-American culture got on the same track as the rest of the country and possibly they will see an attitude change among their youth. However, the Swift-Boat commercials will show Obama laughing and clapping . . . the best is yet to come!

Posted by: Cantabrigian | April 27, 2008 7:46 PM | Report abuse

Obama's judgment leaves much to be desired. Obama was quick to infer that Hillary Clinton's campaign was responsible for the pass-port fiasco, although USA Today reported that The Washington Times and CNN say one of the contract employees worked for a company called The Analysis Corp. That firm, in turn, is led by CEO John Brennan -- an adviser and contributor to Obama's campaign.

Posted by: Cantabrigian | April 27, 2008 7:42 PM | Report abuse

The DNC didn't want my vote in the the primary...they sure as hell not getting it in November....I only hope every democrat in Michigan and Florida feels the same.

Posted by: lucygirl1 | April 27, 2008 7:41 PM | Report abuse

Words, only words . . . the twenty years of sermons by the white racist, hate-filled, Pastor Jeremiah Wright. Words, only words. . . the angry anti-American sentiments of Mrs. Obama. Obama's judgment leaves much to be desired for failing to express indignation during the twenty years he took his small children to hear the white-racist, anti-American sermons of Pastor Wright. However, Obama pulls the race-card and with hyped up indignation tinged with shouts of racism jumps all over Imus, the Clintons and claims that Geraldine Ferraro is "Trash-talking." This nonsense from Obama, who claims he is trans-racial!

Posted by: Cantabrigian | April 27, 2008 7:39 PM | Report abuse

The front page of the Wall Street Journal (4/21) provided an article on Obama's history which is a trail of higher ambition, lies and nefarious political tricks, and more lies mixed with poor judgment. Obama has carefully crafted a political career ladder with the same campaign speech of anti-establishment, hope and change. Of course the "change" he is always proposing is that he win the campaign! This is a surprise to no one who knows him - Obama wants to be the "King" of the establishment, which so happens to include you and me! Obama refused a request from the Journal to be interviewed for the story.

Posted by: Cantabrigian | April 27, 2008 7:33 PM | Report abuse

Then we have the candidate's wife, Michelle Obama who is an angry woman who expresses anti-American sentiments that, "life in America is not good, we're a country that is just down right mean . . . We're a country that is guided by fear, We're a nation of cynics, sloths and complacents." Mrs. Obama comes from a black blue-collar family, attended both Princeton and Harvard, is now making a six-figure income and living in a $1.6 million home. Strangely, Michelle Obama does not see herself as fortunate by any body's standards. This is the family the Democratic Party think could possibly be living in the White House? I don't think so.

Posted by: Cantabrigian | April 27, 2008 7:31 PM | Report abuse

Senator Obama should send working-class Americans flyers that give details of his accomplishments as a community organizer. Obama was successful at helping working-class citizens of many races find jobs, etc. to improve their lives.

He was 26 years old when he made this choice of work, instead of the corporate world of law. At the very same age (26), Hillary Clinton chose corporate law instead.

Senator Obama's early career has been hands-on, in the street, connecting directly with the everyday person.

Senator Clinton's career has been mostly corporate law. I am not aware of her having to get out in the community to have direct contact with citizens as Obama has. It has been documented that she overstated her involvement in the Children's Defense Fund.

Posted by: c | April 27, 2008 7:30 PM | Report abuse

A Living Lie
By Thomas Sowell
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
An e-mail from a reader said that, while Hillary Clinton tells lies, Barack Obama is himself a lie.
That is becoming painfully apparent with each new revelation of how drastically his carefully crafted image this election year contrasts with what he has actually been saying and doing for many years.
Senator Obama's election year image is that of a man who can bring the country together, overcoming differences of party or race, as well as solving our international problems by talking with Iran and other countries with which we are at odds, and performing other miscellaneous miracles as needed.
There is, of course, not a speck of evidence that Obama has ever transcended party differences in the United States Senate. Voting records analyzed by the National Journal show him to be the farthest left of anyone in the Senate. Nor has he sponsored any significant bipartisan legislation -- nor any other significant legislation, for that matter.
Senator Obama is all talk -- glib talk, exciting talk, confident talk, but still just talk. However inconsistent Obama's words, his behavior has been remarkably consistent over the years. He has sought out and joined with the radical, anti-Western left, whether Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers of the terrorist Weatherman underground or pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli Rashid Khalidi.

Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of Basic Economics: A Citizen's Guide to the Economy.

Posted by: Cantabrigian | April 27, 2008 7:29 PM | Report abuse

Obama lies and claims that he didn't know Ayer's man's background because he was only EIGHT years old at the time. However, as recently as 9/11 Ayer's comments made headlines! Perhaps, Obama is one of the people who don't read newspapers; Like the other fellow sitting in the White House.
How many Americans know a couple who were involved with bombings? How many Americans know a man who was involved with bombings and tells people he not only does not regret it, but wishes he could have completed more bombings? I don't think this is called main-stream. Obama's an embarrassment who is way out of his league. He lies.

Posted by: Cantabrigian | April 27, 2008 7:24 PM | Report abuse

Mr.Obama has already reached out to the middle class working voters across our country. His degrading "Cling on" comments rang loud and clear with the voters in Pennsylvania. They got it. The rest of the country will eventually figure out what this guy really represents. I hope that enough of his American Idolizing Obamuppets will catch on to his hope a dope. One can never underestimate the power of Stupid Humans In Transit though.

Posted by: Steve Boston | April 27, 2008 7:22 PM | Report abuse

& addendum. . . affluent, better educated brethren. . . .but then I'm myopic. (Did I spell that correctly, John?)

Posted by: Jim | April 27, 2008 7:16 PM | Report abuse

Obama definitely does not want to debate a woman of Senator Hillary Clinton's gravitas. Obama was way out of his league with his glib smirk and mocking of Senator Hillary Clinton at the last debate. He attempts to copy the insight and professionalism of Senator Hillary Clinton, but lacks her knowledge. Obama was as nervous as a cat on a hot tin roof, eyes bugging, nervously licking his lips while fumbling for answers in a televised debate with a knowledgeable, intelligent woman of substance. The audacity of this dolt and his toadies trying to tell us that he won the debate and denying there was any connection between him and Ayers! The Boston Globe (4/17) reported Obama's political career was launched in 1995 when Ayers and his wife introduced Obama to their Hyde community with a small house party when Obama was running for the state Senate. This man Obama lies, lies, and lies.

Posted by: Cantabrigian | April 27, 2008 7:15 PM | Report abuse

and now with spell-checking. . . .
"This is a fairly small sample from which to draw a conclusion, but it seems that the letters that condemn Obama the loudest are the ones riddled with spelling errors and incomprehensible grammar. Coincidence? I think not." Posted by "John."
Dear John,
not everyone gets to go to university or attend Columbia or Yale or Harvard, and most of us don't have speech writers and proof-readers. Indeed, many of us do not have MacBooks and cannot afford lattes at Starbucks. We tend to have spouses who work full-time, and we tend to spend our time taking care of the kids, trying to earn enough to get by, and living from paycheck to paycheck.
But, please John, that does not make us either stupid or ignorant. However, your remarks suggest you might see yourself as "up-scale" rather than "down-scale." Could that be correct? Do you have a BA? BS? MA? MS? Professional degree? Ph.D.?
Is that what this is all about? Those of us who don't should listen to our betters?
From this sampling of letters, it seems to me that those who have trouble thinking and confuse clever remarks and assertions with careful argument based on facts tend to support Obama. But perhaps I am wrong. I have not done a textual analysis of this particular subset of posts. Maybe next time around, when I have more time at my disposal.
For now, let me just suggest that perhaps the reason Obama has not made inroads among working-class people (other than blacks) is that he brings nothing to the table. Can you name one thing he has done for them, John? Can you name one program in his platform that will help them?
Perhaps his suggestion to give money to corporations to create jobs?
Perhaps his mandatory health care for kids, but not for their parents?
Perhaps his proposal to help minorities and women improve their economic positions? Or perhaps not, since women tend to vote for Clinton and Latinos tend to vote for her too -- or are women and Latinos racists and ignorant and prone to spelling errors too, John?
Perhaps his desire to encourage free trade?
Or perhaps not, since he claims to be against NAFTA.
Perhaps his offer to use federal money to "create new high-wage jobs" by funding R&D at, you guessed it, big universities and big corporations (no wonder the latte set loves this guy!)?
Perhaps his proposal to fund industries so they have create "green jobs" (is that like waste disposal, John? or is it spreading eco-friendly pesticides on your lawn?).
Perhaps it is his startling proposal to deploy next-generation broadband?
Or to support the Employee Free Choice Act?
Now raising minimum wage, yes, that would help, especially if it were indexed to inflation. But by how much? And do you really think a Congress that has not passed more than a handful of minimum wage hikes in years will pass this one?
Or perhaps Universal Mortgage Credit of -- are you ready for this, John? -- $500! Wow, that will help a lot of poor working stiffs!
Or Obama's plan to continue sub prime lending?
Or his Bill of Rights for credit card holders?
Or his limiting of interest for payday loans to a measly 36 percent? Amazing! How does he think those poor people running those payday loan places will live?
Or perhaps expanding the FLMLA to businesses with 25 employees -- great idea, John, except only about 40 percent of women in firms employing more than 50 workers can actually afford to take 12 unpaid weeks of maternity leave.
No, it must be the voluntary health care, the expansion of "hate crimes" statutes, and the tax credits allowing the middle class to pay fewer taxes. Are those the ones, John?
Or is it just that all those less educated, less affluent whites are a bunch of cynical gun-totting, embittered, religious fanatics who don't trust well-heeled lawyers from Chicago who happen to be black and believe in free trade?
Got me.
I just cannot imagine why workers and people who are older (plot the graph and you will see a steady and precipitous decline of support for Obama as people 'age'), and people on fixed incomes, and women, and Hispanics, and others who have not seen the light have not fallen all over Obama, just like their more

Posted by: Jim | April 27, 2008 7:14 PM | Report abuse

If you are a democrat, and want the Presidency, then it is time to come together and make a clear frontrunner. Clinton fatigue is abundantly clear. The "distractions" have become Clinton's entire campaign as her campaign managers are fired and owed millions of dollars. She can't pay her bills or manage an effective campaign when she had every advantage to begin with. Who really wants this woman running the country and fixing our economy. She recklessly threatened to invade Iran and "obliterate them" at a time we are in two wars, spread thin and most of the world knows we can't invade if we wanted to.

I am not impressed. She felt she was "the chosen one" and had no plan after Super Tuesday and she calls Obama elitist.

Obama has done the unthinkable. He has grown a grassroots operation coming from being an unknown in a few months time. He has raised more money than the history of either party and he has engaged voters and single handedly brought more new people into the process. That shows leadership and management skills.

If Clinton wants to run on her experience in this election, then McCain wins. The fact is, it's not about experience. No one can claim experience to be President. It's about judgement and character.

Obama has run a decent campaign. There are real issues watch CNN. Oil is record levels, gas going to $4 gal, recession, dollar sinking, world food riots, 2000 scientists have now signed on to the global warming report internationally because the effects are more rapid than originally thought. We are in two wars, Syria and No Korea now reported engaged in nuclear proliferation and the current administration didn't even notify the Senate Intelligence Committee. The issues are abundant. Don't be distracted. We need to rap this up now and win. Vote Obama.

Posted by: Jeanie | April 27, 2008 7:11 PM | Report abuse

Where did he steal this comment about "working harder"? From a PA Superdelegate no less...
Obama outworked in W.Pa., Doyle says
By David M. Brown and Salena Zito
Friday, April 25, 2008

Barack Obama needs to "demonstrate he can connect with blue-collar, working-class people," says U.S. Rep. Mike Doyle.

"Up to this point, I don't think he's shown that yet. That causes me some concern," said Doyle, a Forest Hills Democrat whose 14th District includes much of Pittsburgh.

Doyle is one of 29 Pennsylvania superdelegates -- and one of just six who remained uncommitted -- after Hillary Clinton won Pennsylvania's Democratic primary on Tuesday.

Doyle said he told Obama that he needs to try harder.

"I told him I wasn't real pleased" with his approach and that "he can't win campaigns in Western Pennsylvania on television," Doyle said in an interview. "You have to go out there amongst the people, and I felt Hillary was outworking him in Western Pennsylvania, and she got a result for it.

Posted by: Typical White Person | April 27, 2008 7:07 PM | Report abuse

Bill Clinton Blames Others For 911

Posted by: Real Americans | April 27, 2008 7:02 PM | Report abuse

Listen to Bill Clinton defending himself for not killing Osama

Bill refuses to address this concern:

Posted by: Real Americans | April 27, 2008 6:56 PM | Report abuse


Whether this get posted or not, I think we should tackle the right issues when it come to the Clintons.
August 1989:
The Clintons were in power when American Embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania all in Africa got attack by Osama Bin Laden. Information was sent to the White House, and nothing was done other than a speech of condolences for the victim's families in Africa. It was just the Africans - Who care? This was the message that was received in Africa.
We all thought the Americans will back us because of the information that we gave them - Osama was in the hide outs (Libya). We later found out from source closer to presidents of those African countries that were attacked that, the US have contacted the Saud ices and received Millions of Dollars that were ship to some Swiss Banks. The Swiss government is refusing to address this situation or conspiracy.
Africans have this adage: "the rain that falls on my house and cause destruction will soon drift to your house." This is what happened on Sep 11Th, when US was attack right at home. Had it been the Clintons had taken out Osama, 3000 US citizens would not have died. Who then, should we point fingers at - The CLINTONS. They knew all the plots of Osama from briefings by the CIA and FBI but because they had taken money from the Saud ices, they wouldn't pursue the safety of 3000 US citizens.
Call this a verbose claim, they video is available when US intelligent saw Osama getting into a bucker for their usual meeting after they had attacked the US embassies. Despite a call to the White House, THE CLINTONS WILL NOT APPROVE THE KILLING OF OSAMA.

So, all we are asking is to tell the truth about what happen before 9/11.

Sending the Clintons to the White is not something that we want to see happen again.

To those who intend to vote for the Clintons, bare this in mind:


Former President- Bill Clinton is misleading:
Watch this:

Posted by: Real Americans | April 27, 2008 6:44 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: THE TRUTH | April 27, 2008 6:43 PM | Report abuse

* Obama is scared of debates..

* Obama calls his supporters Chablis drinking limosine liberals

* Obama pushed MLK under the train by comparing his speeches to Rev Wright's speeches.

* Obama thrashed a bunch of high school kids in basketball, not caring for their feelings, just because he cannot bowl

* Obama insulted the marines by wearing a USMC T shirt. Has he ever served in ROTC. Even Bush has served there.

All these juset for the weekend.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 27, 2008 6:37 PM | Report abuse

To state that race will not be a factor in the November election is delusional. All anyone has to do is to listen to African Americans when interviewed and asked who they were voting for and the answer is Obama and when asked why, they say because he is black. That is the difference in the black voters and white voters. Black voters are not particularly interested in a candidates views and what they can do for the country, they are only interested in elevating their race. White voters do not want another George Bush in the white house, and will vote for the candidate they feel will help to get our country out of this mess we are in and back to a stable society. Blacks don't seem to care what situation is in as long as a black is in the white house. So for Obama to say this election is not about race is ridiculous. Obama scares me and he should scare other white Americans. You cannot tell me that he has continued a relation with Reverend White and other radicals like him if he didn't have those feelings also. For the white voters in America, be careful what you wish for, you may just get it.

Posted by: dana | April 27, 2008 6:12 PM | Report abuse


It's time for everyone to face the truth. Barack Obama has no real chance of winning the national election in November at this time. His crushing defeat in Pennsylvania makes that fact crystal clear. His best, and only real chance of winning in November is on a ticket with Hillary Clinton as her VP.

Hillary Clinton seemed almost somber at her victory speech. As if part of her was hoping Obama could have defeated her. And proved he had some chance of winning against the republican attack machine, and their unlimited money, and resources. In all honesty. I felt some of that too.

But it is absolutely essential that the democrats take back the Whitehouse in November. America, and the American people are in a very desperate condition now. And the whole World has been doing all that they can to help keep us propped up.

Hillary Clinton say's that the heat, and decisions in the Whitehouse are much tougher than the ones on the campaign trail. But I think Mr. Obama faces a test of whether he has what it takes to be a commander and chief by facing the difficult facts, and the truth before him. And by doing what is best for the American people by dropping out of the race, and offering his whole hearted assistance to Hillary Clinton to help her take back the Whitehouse for the American people, and the World.

Mr. Obama is a great speaker. And I am confident he can explain to the American people the need, and wisdom of such a personal sacrifice for them. It should be clear to everyone by now that Hillary Clinton is fighting her heart out for the American people. She has known for a long time that Mr. Obama can not win this November. You have to remember that the Clinton's have won the Whitehouse twice before. They know what it takes.

If Mr. Obama fails his test of commander and chief we can only hope that Hillary Clinton can continue her heroic fight for the American people. And that she prevails. She will need all the continual support and help we can give her. She may fight like a superhuman. But she is only human.

Sen. Hillary Clinton: "You know, more people have now voted for me than have voted for my opponent. In fact, I now have more votes than anybody has ever had in a primary contest for a nomination. And it's also clear that we've got nine more important contests to go."


Jacksmith... Working Class :-)

Posted by: Anonymous | April 27, 2008 6:05 PM | Report abuse


If you think like Barack Obama, that WORKING CLASS PEOPLE are just a bunch of "BITTER"!, STUPID, PEASANTS, Cash COWS!, and CANNON FODDER. :-(

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think Barack Obama with little or no experience would be better than Hillary Clinton with 35 years experience.

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that Obama with no experience can fix an economy on the verge of collapse better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) led the greatest economic expansion, and prosperity in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that Obama with no experience fighting for universal health care can get it for you better than Hillary Clinton. Who anticipated this current health care crisis back in 1993, and fought a pitched battle against overwhelming odds to get universal health care for all the American people.

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that Obama with no experience can manage, and get us out of two wars better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) went to war only when he was convinced that he absolutely had to. Then completed the mission in record time against a nuclear power. AND DID NOT LOSE THE LIFE OF A SINGLE AMERICAN SOLDIER. NOT ONE!

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that Obama with no experience saving the environment is better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) left office with the greatest amount of environmental cleanup, and protections in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that Obama with little or no education experience is better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) made higher education affordable for every American. And created higher job demand and starting salary's than they had ever been before or since.

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that Obama with no experience will be better than Hillary Clinton who spent 8 years at the right hand of President Bill Clinton. Who is already on record as one of the greatest Presidents in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that you can change the way Washington works with pretty speeches from Obama, rather than with the experience, and political expertise of two master politicians ON YOUR SIDE like Hillary and Bill Clinton..

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think all those Republicans voting for Obama in the Democratic primaries, and caucuses are doing so because they think he is a stronger Democratic candidate than Hillary Clinton. :-)

Best regards

jacksmith... Working Class :-)

p.s. You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you don't know that the huge amounts of money funding the Obama campaign to try and defeat Hillary Clinton is coming in from the insurance, and medical industry, that has been ripping you off, and killing you and your children. And denying you, and your loved ones the life saving medical care you needed. All just so they can make more huge immoral profits for them-selves off of your suffering...

You see, back in 1993 Hillary Clinton had the audacity, and nerve to try and get quality, affordable universal health care for everyone to prevent the suffering and needless deaths of hundreds of thousands of you each year. :-)

Approx. 100,000 of you die each year from medical accidents from a rush to profit by the insurance, and medical industry. Another 120,000 of you die each year from treatable illness that people in other developed countries don't die from. And I could go on, and on...



Posted by: jacksmith | April 27, 2008 6:03 PM | Report abuse

This is a fairly small sample from which to draw a conclusion, but it seems that the letters that condemn Obama the loudest are the ones riddled with spelling errors and incomprehensible grammar. Coincidence? I think not.

Posted by: John | April 27, 2008 6:01 PM | Report abuse

Most people that are on here criticizing Obama would vote for McCain over Hillary too. Check out the comments by Lady M for verification and, for evidence of the ridiculous comments about Obama check out Lynn Parkers comments,... some people just will not be able to think on a different level to understand that comments are taken out of context. Obama's running a positive campaign which is the reason he was able to gain 15% on Hillary in Pa, wheras she on the otherhand lost ground through her negative campaigning

Posted by: Othello | April 27, 2008 5:54 PM | Report abuse

Obama shows his lack of experience and connection with the working class by saying he just needs to work harder.

This is one area where Clinton's experience really does matter. Clinton, like Obama, was from Chicago and Ivy league universities. But her 20 something years in Arkansas with Bill taught her how the working class work, then as first lady surviving two presidential elections with Bill...She breathes their issues.. This 'knowledge' is not a text book knowledge, it is the 'inner knowledge' that comes from true lived experience.

Even if Obama spends 24/7 trying to learn the working class in the next 10 days, he will not gain what she has had for the last 20 years or more.

Posted by: vote4thebest | April 27, 2008 5:53 PM | Report abuse

I and -MILLIONS- like me will vigorously campaign against Hillary Clinton should she STEAL the Democratic nomination. Carve this in stone - she will NOT be elected after this display of Egomania at the expense of the American public. Carve it DEEP in stone !

-and I voted her into her senate seat. Fool me once... NEVER again. Never.

Posted by: PulSamsara | April 27, 2008 5:43 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Obama cannot relate to us b/c he is NOT us and never has been. He is the product of an elite, liberal educational system that is totally out of touch with the "average" American. And for his infomation I don't want him to solve my problems - I'll do that myself thanks. He can do nothing about gas prices and all the other ills he promises to cure. If elected and backed by a Democratic Congress, all he will do is raise taxes for his entitlment programs such as universal health care etc. So - if you want your problems to increase, I would suggest a vote for Hillary or Obama as there is absolutely NO difference in their platforms.

Posted by: Lady M | April 27, 2008 5:34 PM | Report abuse

a CHAT ON ANY NEWS PROGRAM WITH oBAMA IS SUCH A WASTE OF TIME. hE IS WELL PREPARED FOR THE QUESTIONS BEFORE THE PROGRAM BEGINS AND HIS WRITERS AND ADVISERS WILL TELL THE BOY WHAT HE SHOULD SAY, HOW TO RESPOND and how to say it. he is a good street corner talker and a storehouse of useless information!, and this no nothing guy want to run this country. WHAT A FARSE!

Posted by: LYNN PARKER | April 27, 2008 5:10 PM | Report abuse

Obama need not work harder for Blue Collar votes. He has laid it out as to how he feels about blue collar workers from small towns. His take on this subject was very clear. Blue collar workers, as he portrays us, carry guns to show bitterness and hide behind religion (for what purpose, he was not too clear on). So there is nothing further he has to say on the subject - he has said what he thinks of most of American workers. NOW HE WANTS TO FLIP FLOP.

Posted by: LYNN PARKER | April 27, 2008 4:59 PM | Report abuse

I'm a white american male (upper-middle class), and even among my own family (most blue-collar and lower).. i can tell you that there's a lot of people in america, 40-100 years old.. that still refuse to let go of the past ways....I have an asian wife, with absolutely no skillset or education in any field (but makeup, and shopping, heh) and i am constantly reprimanding her for making prejudist remarks about mexicans and blacks.

"blue collar and lower" "Asian wife - no skillset... "but makeup and shopping" "I am constantly reprimanding..." This type of arrogant, disdaining attitude, that treats middle and lower income families as if they are children incapable of making a decision, is the reason why Obama cannot win core democratic votes. Not to mention his lack of experience and inability to handle the pressures of a campaign race.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 27, 2008 4:57 PM | Report abuse

Senator Obama has to promote himself more to the white working-class community during the next two weeks. If they believe that their lives will improve with him in the White House and that he will work towards bi-partisan support to move this country in a positive direction, he will get their votes. No obstacle is too big to overcome - he has already beaten the odds by coming this far in the Democratic primary. America is listening - she is ready for a President Barack Obama.

Posted by: Kiki | April 27, 2008 4:49 PM | Report abuse

"I am less familiar with some of these blue-collar voters"...out of touch to say the least. To many Senator Obama does not appear to understand their lives. He said on CBS's "Face the Nation" that Clinton is "somebody who can appeal to working people, people who have real concerns about this economy. She won overwhelmingly with those voters who were concerned about the economy." Thank you Senator Obama for the sound byte for her next ad!!

Posted by: cb | April 27, 2008 4:49 PM | Report abuse

What planet do you people live on? Obama has had a privileged life: He doesn't know the struggles of blue-collar America. With a salary of $4.2 million, he can hardly deem himself a poor, working-class American.

Posted by: smokin' joe | April 27, 2008 4:49 PM | Report abuse

I really do not think Senator Obama gets it. For someone who claims they will be a uniter, he's having a very serious time connecting. No matter how hard you try to forget wright, ayers, renzko and "bitter", there's little else to his history. I think to go in an close a curtain as much as you would like to it is impossible to not have those mememories. Especially,wright. I watched his interview, and there were still not enough explaination. The government and aids. Why would someone who is supposedly learned, lie about that and why would someone learned sit and listen? I cannot reconcile the judgement issue.

Posted by: kt | April 27, 2008 4:42 PM | Report abuse

"The DNC didn't want my vote in the the primary...they sure as hell not getting it in November....I only hope every democrat in Michigan and Florida feels the same.

Posted by: lucygirl1 | April 27, 2008 3:29 PM"

lucygirl1, don't put all the blame on the DNC for Michigan and Florida votes not counting. Back in August of 2006 the DNC set dates for the caucuses/primaries in Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, and South Carolina. The rest of the states could then hold their caucuses or primaries after February 5, 2008.

When Michigan and Florida were moving up the dates of their primaries they were warned repeatedly by the DNC not to do so, but went ahead anyway for whatever reason. I assume it was to have more influence in the selection of the Democratic candidate.

It seems to me that if you're going to blame the DNC, you better hold those in the two states who decided to violate the rules accountable as well.

Posted by: Undecided in Oregon | April 27, 2008 4:20 PM | Report abuse

Not ready for a black president at all!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Native American | April 27, 2008 3:57 PM | Report abuse

according to poet allen ginsberg, a buddhist master has failed if his student isn't better than he was. obama isn't afraid to learn from the unwise as well as the wise. also, one learns more from an adversary than from a friend. there is one candidate who is being tempered for the presidency. go obama '08.

Posted by: ted quinn | April 27, 2008 3:57 PM | Report abuse

Barack Hussein O'Pander is now trying to reach out to all the God D'ed American Blue Collar Workers Praying for help while Locking and Loading to defend our Country from the Onslaught of the Invasorios Barry tells us we are Blaming for Underbidding our Jobs and over-running our Communities and Infrastructures.

God D' us Typical Americans-Huh Barack! ;~)

And he wonders why we aren't Biting the Bait?!

Posted by: RAT-The | April 27, 2008 3:56 PM | Report abuse

Senator Obama did try to reach working class voters with his ad about how he helped the former Maytag employees after the plant was moved to Mexico. This was a total fabrication.

Senator Obama was asked to cease his false campaign ad by the president of the union, inasmuch as he did not lift a finger to help.

This is a serious misrepresentation on Obama's part...a flagrant lie in a national ad no less! Why is no one talking about this deception. Incomprehensible!

Posted by: Woody | April 27, 2008 3:54 PM | Report abuse

Monica Who?

Posted by: Mantua51 | April 27, 2008 3:52 PM | Report abuse

Personally, i think FRank pointed out exactly why Obama has a hard time winning "Blue collar" votes...

I know we all like to think prejudism is a thing completely in the past, but it's not. it's gotten better, but not gone.

i'm a white american male (upper-middle class), and even among my own family (most blue-collar and lower).. i can tell you that there's a lot of people in america, 40-100 years old.. that still refuse to let go of the past ways. The older, and more stubborn the individual, the more likely you will find the occasional talking bad about black men.

I have an asian wife, with absolutely no skillset or education in any field (but makeup, and shopping, heh) and i am constantly reprimanding her for making prejudist remarks about mexicans and blacks.

when you're talking about "Blue collar" in a places like Ohio and Penn. (and a lot of other states for that matter) i think you're talking about middle-aged -to- old-aged people who most-likely still make negative remoarks and/or snare at anyone non-american who's gotten further in life.

no-doubt, i'm sure Obama already expected his race to be a problem. and i think he's not really felt the impact of it until those 2 states.

I perosnally support Obama, He doesn't have the "political coverup know-how" bred into him.

(side-note: how did Obama fair with the "Blue collars" of places like Alabama?)

Posted by: Anonymous | April 27, 2008 3:51 PM | Report abuse

44th President of the United States

President Barack HUSSEIN Obama

Posted by: dalla cas | April 27, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

Hillary's small group of loyalists are trying to blackmail the nomination from the Democratic party...

not gonna happen. move on, the rest of the party will, as will the moderates and indepedents who won't be galvanized to vote Republican if she wins.

Like Christ Rock put it,
I'm all for the first woman president, but would it have to be THAT woman?

Posted by: eljefejesus | April 27, 2008 3:44 PM | Report abuse

The race is over, but her attacks do still annoy people.

Hillary,Carville, and her inepts loyalists running her campaign will have a rude awakening when they lose the nomination and have not tried to patch up the damage the've caused to the party.

As for this article, I'm one of those minorities that Clinton will have trouble getting to support her if she steal the election from Obama. Not to mention an educated white collar worker, a group she can't seem to win. I guess if that makes Obama elitist it makes her a panderer and an unlikely millionaire populist.

Posted by: eljefejesus | April 27, 2008 3:42 PM | Report abuse

not a whole lot of difference between Rev Wright and Congressman Clyburn...The only difference Rev wright shows his true colors and Congressman Clyburn hides his....

Posted by: lucygirl1 | April 27, 2008 3:32 PM | Report abuse

The DNC didn't want my vote in the the primary...they sure as hell not getting it in November....I only hope every democrat in Michigan and Florida feels the same.

Posted by: lucygirl1 | April 27, 2008 3:29 PM | Report abuse

Congressman Clyburn calls Bill Clinton a racist. Has he ever commented on Michelle Obama or Rev Wright. CLYBURN ,CRYBABY, and his ilk needs to CHILL OUT. IT is racism when 92 % vote by color...

Posted by: vs | April 27, 2008 3:28 PM | Report abuse

shame to you bill and hillary clinton,in other to obtain power you betray your fellow african-america,shame to you bill,shame to you hillary.your time is gone,is time for obamania,obamaina stand for change and change we believe in.

Posted by: clintons | April 27, 2008 3:26 PM | Report abuse

DUmbasses the amereican people were for the war at the beginning 90 percednt backed the president congress loss alot of republicans because they did not vote for the war hillary voted for the war at the time that was necessary to engage into military action. so rember thyat you were also in support fo rthe war we can noyt have double standard bunch of hypricites. so screww you vote for ahillary no ohbama drama here. if hillary doesn not win the nominationm vote for mccsin no black msn for preeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeedent

Posted by: FRank | April 27, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

Obama bad, Clinton good.

Posted by: Joe | April 27, 2008 3:16 PM | Report abuse

Anyone who underestimates Barack Obama does so at his or her own peril.

Ask Hillary Clinton.

Posted by: Malama Makena | April 27, 2008 3:03 PM | Report abuse

What's interesting is that among many people of Illinois, the ostensible home of most of the candidates, is that the perception is Obama is more for the working class than Clinton.

If I ran the Obama campaign and wanted to go negative, I would mention that Clinton claims to be from a lot of places, yet won't commit to any of them. Is she a Cubs fan or a Yankees fan? How come no one knew that she was from Pennsylvania until she showed up there? The lack of a cohesive narrative for her life is confusing to me.

Posted by: boz | April 27, 2008 2:59 PM | Report abuse


The 44th president of the United States:

President Barack Obama


Posted by: Anonymous | April 27, 2008 2:56 PM | Report abuse

I concur with Obama's assessment to work harder for working-class white voters support. It has all to do with perception. Hillary is able to run on the Bill Clinton's appeal among the white working class.

Obama has got to do more pivoting in his campaign stump as short-term issues arise, while still keeping a focus on the long-term. He has to offer both criticism and solutions while on the stump when talking about gas prices, unemployment, and the housing market fiancing crunch. Why has Obama spoken more about the Indiana's agricultural business that was aided by his support of the 2005 Energy Bill that increased use of renewables such as ethanol and biodiesel while Hillary voted against it.

Even Obama does not need to win both Indiana and North Carolina, he should be campaigning in both as though his own candidacy depended upon it.

Posted by: AJ | April 27, 2008 2:55 PM | Report abuse

We typically want to acheive more for those who follow us. Parents, for example, generally want the world to be a better place for their children.

A lifetime of struggling to achieve those dreams, experiencing first hand the politics that often promise much, but deliver little, is what many middle American's frame of reference is.

Who wouldn't subscribe to the idea of positive change. But the stake comes in the believing part of the equation. I do believe it is possible. I am not set in my ways, nor content to settle for less than the ideals I reach for, if not for myself, for the family I will one day leave behind.

We are learning quickly about the bleak future we face if we don't embrace - and begin to practice - real change. Environment, War, Economy, Energy and Health care. When, then is the appropriate time for change? Four more years?

The time for change is now. You've got to believe. The alternatives hold no promise whatsoever.

The crises are coming to a crossroads. Obama may have to work harder for these votes, but we (the very same voters), need to comprehend the magnitude of our condition and work for real change together.

Posted by: DonJulio | April 27, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse




....................HILLARY VOTED FOR THE WAR



Posted by: Anonymous | April 27, 2008 2:44 PM | Report abuse






Bill Kristol, Charles Krauthammer, Rush Limbaugh, Pat Buchanan,
Joe Lieberman, Rubert Murdoch, Dick Cheney, Carl Rove.......


war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war war !

Posted by: Anonymous | April 27, 2008 2:36 PM | Report abuse

He should endeavor to work smarter as well as harder. I think he needs to seize the concerns of moment - high food and gas prices - and really focus on how it is hitting that segment. Honestly though, looking at his background and schooling he is probably exactly what workiing class people would like to see happen for their kids, he has been there, knows how hard it is and should relate where he has been to what they want and why they see those dreams slipping away

Posted by: nclwtk | April 27, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

I just don't get how a 100-million-dollar First Lady from Chappaqua, New York (Ranked #42 Richest Place in America) could accuse Barack Obama of being an elitist.

Posted by: Dissent | April 27, 2008 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Obama has a perception problem with blue collar workers. McCain can waltz into Ohio and proclaim that jobs are not coming back, while Barack tries his hardest to present this problem in a constructive way and gets slapped in the face for being an elitist. Go figure.

Posted by: David Donar | April 27, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company