Hillary Clinton lengthens Pennsylvania lead over Barack Obama
A fresh poll from Quinnipiac (doesn't that sound like a character in a Herman Melville novel?) University finds Hillary Clinton adding to her lead over Barack Obama in the April 22 Pennsylvania primary. And you can't help but think some of this stems from the debate over race and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
Race does matter, judging by the poll numbers. Overall, Clinton led Obama 53% to 41% among all likely primary voters, a widened gap over the 49% to 43% lead she had Feb. 27. The poll, conducted over six days ending Sunday, has an unusually tight margin of error of 2.7%, which means Obama's slide is within the margin but Clinton's gain exceeds it.
The most interesting stuff, as usual, is in the details. The poll found that the racial gap has widened. White voters preferred Clinton by 61% to 33%, a change from the 56% to 37% lead last month. Similarly, black voters backed Obama 76% to 18% percent, compared with a 69% to 23% earlier finding.
There's a lot of time -- and a lot of campaigning -- to go, but at the moment, the numbers are tracking better for Clinton than for Obama, at least in Quinnipiac's poll. You can browse the rest of the polls here, but pay particular attention to the trend lines on the Real Clear Politics aggregate graph. It shows Obama flat in Pennsylvania, while Clinton climbed. And she was ahead there to begin with.
-- Scott Martelle
You are aware that Obama is up by 170 pledged delegates, right? So the 10 to 15 delegates that Clinton will probably pick up in Pennsylvania matter because...?
Posted by: Jonathan | March 18, 2008 at 12:49 PM
First of all, I am not a Democrat. But I think it would be a shame if Hillary Clinton won the Democratic primary because of the Rev. Wright issue. I'll be the first to admit I found his comments outrageous; however, looking back over the Clinton legacy and all the "skeletons in the closet" they have, I find it hard to believe the Democrats would allow Hillary to represent them in the November election. When you really look back at it, Bill Clinton is the one who initially entered race into the campaign. And this from a man who claims to be a friend of black America. Just goes to show you, when you want down and dirty politics, get the Clintons involved.
Posted by: bob | March 18, 2008 at 01:10 PM
Clinton needs to win the popular vote. If she does, the superdelegates are obligated to support the will of Democratic voters.
Posted by: superjo | March 18, 2008 at 01:11 PM
It's important because if Hillary can eke out a win in terms of popular vote, she has a case to make with the super delegates. That's why.
Posted by: Belle | March 18, 2008 at 01:17 PM
In Obama's road to the white house map of the country he already notes he probably won't win PA. His map has been right on so far. So he won't win PA but he still wins the white house!
Posted by: j101 | March 18, 2008 at 01:24 PM
I believe Mrs. Clinton will continue to gain in National polls and it shall become clear that she is the strongest candidate for president as we approach the Denver showdown.
Experience shall prevail over change as our economic woes worsen. Mrs. Clinton has made a strong case for experience and Mr. Obama has not made a strong case for change; most likely because he has failed to define what he plans to do that is different from the platform driven home by Mrs. Clinton.
Posted by: Fredric Fortney | March 18, 2008 at 01:27 PM
It doesnt matter now that Barack has more delegates. The delegates he won was when he was not exposed as belonging to a racist church. If you have elections in those same states where Barack was leading, I would bet you he wouldnt make it. Barack has already been exposed, his heart where is at is not for the American people. Why would Americans vote for him now?
If the DNC respects his number of delegates now, watch out, the republicans may have more ammo on him and this is why Barack cannot disown the pastor because he knows there is more tapes out there.
Posted by: God Bless America. | March 18, 2008 at 01:28 PM
Personally, what I think we are witnessing in this poll is two fold...first we see the deteroration of the campaign into racial politics, somthing I never thought we would see, and the second is that if you dig up negative images related to the other canidate, the public result will be a drop in the polls. Clintos campaign dug up dirt on Obama's preacher, thus we see adrop in the polls.
Hopefully Mr. Obama will take note of this and start digging...though I do recomend he not dig too deep, else he will stumble into actual rotting corpses of men like, Vincint Foster, Charles Mcdugal, and Ron Brown who died in a small plane crash and got shot in the head at the same time.
Posted by: Andrew Ian Murphy | March 18, 2008 at 01:34 PM
Race matters when incessant blather pounding on the obvious leads to nothing new, that's media.
What's the point of campaigning if people are set in their ways racially? If Obama is only defined as a black. Hillary is only a woman and she has Bill.
I don't go into polling booth to deny ethnic groups. I don't place race or gender ahead of other necessary data to consider.
One person on TV news said, can't vote for black candidate. A woman claimed, the President has to be male.
Democrats fight about it but there will be a loser. The question is whether Democrats move over to McCain and that's not easy when the Senator is now claiming to be Conservative Republican.
Aren't Democrats trying to get from under Republican rules?
All remaining states still to vote have to know, Hillary is almost at the point she can't win. Ohio didn't put her in the lead. Pennsylvania won't either. Florida isn't voting again. Michigan isn't likely.
Politics is a loser process if people can't get over the racism and bias in themselves.
.
Posted by: Marks | March 18, 2008 at 01:39 PM
Obama's fine speech will be reflected in the next Pennsylvania poll. He will likely lose the PA primary but it will be much closer than those reported poll numbers.
In any event his delegate lead is impregnable. He just picked up some more delegates from Iowa and will add enough delegates from Texas to upend the conventional wisdom that Hillary won there. Washington, Oregon, North Carolina and Guam, all favorable grounds for him, loom ahead.
The Superdelegates are politically savvy enough to follow the will of the voters. And they have indeed been moving in his direction.
Obama vs. McCain it is.
Posted by: Truesdell | March 18, 2008 at 02:09 PM
The hatred and arrogance in Rev. Wright's comment could be just a tip of the iceberg. This comment is not just a spur of the moment. Its seriousness must have been rooted to his personal belief, which developed in time. As Senator Obama considers this man intelligent and an adopted uncle, who knows if Rev. Wright's wisdom is shared by the senator in one or more of their private conversations. As it became public, the senator's natural instinct is to repudiate it. What a way to go.
Posted by: Melvyn M. Rosales | March 18, 2008 at 02:24 PM
This whole race thing is distracting us from the big issues. It's really quite pathetic, and I think the candidates need to get a hold of themselves before things get way too out of hand. Personally, the fact that Obama was black never influenced how I voted. Even after all this controversy with his former pastor, I'd still vote for him.
Posted by: Duke of Luxembourg | March 18, 2008 at 02:31 PM
I also find it herendous that the Clinton campaign has associated a sort of correlation between Reverend Wright's comments and Sen. Barack Obama. Though Wright's comments were offensive, you should listen to the speech Barack gave today and how it truly faces the discrimination between many of us. Mr. Obama is a great man and we would be blessed to have him as president of the United States.
Obama '08
Posted by: John | March 18, 2008 at 02:33 PM
I'm not sure how "recent" this Q poll is, actually. In fact, the last time a "recent" Q-piac poll was released, it was actually performed at least a week prior to its being published. However, it seems a tad too convenient and suspicious for any polling center to release something like this on a day that just happens to coincide with Obama's biggest speech this campaign. Now, while most of us realize the poll would have to have been conducted prior to this speech, the layperson would assume these numbers could be a result of his speech, which just isn't true. Beyond this Wright flap and SNL noise -- both candidates' camps are right: the media is stepping far and egregiously past the line that corrals the Fourth Estate. It's time they be held accountable for "guiding" the electorate's opinions.
Posted by: ndo | March 18, 2008 at 02:38 PM
The question is will white people vote for Obama after the pastor controversy? Is he white enough even though he is half white? How do we know whites wont be racist and choose 100 years more in iraq than a half white president?
Posted by: danny | March 18, 2008 at 02:42 PM
Did anyone catch snippets of the sermon given by Rev. Wright's replacement just the other day? Didn't sound like he was very concerned about Wright's comments. In fact, sounded as though he defended him and agreed with the basic tenor of his former boss' speech. So....ask yourself this simple question: Do you want the "home church" of next President of the United States reflect such views, make such statements, spew such divisiveness? That may play well in Damascus, Tehran, or Amman, but it will not on US Main, Wall or Back streets. Obama is finished. The way he will be ousted from the top Democratic position has yet to play out. What a dilemma for the Democrats, the party may implode unless he withdraws!
Posted by: soothsayer | March 18, 2008 at 02:51 PM
If Obama was given the same scrutiney as Hillary from the press at the beginning of this race he would NEVER, NEVER have this lead. Now that the press is finally sort of equal to both of them, Obama isn't the "superman" they made him out to be. But is he does win I will vote for him and her if she wins.
We can't have McCain (Bush lll ) in the White House. But if McCain wins everyone that voted for him deserves whatever you get. No crying over spilled milk.
Posted by: Jeff | March 18, 2008 at 02:58 PM
WHY YOU SHOULD NOT VOTE FOR HILLARY ROTTEN CLINTON:
Many millions of jobs that have been harbored safely within the borders of the U.S. as an active part of the U.S. economy have been moved to distant locations outside the U.S. where labor costs are significantly reduced. The outsourcing of U.S. jobs, often referred to as “offshoring”, while not new, has become quite prolific since the advent of NAFTA by the Clinton Admini- stration. The immediate reaction was that hundreds of manufacturing plants were closed and relocated outside the States. Champions of NAFTA and the World Trade Organization rationalized that low-skilled and low-paying manufacturing jobs would be replaced with higher paying jobs in high-tech and service sectors. Corporate momentum is such that outsourcing has gained wholesale acceptance by companies across-the-board seeking lower costs and higher profits. Job outsourcing has moved up the corporate ladder of hierarchy from telemarketing jobs to highly-skilled and managerial positions. Multinational Corporate America has been relocating the very jobs that NAFTA and the WTO announced would replace low-paying manufacturing jobs. The newest wave of job outsourcing is being exercised in accounting and financial services, computer and IT services along with telecommunications.
Mexico was a huge testing field for NAFTA and corporate internal structuring. For a time, Multinational Corporate America sustained many manufacturing plants in Mexico within reach of the U.S. border. When the labor costs and the professional level of the Mexican worker began to increase, most of the plants were quickly abandoned for other less expensive provisions overseas. The corporate taste for labor manipulation was fully birthed.
Multiple times, Congressional measures have been considered to restrain the federal government from granting contracts to companies to send work overseas. The Bush Administration has consistently opposed the legislation. The administration has continually supported tax incentives to outsource jobs overseas. Unprecedented levels of sensitive personal information are being shipped overseas where privacy protections are not in place. The federal government has made efforts to undermine state laws by convincing state governors to accept new rules for trade agreements, working to promote the use of funding that employs outsourced workers overseas.
While it is safe to say that these multinationals have heavily funded the Bush campaigns, the same support was obviously in place when the trade agreements were pressed into service by the Clinton Administration. The role of money in politics often appears to be very subtle. General Electric, Deloitte Touche, IBM, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, Microsoft, Texas Instruments, SBC and Verizon are among the top exporters of U.S. jobs since 2000. There is speculation and analysis, but almost no solid information of the number of U.S. jobs that have been outsourced. Ernst & Young sends tax preparation work to India. Aetna has medical records reviewed in India. Deloitte sends government work to India and commonly brings Indian workers from overseas to perform government work. The large organizations that support a multinational workforce have resisted disclosure of any information that might work against their corporate benefit. The government has worked as a partner to stem public scrutiny of job outsourcing with no federal reporting requirements for outsourced jobs. Multinational corporate America is fearful over a public backlash of opinion that would prevent them from exercising complete autonomy over their corporate workforces.
Increasing numbers in the United States labor force compete with developing third-world countries. The U.S. government continues to subcontract work to private contractors that often outsource with an overseas affiliate or subcontractor. Corporations like Deloitte Touche, have increasingly been sending IT and managerial jobs overseas. It is not uncommon for Deloitte, a major governmental finance and accounting firm, to bring foreign workers into the country to educate them while maintaining control of all aspects of worker’s lives, a form of indentured servitude. Work visas are commonly employed to bring foreign workers to work in the States for reduced wages. The action is considered as harmless and justifiable because of the number of multinational offices held by many players of Corporate America.
The effect of job globalization is the suppression of wages in the United States. 57% of reemployed displaced workers earned less in new jobs than in the jobs that were lost from outsourcing. 34% of those displaced workers saw earnings reductions of more than 20%. Brookings Institute recommends that outsourced reemployed workers recover 47 cents of every dollar that they used to earn.
Perhaps the ultimate expression of capitalism results in the export of jobs to lowest-cost countries to enable what used to be “American companies”, now multinational corporations that have the sole goal of maximizing their corporate profits. The ultimate political expression has evolved to a sector of the world that is, in effect, ruled by multinational corporations
Posted by: mariann | March 18, 2008 at 02:59 PM
Whatever her supporters think or want to believe, Sen. Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton know she has lost the race for the Democratic nomination. By offering Obama her VP spot, she is trying hard to become his VP. Clever and crafty move!
Posted by: NorthCarolinian | March 18, 2008 at 02:59 PM
Whatever her supporters think or want to believe, Sen. Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton know she has lost the race for the Democratic nomination. By offering Obama her VP spot, she is trying hard to become his VP. Clever and crafty move!
Posted by: NorthCarolinian | March 18, 2008 at 03:01 PM
What else do we not know of Barack Obama?
-- Side deals of Nafta with Canadian Embassy
-- Side deals with withdrawal of troops on Irag War
-- Side deals on his voting record about the war funding
-- Side deals about his experience of foreign policy
-- Side deals on voting record as Illinois state senator
Finally, side deal with Rezco on his mansion.
Can Obama overcome these handicaps once he faces the radical right?
My conclusion: Obama is not ready for Presidency, he should stay in the Senate as a fiscalizer. He is too raw to be Democratic standard bearer and too many skeletons to hide come General Elections in Nove.
Posted by: Ed | March 18, 2008 at 03:01 PM
The "Wright" setback matters and very much so. And Mr. Obama rushes to salvage with paternal speeches/lectures. Sitting in the radical church, listening to hateful preaches but waking up just today with righteous words. Well, Paris worth the Mass.
Posted by: Gurvinek | March 18, 2008 at 03:23 PM
Sorry, but this gain in PA, is showing that the American people are actually seeing the real Obama and are actually are seeing that Hillary Rodham Clinton is the correct person to lead the Dems into the elections and to win the White House. She is the only one that has mentioned anything in the last week about the economy etc....its time to stop voting on good speeches and vote for someone that is actually going to help the our country.
Posted by: daniel | March 18, 2008 at 03:35 PM
I'm an ex-pat Brit and don't have a vote. But I do have an opinion. For what it's worth, if Obama is not elected as the Democratic candidate - and consequently the next President - then that will send a message ringing around the world: Business as Usual. And that would be bad for the world, disastrous for America.
Posted by: John Bard | March 18, 2008 at 03:41 PM
Will one of the dim-witted Republicans please tell me what the skeletons are in Hillary Clinton's closet? You don't realize that Reagan had Iran-Contra. Bush/Cheney have had so many ethical lapses that there's not enough space here to list them all but lying about evidence to start a war is on the list. The difference-- elected Democrats are wimps who don't pursue impeachment or spend 60 million dollars trying to dig up more dirt on a Republican President. After all was investigated, Bill Clinton lied under oath about sex with an intern. What are the PROVEN Clinton skeletons that are any worse than Reagan's, Bush's or Thomas Jefferson's? Get real.
Posted by: ivan | March 18, 2008 at 03:58 PM
I'll vote for either Hillary OR Barack, whichever one is the nominee. Both of them are far better for our nation than McCain.
Posted by: Jessica | March 18, 2008 at 04:16 PM
I was so proud of my country for making a candidate's gender and race an irrelevant issue. I thought I was in a happy reality. But instead it's a fantasy.
The mere fact that a dramatically greater percentage of Pennsylvania blacks than whites support Obama says it all. Race does matter.
Maybe our grandchildrens' grandchildren will see a better day. In the meantime, will someone qualified get behind the White House wheel and steer us into a better future?
Yeah ... a happy fantasy.
Posted by: Martin | March 18, 2008 at 04:20 PM
The truth is democrats are now divided. Whoever wins as the contender for president will not win because they both hate each other.
If Obama wins the nomination we are all screwed when we find out some of these things that we are learning now. Truth is the kitchen sink has been thrown to Hillary from the start. The media GROOMED Obama. It was biased.Now that some dirt for Obama is coming out they dont know what to do.
Obama is saying he doesn't agree with Rev. Wright BUT he cannot stay away from him? Come on, 20 YEARS in that church? and considers Rev. Wright as HIS UNCLE? and this rev supports FARRAKHAN, right? So what happens when Obama wins? These people will be free in putting hatred to more people? Gangs will proliferate. This issue just divided the democrats based on race.
If Hillary vows out of this race now Obama will not win the presidency becoz Republicans will me more ruthless.
On the other hand, if Hillary wins the nomination the black voters will not vote for her.
No one wins.
Might as well vote for a fake Republican...
Posted by: DemNowRepublican | March 18, 2008 at 04:34 PM
I'm Hispanic and I hate when Obama supporters call me and Clinton supporters racists or prejudists. If they are voting for Obama because he's black, then who are the racists? Do we have to vote for him just give blacks their first African-American president? I'm sorry, but find an experienced black candidate and I will be more than happy to vote for him. This is not Affirmative Action people! Critics hate the Clintons over sex scandals. For how long does Bill has to pay for his sins?And who are them to judge them? Obama supporters accuse Hillary for everything that goes wrong with Obama. Do you really think Obama is the victim here? Well, then I feel sorry for Obama, but we need a strong leader and not a cry baby running for president. There are a lot of presidents in this world that will eat him alive. I vote for Hillary not because she's white but because I know she's the best candidate for the job. Those Clinton' haters, a little advice: i read somewhere that hate is like drinking poison and hoping the other person will die.
Posted by: Maria | March 18, 2008 at 04:39 PM
As far ahead as people claim that Obama is in delegates, all it really translates to is an overall popular vote lead of about 55,000 votes. I did the math. Hillary can very possibly overtake that in Pennsylvania if she continues to go as she has. Hillary Clinton is still very much alive in the Democratic Nomination. And this is considering the fact that many of those Obama wins were in caucus states...and Texas proved to us how inaccurate a caucus vote is in determining the will of a state (Hillary won 51% to 47% but lost the caucus 56% to 44%; keeping in mind that only a fraction of primary voters actually went to the caucus). For all the attention being bought to Hillary that she will never reach the 2,025 delegates needed before the convention, neither will Obama - so that will bring other indicators into play. How well each candidate performed in popular vote, in key democratic states etc. This race is very much alive.
Posted by: Fausto | March 18, 2008 at 04:47 PM
I am not a racist. I think the speech (fabricated or???) is great and Obama simply listed out the facts and added an ending story. And I agree with most issue Obama had said or raised.
But what matters more? Creditability or ability for great speech.
As one reader pointed out, the poll was probably done over a few but released today. This indicates a trend and not the end. I can't wait to see the new poll.
Here are what I don't understand:
1. Had Obama done in anything in stopping Wright from poisioning the crowd? Or did he simply just disagreed. Doesn't the God say love all others? What love did Obama showed in letting Wright's continuing hatred agenda in 20 years.
2. Why Obama still invite Wright into his team?
3. The speech was about trying to unit the American after listed out all facts. But should I believe Obama will make a difference after sitting in his church for 20 years and made no difference.
4. What else is coming up?
Time is really Clinton's friend. Too bad we can't undo or redo "Super Tuesday".
Posted by: hiddengun | March 18, 2008 at 04:48 PM
if Clinton gets the nomination simply because of a remark Obama himself did not make but showed intelligence by adressing it theyway he did: with integrity , then America is just not ready for change...they have no one else to blame but themselves. After all, every nation has the government it deserves. I would like to see Clinton doing the same, but that is not her style. And McCain keeps on blundering and is still taken seriously....no wonder the rest of the world looks down on us and doesn't trust us.
Posted by: eb | March 18, 2008 at 04:52 PM
Obama
1. has linked himself to a man who thinks 911 was America's fault
2. is bold enough to say that in America and on camera.
3. and was selling his hate speech on dvds
4. for 20 years.
5. This is the guy they prayed with in private before he annouced his campaign.
6. Guess who they will be praying with in private on the first day in white house.
Do u want to see the man who believed in god damning America to be in the white house ?
Can a first generation Kenyan immigrant with an Arabic name represent all of America ?
Posted by: Obamabot | March 18, 2008 at 05:28 PM
Okay, you bigots: have you never heard a sermon in your own church that you didn't agree with? If not, we are truly a nation of sheep. Being a Baptist in my early youth, I heard that God loves Christians but Muslims are all going to hell! Also, homosexuals including several in my family, are lousy sinners! That, I suppose, is better than what Reverend Wright said? Let's face it, we are formed by our cultural up bringing and our thoughts are slanted by our experiences and real life happenings. If your race were persecuted for hundreds of years, maybe you would also have some anger about how you were treated in America! Jerry Falwell, the conservative's friend, says New Orleans was punished by God for the sins of this nation. Outrageous, but no one branded him unpatriotic.Fox news and Hillary know he is the one to beat so they crucify him for something he didn't say or agree with? Does everyone want to lose the best candidate we have because of a few statements from someone else? He is the only one who can beat McCain because the supposed skeletons in his closet are bare-boned compared to the dirt they will dig up on Hillary!
If you want to do the will of the Neo-cons, crucify Barack or get on the bandwagon for the real issues that do matter! Do we want another 4 years of George Jr.? After all, he has been studying his philosophy and agreeing with it for the past 8 years. Get over Wright and do what's right for America!! Don't play right into the Republican's hands, we've tried that long enough.
Posted by: Linda Lutes | March 18, 2008 at 05:28 PM
Let he who has never used the phrase "welfare queen" or nodded in approval when hearing or reading that racist phrase (explicitly crafted as such for Ronald Reagan's campaign by Lee Atwater) lob the first stone at Jeremiah Wright. Obama was extraordinarily generous in his speech in legitimizing the resentments of racist whites, but that's a measure of the caliber of his character and his optimism that our society can move beyond that. And if we can't then god damn America indeed -- and Wright's comments were also conditional, but you wouldn't know that listening to the decontextualized snippets, cut off mid-sentence, and played over and over and over ... in the corporate-owned and controlled media, to play on the primitive emotions of those who are already prone to be scared by the angry black man who's pissed about how America has treated and continues to treat his people.
Posted by: truth machine | March 18, 2008 at 08:02 PM
"Okay, you bigots: have you never heard a sermon in your own church that you didn't agree with? If not, we are truly a nation of sheep. Being a Baptist in my early youth, I heard that God loves Christians but Muslims are all going to hell! Also, homosexuals including several in my family, are lousy sinners!"
Indeed, never before in the history of this country has it been demanded of a public figure that they leave their church or denounce /as a human being/ their religious leader, yet we have been getting a steady stream of that demand, not just from "pundits" and Clinton drones but from people who pretend to be journalists like Lou Dobbs and the rest of that crew. And Wright is retiring, and Obama didn't hear those statements (contrary to the lies about what he said in his speech). And there are many other people in that church, including prominent public figures, and no one is demanding that they leave the church. Because in fact it's not a demand that Obama leave his church, it's a dishonest fabricated attack on Obama built around the fact that he didn't do something that he had no obligation to do. At bottom, it has nothing to do with Wright and what he said or what Obama did or didn't do, it's a calculated effort to destroy his candidacy, very much in the spirit of the attacks on Al Gore for "lying" about things he never lied about (he *was*, as Erich Segal's roommate, the model for Love Story, he *did* grow up on a farm 6 months out of the year, he *did* take the initiative in Congress of creating the internet, as a commercial network out of the government-funded NSFnet), the swift boat attacks on John Kerry, and the attacks on doubters about WMDs and the legitimacy of invading Iraq. It's the worst, most vile sort of politics, and it's time for Americans to wake up to these sorts of tactics and reject them.
Posted by: truth machine | March 18, 2008 at 08:23 PM
Obama is ahead by 700,000 in the popular vote. And if you were a voter and all you saw was a constant loop every 20 minutes of Rev. Wright, you might vote for someone else, too. Voters are easily manipulated. He will close the gap in Penn. but she will probably still win which is fine because he is doing allright.
He should have talked more about patriotism in his speech a bit. I think that would have helped.
Posted by: Barbara | March 18, 2008 at 10:51 PM
The Clintons started the low down dirty campaign,and Obama was caught off guard because he is basically a good and fine person. This country can do better than elect the tyranny of the Clintons. We do have a Republic in this country, not a King and Queen who will do anything to reign again
Posted by: tp | March 19, 2008 at 01:05 AM
In her speech to support the war in Iraq, Hillary used her experience to make the case. It is getting clear she want to win at all cost, playing politics, fighting the change America is seeking in the White house, not only a change of political parties but a change of the system run by lobbyists.
How do you know when a person has enough experience on an issue, it's when s/he shows a better judgment. If this election was all about experience on the system, Bill Richardson would be the nominee and McCain would beat Hillary, she wont compare her experience to McCain's. But this election being about change, Obama is in the better position to win the White House, he inspire people from all over the world, he will make the entire country look like one family of Americans and not a collection of racist, black, white, asian, Latino
All my support to Obama 08' for a change in our foreign policy, better US economy and bring the country together to solve our common problems.
Obama 08'
Posted by: Tom Hynes | March 19, 2008 at 04:46 AM
OBAMA STANDS BEHIND SPIRITAL ADVISOR WRIGHT!
“Wright is like an uncle you love and respect”
IT’S WAY TOO LATE OBAMA, NO ONE WANTS TO HEAR YOUR LIES AND EXCUSES OR A SPEECH SOMEONE WROTE OR STOLE FOR YOU! YOU HAVE CLAIMED TO BE A MEMBER FOR 20 YEARS, YOU KNOW FULL WELL WHAT THIS RACIST ANTI-AMERICAN PREACHES EACH WEEK, YOU CAN BUY THE DVDS ON THE WEBSITE, and THIS IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF HOW YOU’RE RASING YOUR YOUNG DAUGHTERS? YOU ARE MOST CERTINALLY NOT THE LEADER FOR THIS GREAT COUNTRY! No one says Obama can’t attend any church he wants, or practice Muslim religion, he can be as racist as his “not proud of America" wife Michelle, or even the anti- American as Wright and his churches “man of the year award" Farrakhan! The problems he is running to be President for ALL people of the U.S. not just white American haters! He is not fit to be in public service! He should have disowned Wright & Farrakhan before this week or left that church years ago if he didn’t agree with his anti-American, anti white preaching. He is teaching his daughters the same type of anti American racism by attending that church and continuing to support and follow his spiritual advisor Rev Wright! Obama can’t persuade his way out of this one with that extremely lame speech!
IT’S TIME OBAMA GET OUT OF THE RACE!!! DROP OUT! WE DO NOT NEED OR WANT YOUR CHANGE BACK THE RACIAL DIVIDE OF THE 60'S...SHAME ON YOU OBAMA!
Posted by: mali | March 19, 2008 at 04:53 AM
Say what you want about Obama but I agree with John Bard - the rest of the world - by majority - does think he should be the next President and that an attempt should be made to move beyond business as usual. We wish you would take pause to consider that in amongst your in quibbling and falling for the same old swiftboating tricks that lumped you and the rest of the world with Bush for 8 years.
Posted by: Jay | March 19, 2008 at 05:38 AM
What has Obama to do with Right's sermon? Come on!
Unfortunately the Clintons are playing "experience" to justify their struggle for power.
Hillary, for instance, has shown how angry, sarcastic and divisive she is. Now they're taking advantage over Mr. Wright's sermon - something Barack has no control on. It was Dr Wrigth's speech, not Obama's
If my judgement is correct, I think Hillary will bring more division, gender struglle and America will be reaping a very bitter harvest.
Think, American people, think wise!
But not Clinton!
Posted by: Brainerd | March 19, 2008 at 06:06 AM
I think it's unfair the way people are firing on Obama. How can one be responsible for what other people say?
Is the media, plus the Clintons campaign trying to steal Barack's nomination?
Would the democrats survive such a blunder? I don't think people have lost their sense of right judgement.
In my estimation, Hilary has, from the very beginning, tried to strip Obama off this election process, by using all sorts of tactics on her opponent. Go for Obama, otherwise McCain. But Hillary, pleasse.. never!
Posted by: Billy Olive | March 19, 2008 at 06:19 AM
People need to just drop the whole racism and gender issue all together. It's sad that Americans are so sensitive that even the slightest mention of race and gender gets blown out of proportion.
It's to the point where people are quite frankly too scared to bring up any issue related to race or gender because they are afraid to be labeled as a racist. I think Obama is an honest guy and his character is certainly much more likable and appealing than Clinton. I don't think any less of his character in light of the whole NAFTA, Samantha Powers, and Rev. Wright issues. But these issues highlight his biggest flaw; lack of experience.
The fact that he can't deal with these issues head on (only now does he finally address them and talk about them openly) is a serious concern. If he can't handle these issues how, is he going to handle a national crisis when he's president?
I do understand why many people think Clinton will do anything to secure the nomination. Therefore, perhaps labeling her a "bitch" may be appropriate. But just remember, "bitches get the job done."
Posted by: Lawrence | March 19, 2008 at 06:44 AM
It's not that long ago that a black person had to step in the gutter to let a white person walk past. And that's just a small part of it. Remember all the signs 'Whites Only'. I'd be ticked too. I'm a 73 year old white woman. Did you really think there would be no bitterness about that, especially in the older people, those who lived it! Get real. But I believe it's possible to rise above it, for all of us.
Barack Obama is the hope for the U.S. and the world and if hate swallows up the hope he offers, then we're all doomed to carry on in the same old, same old...
Posted by: Joan | March 19, 2008 at 07:59 AM
Doesn't matter Obama has more delegates now...He can not win the popular vote. He is an embarrassment and would continue to encourage divisiveness among the races in the country and perhaps abroad, if he were elected. Clinton has the experience, and the resiliency, and the strength to deal with anything that may come our way. I put my faith in her. One other point, Obama can not win against McCain, Clinton most certainly can. God help us if another republican gets in - this country needs a boost, and Clinton is the best person for the job. In my lifetime, the Clinton administration was the best - the only time this country had a balanced budget, and we were well liked across the world. We need to get back there, and Obama isn't going to take us there, not now.
Posted by: anna | March 19, 2008 at 08:55 AM
If Hillary is not on the ticket, I will vote for McCain.
Posted by: Jeff | March 19, 2008 at 12:22 PM
a clinton/obama ticket will get more democrats to vote in the general election against that dinosaur,John Mccain.But an Obama/Clinton ticket will not cut the mustard . Trust me. Let's place objectivity over subjectivity when pulling the lever in November. Competence and experience plus youth and passion, in that order, will get the democrats in the White House again. Finally!
Posted by: karl | March 19, 2008 at 02:28 PM
To Obama supporters. You'r calling the Clintons racist. your accussing Hillary of murder, and claim she did nothing as first lady. You sound just like Rush L. Until this Obama fad started black leaders have always held the Clintons in high esteem and overwhelmingly supported them. Those Intellectual liberals for Obama are rapidly deteriorating into petty name calling fanatics. Then THEY accuse Hillary of undermining the Democratic party. Its understandable, The tide is shifting in Hillary's favor. The outragious lies and exaggerations being printed nowadays by Obama'a staff is clear evidence that they are getting real neverous. Shame. Hillary deserves better. Even her Republican Peers say openly that she has done many good things on behalf of the american people and she will do even greater things as President.
Posted by: hector | March 19, 2008 at 03:10 PM
to Obama supporters. You'r calling the clintons racist. your accussing Hillary of murder, and claim she did nothing as first lady. You sound just like Rush L. Until this Obama fad started black leaders have always held the Clintons in high esteem and overwhelmingly supported them. Those Intellectual liberals for obama are rapidly deteriorating into petty name calling fanatics. Then THEY accuse Hillary of undermining the Democratic party. Its understandable, The tide is shifting in Hillary's favor. The outragious lies and exaggerations being printed nowadays by Obama'a staff is clear evidence that they are getting real neverous. Shame. Hillary deserves better. Even her Republican Peers say openly that she has done many good things on behalf of the american people and she will do even greater things as President.
Posted by: hector | March 19, 2008 at 03:27 PM
Ob ama made an attempt to disown most of what he had been built on with the exception of his association with his pastor himself. He disowned the fact that he came from strong Muslim roots, he disowned the fact that he had strong givings from the pastor Wright, right or wrongly put in. Mrs. Obama has only recently been aware of the nice proud feelings of being an American. Do we collectively want someone of this background be our national hero? I wonder!
Posted by: gino | March 19, 2008 at 06:48 PM
I'm no pollster but if Obama were going to get a "bounce," it would seem that it would occur right after his very eloquent Phila. speech. The Q poll was taken before the speech. By early next week we should see if Obama's speech helped him, hurt him, or left him about the same. Those are the polls I'm going to be paying attention tol
Posted by: shellray | March 19, 2008 at 07:15 PM
With this baggage, Obama is not going to be electable. He is not 'post-racial' but 'pro-black'. He get to this point because of strong black support (90%) and liberal support. However, he does not get the support from the following traditionally democratic leaning group
* Hispanic support (3:1 voted against him in CA)
* Asian support (4:1 voted against him in CA)
* possibly Jewish-American because many think that he is not as pro-Isreal as previous president. Hey McCain know this and is now in Isreal.
For any democrat candidate to win the election, he/she needs the support of these people.
With all these baggage about race, he is not going to win in November. It is amazing that the liberal media like NYT is trying to spin his 'throw my grandma under the bus' speech into a historical speech. In November, McCain unlike Hillary who can very well forget about black vote, will go all out to bring out the dirt on Wright, his wife comments, his book, his senate voting record, ... etc.
The only people who think that he is electable are blacks and the left-leaning liberals. I am not a supporter of McCain. I will respect him as a true uniter if he can step aside and urge his African-American base to support Hillary. Don't be a spoiler please, we CANNOT afford to have another 4 years of replican president.
Posted by: straight arrow | March 20, 2008 at 01:41 AM
Everytime something pops up about Obama's past mistakes or his inexperience, he and his supporter will whine about racisms, and the liberal media (especially NYT) will go along with it.
However, Hillary despite her proven experience, will always be under a microscope. if she appears tough, she is perceive as too 'bitchy'. If she appears soft, she appear weak to do a man's job.
The funny thing is many young women do not realize this sexism and double standard, which they will face later in life. Instead, many fall all over Obama just for his beutiful but empty (with no specific) rhetorics. He is just the democratic version of G. Buch, who does not have the experience to run the country.
I cannot imagine this country is going to be run by another inexperienced person.
Posted by: straight arrow | March 20, 2008 at 01:43 AM
From day one I have questioned his patriotism. Patriotism is a very basic principal for a presidental canidate. He appears to go out of his way to thumb his nose at things like the flag pin, and forgets on occassion to put his hand over his heart and face the flag. Anybody thats been around long enough has skeletons in their closet. Greed, power and corruption are practically accepted in the White House. When you make a decision to run for president, its imperative that you begin to consider your actions and the company you keep. We are in a time when we hear hatred for the U.S. preached by religious groups, sects etc. from other countries. The last thing we should have to hear is similar hatred being preached in our own country and being supported by our potential commander and chief. This is a man who is living in America and preaching negativity to our commander and chief! How do you think this looks to the rest of the world? The type of rhetoric he is preaching does not help our cause here at home if those extreme Islamists hear it. Its not politically correct on Baracks part, shame on him! He has gotten by for some time now because of fear of the race card being played. I don't want this to sound wrong, but if we are going to say, well this is how black preachers preach then is that to say this is how extreme Islam preaches?
Posted by: Dee | April 19, 2008 at 05:40 PM
Hillary is gonna win Pa. BIG TIME
if Obama does get the nod who will B his V.P.??? Reverend Wright or Luis Farrakan?? Oh wait it will B Michele Obama, his racist wife!
Go Hillary, our next Presdient!
Posted by: J.P. | April 22, 2008 at 02:00 PM