Top of the Ticket

Political commentary from Andrew Malcolm

« Previous Post | Top of the Ticket Home | Next Post »

Where did Barack Obama's mojo go?

Something's going on. Or some things.

A new CNN/Opinion Research poll out Wednesday shows that despite nine solid days of blanket media coverage from overseas with Barack Obama cheered by adoring throngs of Germans and parlez-vousing with the French, making a three-point shot in the Middle East and standing outside No. 10 Downing Street, the freshman Illinois Democratic presidential nominee to be Senator Barack Obama of Illinois stayed static in the polls despite his well-covered long foreign tripsenator is stuck right where he was in the polls before he left.

No bounce. Not even a roll.

He still leads Republican Sen. John McCain 51% to 44%. But it's the same 51-44 as last time.

A CNN poll average shows an even slimmer 48-45 Obama lead, dangerously close for an experienced opponent who relishes being the underdog.

"Obama has not picked up any ground against McCain on foreign issues," says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. "And some 52% think McCain would do a better job than Obama on the war in Iraq -- virtually the same number who felt that way in April."

Other polls show the same stubborn one-digit lead holding for the Democratic nominee-to-be with only 96 days left until the general election. Some crucial state polls even show McCain gaining.

Obama seems to have everything going for him. A fresh face. A smooth, cadenced speaking style suited for TV. A message of change at a time when Americans historically favor change, after one party holds the White House for two terms. And after several convictions of GOP legislators.

Obama's got tons of money. An attractive family. Energized followers. A media that's curious about the new guy and tired of ...

... the dogged old POW one. High gas prices, a poor housing market, a two-front war ongoing and a slightly sagging economy, all of which should help political challengers. Not to mention an unpopular incumbent president.

A lead's a lead, but political strategists are puzzled.

In 1960, John F. Kennedy, the last sitting senator to win the presidency, announced his candidacy on Jan. 2. In 10 months he not only won the Democratic nomination in a blaze of freshness, but he beat 47-year-old Richard M. Nixon, who'd been a prominent vice president for eight years and a House member and senator before that.

Obama's had nearly twice that long to campaign. He's barely ahead and should be pulling away. But isn't. How to explain this?

Well, it is summer -- vacation time when millions of Americans are actually having personal fun, enjoying "The Dark Knight" and the bright beach, just before the back-to-school sales. It's already been a long campaign -- 19 months -- for everyone to pay attention all the time. And the interregnum between winning the nominations and getting them is a long, hot one.

Also, the down side to "fresh face" is "little-known face." Obama's still a very new character on the national stage. And though Europeans have shown they can fall in love with an American politician during one speech in a platz, Americans historically take much longer to grow comfortable with a potential national father figure.

For a large number of Americans who don't make up their minds anymore according to their parents' "D" or "R," they let the anecdotal impressions of candidates accumulate over time to create a larger, whole portrait for their gut ballot decision. The TV debates could be crucial.

Despite awfully quick denials by party officials and the smiling summit of Obama and Hillary Clinton in Unity, N.H., is the Democratic Party perhaps more severely fractured than it looks? Is race Barack Obama's chief campaign strategist David Axelrodmore important than many let on?

The Iraq war and Obama's much-touted early opposition to it have seemed to shrink in importance in direct proportion to the dramatic drop in U.S. casualties.

A focus so far has been on McCain's age, but are others maybe wary of Obama's relative youth and public inexperience?

Several strategists of both parties sense that Americans want to vote for Obama, but something is holding them back. Or several somethings, as we suggested up top.

Maybe Obama's flips -- his outspoken opposition to denouncing the Rev. Jeremiah Wright until he did; his promise to take public campaign financing, since broken; his eagerness to debate McCain in town halls, now abandoned; his apparent unwillingness to see progress in the Iraq troop surge, which he opposed and predicted would worsen sectarian violence?

Is there a simmering concern over arrogance by the Ivy League lawyer and mere candidate who so blithely patted the French president on the back for a well-done news conference? Asked the other day if he ever doubted himself, Obama replied smartly, "Never!" And grinned broadly. Sounded more like a 20-year-old than someone about to turn 47 next week. 

Americans bought George W. Bush's message of changing Washington in 2000. But he was a governor coming from Austin, Texas. Americans like governors as chief executives; four of the last five presidents were governors first.

Voters have proved more suspicious of legislators. This year they have no more choice; it'll be only the third time in American history a sitting (or standing) senator has been elected to the White House.

Obama's talking change too. But he's a legislator who's been in Washington three years now, two of them as a member of a Democratic-controlled Congress that was elected in 2006 with great promise but currently holds historically low favorability ratings.

What's Obama done for D.C. change since arriving? What's Obama done for reform back home within the historically monolithic and corrupt Chicago Democratic machine, where some up-and-comers are sent off to Congress for seasoning before advancing to the big time of City Council?

The longer the Obama campaign goes without pulling comfortably ahead of the former fighter pilot who was trained to stay on his opponent's tail, the more worrisome it'll become for chief strategist David Axelrod (see photo) and others behind the closed doors in their Windy City headquarters.

A good reason maybe to consider a jump-start: perhaps advance the announcement of his running mate, get another fresh (or maybe not-so-fresh) face out there to draw news coverage while Obama takes a week of well-deserved vacation like so many other Americans, who could care less about the static polls these days.

-- Andrew Malcolm

Photo credit: Associated Press (above); Chicago Tribune (below).

 
Comments () | Archives (193)

The comments to this entry are closed.

Its simple. Go into your office Monday and tell everyone their new boss will be an AA hire with no experience. See how many jump ship before the day is over.

"Isn't it time for you and the media to stop supporting McCain's race biased campaign."

Race baised? The only ones bringing up race are Obama and his fans. Its their excuse for every bad thing.... gee, why does that sound familiar?

But please, keep at it. Working Americans are sick and tired of all that PCBS, from the employee who has to shoulder the workload of an incompetent AA hire, to the manager who's every good faith reprimand is met with an EEO complaint. We don't need that in the White House, esp while we are at war.

Remember: Obama is still out in front. But: here's why I don't think he can close the deal:

1. A lot of us are old enough to remember both Jimmy Carter and Richard Daley.
2. Obama's stance on energy and oil exploration. "Domestic oil drilling and coal are nasty, mmmmkay?"
3. The strategy of 'McCain~Bush' is a loser; McCain ran against Bush in 2000 and almost beat him, until the GOP money machine intervened on behalf of a political scion.
4. Most people understand that Iraq was a misadventure, but the reasons for this understanding vary (I think that the political fallout of a divided country just wasn't worth it). Whatever the reasons, we aren't particularly keen on losing the war, either.
5. The failings of the Bush administration's domestic policy stem from too much government spending, not too little. Whatever else may be said, McCain has been a consistent budget hawk, and Obama, ideologically, can't attack the GOP on the their biggest failings: the deficit and the growth of government.
6. In re. 'the rest of the world': now is not the time for "Hope". Now is the time for the waterboardings to continue until morale improves. Throughout history, justice has beed defined as the will of the strongest; get used to it. "Let them hate us so long as they also fear us."
7. "Inexperience" = racism, "arrogance" = racism, "lack of substance" = racism, etc. etc. etc. Yeah, sure; cry me a river, pal. I used to be entertained by it, but now I'm just bored.

All things, considered, the nasty-ass gets my vote this time.

Americans don't pick a President for change, they pick a President for security.

Obama hit his ceiling in March. He should have continued running as the underdog, where the only place he can go is up, but instead he is running as if he is President-anointed, only way to go is down.

Man, I look at this page, and I see all the typical lefty comments: Bush is a daddy's boy, the GOP uses 'dirty tricks,' Chenny (sic) is a gangster, the GOP is full of racists, etc...

I have a couple of questions:
1) Don't you folks have real white-collar jobs? (were they stolen by the evil GOP and NAFTA?) Why are you ranting on the computer all day?
2) How come progressives can't spell or use complete sentences? Is it the public schools?

Obama is a lot less likely to win than the conventional wisdom currently holds. He was barely able to beat HRC in Democratic primaries at the end. HRC's support was coming from what was perceived as the conservative wing of the Democratic party. Let me ask you, do you think that the average independent and GOP voter are farther to the right or left of these purportedly right-wing Democratic primary voter in, say, Pennsylvania?

The man is too far left. The first black president will be someone able to run as a Tony Blair third-way Democrat - if he isn't a Republican. Obama has promised to raise taxes on at least some Americans. Independent voters will instinctively not want to vote for a guy who makes these promises; many people understand that to the Democrats "the rich" means them.

Further, McCain has now painted Obama as an empty suit, the only real defense for Obama - after he is forced to admit McCain has not engaged in racist attacks - is to point to all his great qualifications. Unfortunately, for the first black man nominated for president by a major party, his qualifications start with a career as a "community organizer". I know that sounds great in some quarters, but it has a different connotation for those at all familiar with big city politics. This will not help Obama with the voters any Democrat must appeal to.

Obama then can shift gears and talk about his career as a teacher at the U of Chicago Law School, but unfortunately the big takeaway from any examination of this "career" is that he was offered a job mainly on account of his race. He has never published a single law review paper and yet was offered a professorship at Chicago: McCain doesn't even have to say anything.

And his legal and political career of course bring up all of the corrupt Chicago politics issues. His yard, after all, was paid for by Tony Rezko who had made a living off the government teat building and managing low cost housing developments. Housing developments that were lobbied for by community organizer Obama and passed into law by state senator Obama.

This is the beginning of the end.

A lot of things have been said about Barack Obama in the past, and I'm not sure I agree with all of them, but one thing is beyond question: the man is a socialist. There is no argument there. Everything in his life up to this point has involved the advancement of socialism. The problem is, the US cannot afford to have a socialist president at this time. Our country is 9 trillion dollars in debt and the last thing we can afford to do is elect a president that is promising trillions in new spending. We have to go in the opposite direction. We have to cut back on spending so we can start paying down the enormous debt. It is also unfair to saddle future generations with debt to pay for social welfare programs for people today. If we continue down the path to full socialism at this time by implementing Obama's socialist healthcare system, we will destroy any chance the nation has to balance the budget and pay down the debt. If we enact the oppressive tax increases that Obama is proposing, we will bring the economy to a screeching halt and people's retirement funds will plummet in value. We just can't afford any more socialism in America at this time.

I "was" going to vote for OBAMA but he has proven to be
a HAPPY FACE WITH NOTHING BEHIND IT!
For a man that has come from nowhere we expect some
answers and this guy has refused to take questions on
anything. He just wants to talk. We have know this type
before and don't need it.
Today he tells us to fill our tires and get tune ups...what
does he think we are...? We have always known how to
take care of our cars. This will not really save any gas
because we do it already.
He has had such a wierd life- and lived in various countries and yet he will not answer us when we ask
What hospital he was born in or What his birth name was.
(Remember he attended schools as '...BARRY..' Soetoro.
He was known for his whole young life as Barry. Now
he changes his name and complains when he says that
people say he has a funny name. HE CHOSE TO HAVE
THAT FUNNY NAME.
As for his good looks - he would look very different if
he had not had an African father and a Caucasian mom.
(Those races meld beautifully so give both some credit.)

Barack Obama: All Headlines. No Story.

Obama is a lot less likely to win than the conventional wisdom currently holds. He was barely able to beat HRC in Democratic primaries at the end. HRC's support was coming from what was perceived as the conservative wing of the Democratic party. Let me ask you, do you think that the average independent and GOP voter are farther to the right or left of these purportedly right-wing Democratic primary voter in, say, Pennsylvania?

The man is too far left. The first black president will be someone able to run as a Tony Blair third-way Democrat - if he isn't a Republican. Obama has promised to raise taxes on at least some Americans. Independent voters will instinctively not want to vote for a guy who makes these promises; many people understand that to the Democrats "the rich" means them.

Further, McCain has now painted Obama as an empty suit, the only real defense for Obama - after he is forced to admit McCain has not engaged in racist attacks - is to point to all his great qualifications. Unfortunately, for the first black man nominated for president by a major party, his qualifications start with a career as a "community organizer". I know that sounds great in some quarters, but it has a different connotation for those at all familiar with big city politics. This will not help Obama with the voters any Democrat must appeal to.

Obama then can shift gears and talk about his career as a teacher at the U of Chicago Law School, but unfortunately the big takeaway from any examination of this "career" is that he was offered a job mainly on account of his race. He has never published a single law review paper and yet was offered a professorship at Chicago: McCain doesn't even have to say anything.

And his legal and political career of course bring up all of the corrupt Chicago politics issues. His yard, after all, was paid for by Tony Rezko who had made a living off the government teat building and managing low cost housing developments. Housing developments that were lobbied for by community organizer Obama and passed into law by state senator Obama.

This is the beginning of the end.

Obama has had worshipful press coverage for almost two years. The media declared him the Messiah and trashed Hillary 24/7.

This guy has absolutely no qualifications for the job. If he had been white people would be laughing at him.

He shamelessly used the race card during the primaries calling the Clintons racist. He is now doing the same thing to McCain.

Any criticism of Obama is portrayed as racism. Voters are told they must votefor Obama to show they are not racists.

I won't get into the this one is better, worse, etc than that one...it is all what we perceive to be Truth. My question is simple: McCain has been a known quantity and served in the senate for many may years. Yet he can not get up to 50% favorable ratings against a totally new, unknown guy. Address that, please.

"Barack Obama barely beat Hillary Clinton"

He did not "beat" Hillary Clinton.

Hillary won more votes than Obama.

Obama rigged the system so that he ended up with more delegates than her and bribed the super delegates to support him on top of threatening riots in the streets by African Americans if he did not win.

There is another angle to an Obama presidency on which I've seen no commentary. If he is elected president, in 4 or 8 years (if, then hopefully the former), he will be an ex-president, and at 51 or 55 years of age he could be an ex-president for a very long time. Democrat ex-presidents of late, of both the 4- and 8-year variety have a real problem fading into the sunset as was modeled by Reagan, Bush I and Ford. Bill, to the consternation of Hill, was unable to play it cool. I don't think he helped Gore or Kerry much as his false pout wore thin with the electorate. And Carter's failed policies somehow served as PhD. degrees qualifying him to comment, nay criticize ad nauseum. On the contrary John McCain would very likely be the kind of ex-president that Bush the First has been. Remember Bush I refused to go to Germany for a victory lap when the wall came down, because he felt others deserved that honor more than he. Apparently Obama had no problem running that lap as pre-president.

So remember, we are not just electing a president, we are also electing an ex-president. Who would make a better ex-president?

American notoriously resent the media picking their candidates for them.

Any doubt who's been cheerleading for whom over the last few months?

EVERYTHING that Hillary and her supporters have said about Obama still holds true... the EMPTY SUIT, all rhetoric, no substance, playing the "race" card, dirty politics, just another politician, will do anything and say anything to get elected... That's OBAMA!!!

Wake up kool-aid drinkers!

This is pretty inflammatory stuff to be writing about a Democrat. Does your editor know you wrote this? Perhaps you should check again to be sure it's OK.

Obama's only real accomplishment is to have been picked as the left leaning media's chosen candidate. He can accuse the opposition of racism when it is in fact he who plays that card. He can say anything he wants with impunity while McCain tries very hard not to touch the subject.

He is the candidate who was indoctrinated into marxist based Black Liberation Theology and sent his children to the same indoctrination but miraculously resigns his membership when it becomes apparent to the public what that church was all about. And now he is forgiven?

His political debut was undertaken by the weather underground but no worry, he barely knows who Ayers and Dorn are.

He can go to Europe and court the international socialists and his background suits them. Perhaps he should have shown more respect for the wounded troops and less for the europeans who may back him with love and money but they can't vote for him.

Maybe the people of the USA are starting to look at this politician for what he is. McCain is no real prize but he has, in his lifetime, exhibited more character and backbone than Obama is capable of ever developing.

To all of you who have written that Obama voted against the Iraq war...he wasn't even a Senator. He spoke against the war and upon being elected to the Seate..he voted for war fuding, he voted for escalation and to stay just as the other 98 Senators who voted with him.
As for Obama being the head of the Harvard Law Review..he is the only person to be head of the review who has NEVER published any papers. He was not known for his brilliance or achievement at Harvard. He was affable. He did not enter Harvard on his own merits..he was accepted because his father graduated from there. The same deal as George Bush.
As for him running to be elected on his own in Illinois..he was backed by the worst people in Chicago politics. They are in jail now. Rezko. His Legislative benefactor who wrote the 20 odd bills that BO's name were added to in his last year as a legislator (note that he did not write a single bill in the other 7 years and voted present more than anyone in the history of that historical body) is Emil Jones a colorful and influencial black man tied to the Daley machine. You are citing silly nonsense about what you believe he accomlpished and to date..he retains credit on two US Senate bills which..again his name was added.
He is a do nothing vapid person with a 'bunch of folks' like David Axelrod that thrive on Manchurian like candidates and the thrill of trying to get them elected. Axelrods first accomplishment is Deval of Massachusetts who to this date is only known for buying a Cadilac on his first day in office as Governer of Massachusetts. He has since announced to the good people of Massachusetts that if Obama were to be elected he would be Attorney General of the US. Very scary since Deval is a Democrat with a Democratic Legislature and has been unable to think of one thing to do for the state..let alone pass a bill.
Good luck all of you Obama people. You are in for an even wider awakening than what you are now experiencing.

Obama has not been Swift Boated....yet. But he is about to be and just as it worked on Kerry, because Kerry did in fact dissemble and obfuscate over his role in the military it will work for Obama and for the same reasons. The issue will be his too close association with extreme leftists and their sponsorship of him. The "Who sent you" issue. Google it.

DON'T FIGHT IT!
It's all over. Obama will be the next President and anyone who votes against him is a racist.
It is time to right all the wrongs that have been done to African Americans for the past 300+ years.
As soon as President Obama takes office ... Mandatory slave reparations should be taken from all rich whites with incomes over $50,000.
In addition, mandatory Affirmative Action MUST be instituted for a minimum of 50% of all positions at colleges/Universities, news media and corporations nationwide.
Naturally all African Americans in the prison system for alleged crimes against whites MUST be released immediately.
This will be a good beginning to atone for white crimes and racism.

It's time for DNC and Dem. superdelegates to wake up! Obama won't win and they have a chance to fix this in Denver. Have an open convention with Hillary's name in nomination and a roll call vote (like it ALWAYS used to be).

Excuse me but I don't get why we should all in love with national FATHER figure. What BS.

Besides, BO is no father figure to me. I'm older than he is and am not convinced he has the talent or the spine to lead this country in these troubled times.

What are these bloggers talking about when they say (only) the GOP has used lies and slander to scathe their Democrat opponents? The Democrats do the same thing!!!! This is just traditional Washington politics. It's been going on ever since George Washington was President. Why don't people wake up and see that, without term limits, both parties have steeped into corruption and sold out their constituencies to the highest bidder (lobbying groups of all kinds)? Today, you need money to win the presidency, or a seat in the House or Senate. Of course virtually anyone running for those offices will become corrupt, as they need more and more cash to compete. To help curb this, there should be a set amount of taxpayer money, distributed equally to each candidate (along with an equal distribution of airtime), in which the candidates get to describe precisely what they plan to do to solve or assuage problems. And, fundamentally, we need term limits. No more career politicians. Perhaps this is the "change" we so desperately need throughout our political system. Stop the political grandstanding, Obama and McCain - it's about as selfless as flatulence in a crowded subway train.

obama is maxed out on people who will vote for him.

If the undecideds haven't caught obama fever by now, they won't. We've all heard the 'circle jerk' name chanting, one more time at the convention will bring home the converts?

Seriously, what is obama going to do or say, that is going to get him over 50%?

The only thing left is hrc as veep, but then Obama 'would rather win a politcal struggle than the election.'

J Hart writes:

"Well, it's not as if McCain has any good or nice qualities."

Right. Except for the courage, honor, and self-sacrifice that carried him through 5 years of torture in a Vietnamese prison camp, McCain doesn't have any good qualities. He should have become a leftist "community organizer" listening to some racist ranting every Sunday to cultivate those good qualities.

Face it bud, McCain has more good qualities than you and the next 10 generations of your progeny put together will ever manage.

"I have kids- in terms of the values I hope they will hold dear, I have decided to opt for a
future. To imagine my country led by McCain, Hannity and Rove is just too much.
Posted by: david in WHFD | July 31, 2008 at 08:45 AM"

For the love of all that is holy, please let the above post be a joke or some sort of attempt at humor. Comrade - do your political rulers dictate your future? Do they command the tiniest details of the economy? Do they "set the moral tone" for the nation? You'd better hope not - Obama is not Jesus. He is a fallable, flawed (like everyone) human being. The emerging fact that he does not see himself as such should set off the warning bells in your head - if you can them over the din of the heavenly choir that apparently sings out in your mind when you dare catch a glance of the messiah - Ob_ma, may his name be praised.

Race has NOTHING to do with people not wanting to vote for Obama. I'm not particularly fond of McCain; however, I would NEVER vote for someone with as little experience as Obama.

I can't imagine Anyone applying for the JOB of a LIFETIME -- the most important job that they will ever have in their career with a pathetic, thin little resume that states "Community Organizer" as a qualification. While don't some of you try putting that down when applying for your next job and see how far you get. Obama is still "wet behind the ears" -- It would be like giving him the keys to an 18-wheeler and all he has ever drive is a little 4-door compact sedan. Get it ???????

why obama hasn't bounced and why his bubble will burst on november 4:

for all of his good looks and his charm, he's equally arrogant. john mc cain for all of his ordinariness and age, is a fundamentlally decent person. i can't say the same for obama.

mc cain's campaign has struggled no doubt but even critics of it and of him understand that he is about more than himself. obama is all about himself.

for all of his bravado and sweeping rhetoric, what has obama done since arriiving in washington in 2005? even his most ardent supporters can't identify one single issue or cause that he has successfully led or championed as a senator. john mc cain has made a career out of getting things done, even if they are unpopular among his party, i.e. mc cain-feingold, mc cain-kennedy. it is mc cain, not obama who has demonstrated both politically and personally courage above expedience and while people want change and a new direction they also want credibility and humility in a president; something obama has little of.

put them all together and you get clarity as we move forward towards election day. people like the idea of barack obama, and the idea of obama in the abstract but on what issues do people agree with him on? on what issues do they know what his position is rather clearly?? and on what issues has he defined himself as being for, to the point that he would risk his much ballyhood political capital for??? even his supporters don't know which should tell you all you need to know about him and about them. what will barack obama do to bring down the price of oil and gas prices? what will barack obama do to stimulate and sustain economic growth again?? what could be worse for working people than obama as president with a democratic congress hell bent on raising taxes, spending and every day costs??? people will pine for the less bad old days of jimmy carter and gas lines. mark my words, if obama is elected president, the democrats will lose congress in 2010 just like clinton did midway through his first term. if obama proves ineffective in working with renewed conservatives, he'll be a one-term president. so much for hope and change.

people seem to like the thought of barack obama being president, as if it's a role straight out of central casting where looks and appearance and voice inflections matter above all else. they don't. it's quite another to have the guts and the courage to lead a very divided nation towards anything approaching consensus. barack obama likes to tell people that he'll get us past red states-blue states but he has the single most liberal voting record in the senate. that'll inspire pro-lifers and tax cutters. where's his mc cain-feingold? on what issue has he incurred the wrath of his own party for a larger purpose that he believed was right?? a man without an agenda seeking to lead anything, a company, a church, a school, a studio is destined to fail. to succeed in such a role one must execute and lead and not simply cast votes when one's name is called. johnn mc cain has never been a governor or a mayor or a ceo either, but when election day dawns, more people will vote for him for the simple reason that they trust him and their country with him more than a rookie with no military or foreign policy experience. maybe then barack obama can try his hand at a job better suited for his skill set--acting
~cmh

You seem to start from the premise that Obama is the 'rightful king' and there is some problem if he is *NOT* getting 100% of the vote.

Why not consider that this is early days, and that like any other contender it is OBAMA'S obligation to tell us voters WHY we should vote for him - not our obligation to give him our vote unless that mysterious 'something is holding us back'.

And - maybe that attitude is the 'something' all along.

Do you know why John Mccain will be the next president? One word ANGER! I have watched how angry the dems STILL are about the impeachment of Clinton and how "W" "stole" the 2000 election. Enough with the anger!!! WE GET IT!!!! Everyone who is an independent thinker is very aware of the mistakes made by the current president. He is done... LETS MOVE ON ALREADY...The arrogance displayed by the left is very off putting and most of us don't like being put off. So when you really-and I mean REALLY look at what the Obama campaign is saying you find they really don't have much of a solution but to have us inflate our tires and put out a pop culture icon who want s change and to offer hope, (I HOPE I get a cool toy for Christmas) While hope a fantastic message but one that has no substance in this case. Pay attention all you "Anyone But Bush" people...it didn't work in 2004, and it won't work this time...He's not running!!! Real people are smarter than you think.Its time to meet in the middle and fix our problems together instead of just whining about them! This is not an audition this is our lives! THINK BEFORE YOU VOTE its a dangerous world out there...

Your article is right on! Obama is a socialist and it won't work in this country. He said he will bring fairness to our tax system... who is he to decide what is fair.. no one can. Live is not fair or unfair... it is what it is.

His arrogance and elitism is showing through and he is the one that threw in the race card. I look at his character and statements not his race in my decision, case in point, Thomas Sowell and Mr Steele and Mr. Herman Cain.. I would vote for each of them if they lived or ran in my state/district.

Oil... attacking the oil companies is so off base.. God bless them for making money, that is job security for the tens of thousands of workers in that industry. We are a free enterprise country...business are not in business to loss money only Gov'ts are. The price of oil is determined by the free market, supply & demand and the commodoties exchange... go to any online market index and look at sweet crude.. it fluctuates every second...are there really stupid Americans believe oil companies control the price of oil..... simple economic's 101.... if I make a solid block of maple wood and sell it but the core materials to build my solid block and lacer & paint it, go up, then I have to raise the price of my solid maple wood block to cover the expenses to make that piece of wood because I am doing this to MAKE MONEY!!!! not to lose it

idiots!!!

The MSM created Obama's Mojo; they can take it away.

"4. Most people understand that Iraq was a misadventure, but the reasons for this understanding vary (I think that the political fallout of a divided country just wasn't worth it)."
(commenter above).

The division of the country was a matter of choice.

Democrats saw an opportunity to split the country. The going got tough, troops lost their lives, and the Democratic Party position on Iraq became a malleable piece of clay to be reshaped as needed to carve off voters. Division was good, if it accumulated new votes.

Democrats don't seem to value the lives of our troops the way they valued citizens' lives -- or so we thought -- in the days after 9/11, when they seemed to draw together with Republicans to fight the scourge of Terror.

The surge saved lives, thousands of lives of our troops and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives, and Democrats still can't admit error or give its #1 proponent, McCain, due credit.

The more people see and hear of Barack Obama, the more obvious it becomes. He is a socialist. We still have a "semi" capitalist country, and he wants to "change" that to full out socialism. Not only does he want to raise taxes to "take care" of those non-workers in this country, he wants a poverty tax so we can take care of the poor of the world -- as if we don't already contribute our taxes to foreign aid in great big gobs and the citizens here are generous in their individual giving as well.

You think the economy is going down the tubes now? Just wait until he raises everyone's taxes while not allowing our economy to grow due to no fuel to fuel it with. Wake up, media. This guy's mojo is going for obvious reasons -- he will be a nightmare as a president.

As Margaret Thatcher said, "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other peoples' money."

Apologize for the Godwin's Law employment, but couldnt David Axlerod employ a hair style and dress a bit more, say, businesslike? Its awfully evocative, at least to me, of a certain reichsfuerer

He wont drill, hes a lawyer with big dollars, we cant get out of oil shortage by drilling, sure why would more oil help, silly people.

There are several reasons why BHO hasn't gotten the bounce many expected. People are realizing that he is an "empty suit". He has absolutely no record to back up what he's promising. As we look at his senate and Illinois legislature voting record, it shows very little except for a majority of "Not Voting, Excused, Absent, or Present" votes. Looking back to his days as the president of the Harvard Law Review shows he never published anything in which it is customary for the president of the review to do so. His having this position at Harvard stinks of Affirmative Action.

"I have kids- in terms of the values I hope they will hold dear, I have decided to opt for a
future. To imagine my country led by McCain, Hannity and Rove is just too much."

Then try to imagine your country "led" by Obama, Reid and Pelosi. You'll have the opportunity to watch your kids choke to death on their own blood after a WMD attack. Because the Democrat policy in this war is reactive, not preventative.

But at least Obama will have an ample supply of morphine stockpiled for you while he begs the UN to draft its typical feeble resolutions expressing "outrage".

We are in a race against WMD proliferation. The threat triangle is 1) rogue nations that 2) seek WMDs 3) to hand off to terrorist orgs for anonymous proxy attacks against the West. I doubt Obama is even aware of the threat.

What the public doesn't know is that in Germany, the reason there were 200,000 people in attendance was NOT to see Obama ... they were there to see American bands perform. WHY DOESN'T THE NEWS REPORT THIS??? The Obama campaign set it up to LOOK like he was drawing the crowd. People in America, wake up and see this fraud for what he is ... a FRAUD!

Wow, I'm being moderated? No wonder the LA Times is going down the river ... you don't want ANYONE to know the truth about Obama!!!!!

Why would any sane minded person vote for this man?? He's a pure socialist, will raise or add a tax on anything he can get his hands on.
He may have a nice speaking voice, but LISTEN to what he is saying. Obama would be the biggest disaster this country ever had. A very scarey man.

Reading these comment boards is like listening to the prison guards talk shop at Auschwitz-Birkenau.

Sick, you're all very very sick human beings and your racism and bigotry reeks of inhumanity.

 
« | 1 2 3 4

Connect

Recommended on Facebook


Advertisement

In Case You Missed It...

About the Columnist
A veteran foreign and national correspondent, Andrew Malcolm has served on the L.A. Times Editorial Board and was a Pulitzer finalist in 2004. He is the author of 10 nonfiction books and father of four. Read more.
President Obama
Republican Politics
Democratic Politics


Categories


Archives
 



Get Alerts on Your Mobile Phone

Sign me up for the following lists: