Chicagoist: Sweeps Week for Obama

Chuck Sudo

Wed, 13 Feb 2008 14:24:50 -0600

Being a vindictive troll was part of Giuliani's bad campaign strategy.

Spav1

Wed, 13 Feb 2008 12:55:29 -0600

Chuck: Bad campaign strategy equals bad campaign strategy. I mean, "vindicive troll" is your opinion, I guess. In any case, if she pulls it out in those states, it will be very impressive, but Obama has the "M" word: MOMENTUM!! And anyway, firing Pati for Maggie Williams was a routine campaign shake-up as far as I am concerned, but it is a terrible time to lose staff. I am pretty sure Hil is dunzo.

Chuck Sudo

Wed, 13 Feb 2008 12:23:48 -0600

Apples and oranges re: "do-or-die", spavone. Giuliani is a vindictive troll that voters saw through once his petty nature became transparent and his campaign settled into a one-note "9/11" song and dance. Hillary's on the ropes and hopes that the large Mexican-american voting bloc in Texas can at least keep up her candidacy until the convention. Otherwise, those superdelegates she claims are going to become typically fickle and back a winning horse. Spook: Obama's getting better on the stump and you're falling for the hype. It was noted that in the Potomac primaries yesterday Obama made huge gains among all voting blocs, including Latin-Americans, women, and white males. Firing Patti Solis Doyle came at a pretty bad time for Hillary, as some influential Hispanics have been calling it a slap in the face (whatever that means). Slaphappy: McCain might siphon independents from Obama, but Obama is - and I cannot stress this enough - energizing young voters so much that he could withstand the body blow. a large number of the independents who voted republican yesterday went for Huckabee.

spookhatespuppies

Wed, 13 Feb 2008 12:17:55 -0600

@Spook: Obama was always good on the stump. As a matter of fact, his speaking ability (at the last Democratic Convention) is what got him where he is today. It's probably one of the reasons I like him over McCain, as silly as that seems.

YoknapatawphaTourismBoard

Wed, 13 Feb 2008 10:30:50 -0600

Slaphappy: I think you're right regarding the motivation, though I think the issue is that Clinton is extremely weak among independents and with educated voters, all of whom seem well-disposed to McCain. In this case, the equation is that Obama can get McCain's voters whereas Clinton will be fighting for the same states in which Kerry and Gore had difficulties.

Spook

Wed, 13 Feb 2008 10:27:16 -0600

Is O’Bama getting better on the stump or am I just falling for the hype? But before I fall any further, interesting NYT Op-ed by one of Hillary's most negative critics Maureen Dowd. As always overly negative, but she seems to point to the fact that O’Bama has “transcended” race to such a point that even NASCAR white males are comfortable with him, while Hillary “uses” gender to her advantage. I find comments like that disturbing, especially when the front page of the same paper reports that American women are being gang raped by American contractors in Iraq with no legal options except “arbitration”

Spav1

Wed, 13 Feb 2008 10:15:45 -0600

I think what is driving voters to Obama is "Change?..." or some vague promise of "better than before". So Nixonian "Silent Majority". I love it. Also, Hillary is retarded to go "do or die" in TX and OH. Look what happened to Giuliani.

Slaphappy

Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:47:37 -0600

I think what's driving these victories for Obama is "who would beat McCain in a national election?" In my mind, McCain would siphon a lot more Obama supporters than Clinton supporters.