memo out today is great; generals standing up for Obama yesterday was great- But Obama should make TV ad for Pennsylvania mocking Hil ready on day one/Commander and Chief creds-

Forget about citing 3:00 am ad- your using her framing and look responsive; instead- cut ad based on great photos on Kos last week abou Hil singing in Northern Ireland, photos of her tea chats, etc- there was great diary on this last week- The meme- Hil has no foreign policy experience; she only did silly photo ops- need Video and photos

Cons- Makes OB look negative, just like her
Pros-  1. Looks tough- meme will be OB can FIGHT back too, can be tough
      2. Will take Hil down a peg on this issue- this is legit
      3. He still can stay above the fray in GE- this is explicitly as to  Hillary because SHE brought this subject up
      4. Will not hurt in GE- Hil is hated by Repugs
NOTE- Mocking may be too much, but somehow having photos/footage of Hil as First Lady would help OB where he needs it; PA down scale Dem MEN and some women- If he loses PA and Florida, he may have problem- he needs to FIGHT

Hil claims she should get Dem nod because she has proven she can win in big blue stakes she won (squeeked by) in Dem primaries- ie NY, NJ, MASS, OHIO , etc. This is false- Obama wins general in these states too-

See recent SUSA polls GE
      Hil/ McCain     OB/Mccain      DEM WINS  
Cal    50-40           51-40          BOTH  
NY     53-33           52-38          BOTH
OHIO   50-40           50-40          BOTH (poll unclear)
MASS   55-37           49-42          BOTH
NJ     47-42           43-43          HIL/TIE
TEX    42-49           46-47          Hil lose, OB tie

Obama and supporters may have reacted a bit flat footed after Surprise 3:00 am commercial (although they are ok so far), and they may think too little, too late-

BUT MSM is playing it up as pretty good politics, and it is changing/driving  debate last few news cycles

BARAK should hit Hillary head on-

What is Hillary's military experience?

1. She was NEVER in military

2. She has never been commander and chief- Who was the commander and chief, her or Bill-

3. She has never managed/run a war

4. Her one time to influence policy, and she voted FOR IRAQ

5. As chairman of armed service committee, has she been able to change/counter BUSH's disastrous foreign policy?

5. An she even voted to basically bomb IRAN, too-

 Ask these rhetorically- what is Hillary's experience, lets see her answer.  

Watching the debate this week (Hil was quite good, Barak pretty good too),
especially at the end when Hil was almost gracious and poetic, and then seeing Hillary at her screechathon in Ohio Saturday, where i think she came off awful, I really dont know who Hil really is after all these months. I saw somewhere article this week about Metaphors for the two- which I think summarize alot: here are some I like:

1. Barack is Mozart on the stump, Hillary is Salieri (from Tweety himself- but this is my favorite)

2. Election Movie- Hillary is Reese Witherspoon, Barack is the popular jock guy against her

3. Hillary is Nixon (personality), Barack is RFK/JFK- I cited this last week and was torched- but her activity the last week again is Nixonian personality wise (though again I do NOT believe she is corrupt, Nixon was- Im just talking about personality here)

 

4. Barack is Martin Luther King; Hillary is LBJ (per Hil herself)

Just my thoughts on how they both come off- which is again important in general election. Which would we rather run in the general?

They're all just slogans from the Status quo- We dont need slogans, we need real leadership and CHANGE- and thats what I intend to offer.

If Obama can ever turn the "ready on day 1"/"experience" brags into a punchline, and link Hillary with Bush again with these lines (like he is linking Hil and Bush with the Iraq War, he will wrap up this thing quick.

The super delegate issue is a troubling issue for Dems on this site; I am also quite surprised that Hil has consistent 100 super delegate lead given the roll Obama has been on since Super Tue- So I did a little research and was heartened to learn the following- Source- demcomwatch.com:

1. There are apparently 794 super delegates; 718 who are already known, and 76 who will be assigned

2. Of those, to date only 356 have pledged (their votes can change, too)- only about 45 %.

3 Clinton currently leads about 224-132 (about 90 votes)

4. But she has had this lead from early on, well pre 2/5/08.

5. The counts since Super Tue (2/5) who have committed SINCE 2/5 are as follows:   Since 2/5- Super Tue Obama 24, Hil 21

                  Since 2/10- (Mini Super Sat)- Obama 11- Hil 3

6. NYT article today- says the committed Super Del of Hil are starting to talk about switching-

For OB fans, there is hope on the horizon for this category of delegates, as results come in more supers are coming out for Obama. The supers could in total by June pad the Obama pledged delegate lead.    

I am more of Obama fan, and maybe I see everything somewhat thru that lens- but I watched (tried to be objective) 60 minutes last night, and I cant help but think BO came off better:

1. He was interviewed first, that helps him

2. He seemed friendly, and warm, tried to be chummy with the interviewer, while substantive- and the crown momentum shots were effective- I think he did pretty good.

3. Hillary with Katie- part of her interview was pretty good, friendly, approachable, "girl talk" chumminess, for lack of a better word.

4. But there was on point with Hil that I think sums up why she is less liked and believable- Katie asked her if after all this she ever thinks about what might happen if she loses- a great chance for her to be real, disarming, and even sympathetic- but her answer: "I truthfully NEVER think about it"- seemed robotic, dishonest, and totally lacking in either empathy or warmth- and seemed to put distance between her and interviewer- what regular person wouldn't even have thought there might lose, and be a bit introspective of that-she could have gained points; I think she lost some- just my humble observations  

Obama had great results last night; winning three states in different sections of county and different demographics by I believe over 30 % in each state.

However, the press (Msnbc- Buchanan), probably egged on by Hillary camp, kept repeating a new mantra, that Hil since she was winning deep blue states and more white votes  
was a better general election candidate against McCain. This is just plain incorrect, and should be rebutted:

1. Polls clearly show that OBAMA polls much better head to head against McCain, by over 5 %

2. The deep blue states where Hil leads (liberal) would go for Obama if he wins- are NY, NJ, and Cal going to vote for McCain over Obama? of course not

3. Dem Women (again more liberal) are Hils base, but they too would obviously support Obama rather than McCain

4.  Independents are clearly always polling more for BO then Hil

5. Whites- pols show that McCain beats BOTH HIl and Obama, BUT Obama polls better than HIl with whites in GE match ups with McCain

The Hil better GE candidate is bunk

Hil and BO are essentially tied; and with proportional rep system even if one side pulls away a little, this could go to the convention without a winner- disaster for Dems

Fla and Mich states are important, and that issue must be resolved-
Fla and Michigan wanted to go early to have a say-but they broke the rules and the candidates agreed to not campaign and not abide by the results-So the results were NOT an accurate result of both sides competing  

Hil now wants then counted since she got a plurality but she skirted the rules ( trying to not be too negative here), or at a minimum Obama didn't compete there because he abided by the rules. The results are admittedly not fair- BO didn't compete because of rules.

The fair solution is to have new May or June primary or caucus-

As I've stated before, I will support either Hil or Obama if nominated (dems must win in 2008), though I lean to Obama and think he is best chance Dems have in general.

That said, in analyzing Hillary I see the pol figure she most resembles as Nixon- sans the dirty tricks. Case in point:

1. Heavy emphasis on "experience" over charisma

2. Lack of personal connection; we all know her, but we really don't know her personality and she can't seem to make personal connection with majority

3. Need to look tough and agressive on foreign policy/war.

4. Paranoia- esp of media ( see now the Msnbc Shuster blow up, and prior Matthews

5. Lack of social personal skills in debate- she often seems harsh, though competent, not likeable- opposite of Bill

6. Media dislike of her

7. Using race card in South

8. Everything is political- the fights with repugs, the ferocity of her supporters against opponents supporters- ie attacks on Kennedy- Just like Nixon I cant imagine what she has done with free time since 1992 other than plot political strategy

 

1. Hillary wins women big- Dem women- ADV HILLARY

2. Women make up well over 1/2 of Dem voters, but LESS than 1/2 of Repub- ADV BO in general, but will continue to help HIL in DEM primaries

3. Hillary wins Latinos- but BO has cut into this, esp outside of CAL

4. BO wins States where there are ALOT of blacks, or no blacks, but NOT where there are small but solid amount of blacks- WHY, is this racist result?

5. BO wins very good percentage of whites outside of SOUTH; but lower percentage of whites in South- going forward, this is good

6. BO wins in some red states; HIL none

7. HIL wins BLUE coastal states- but BO would no doubt hold them in GE.

8. HIL wins non latino, non black minorities (Asians)

 
THESE TRENDS must be focused on and improved if BO is to win; but right now, election DEM election seems tied

I got a sinking fealing watching the Florida returns tonight:

McCain- the STRONGEST Repug general election candidate wins close repug race, and probably repug nomination.

Hillary, breaks the rules, but gets her big campaign "win" in Fla and press covers it- She is a rule breaker; and her speech is wholly uninspiring. But she has enough institutional support and name recognition to grind out Dem nomination in the end.

She'll then run divisive uninspiring campaign, her unattractive personality traits will come out in general, and McCain will inch by with Bush 2000 like win-

IN A YEAR WHEN WE COULD HAVE WON IT ALL WITH ANYONE BUT THIS MATCH UP.

McCAIN will win the indis and moderates, and the repug conservatives will hold there nose and vote for him united in Hillary loathing-

I AM SADDENED BY THIS- IS THERE ANY CHANCE

OBAMA is doing OK still despite NH and NEV loss, but he seems to be focusing on independants and college students, and losing women, older votes, and hispanics-This is not enough- he must reach out to DEM base-
woman, lower middle class voters, and older voters APAP

HERES WHAT HE HAS TO DO:

  1. START STRESSING electabity-every day "my friends, Dems HAVE TO WIN presidency, it looks like John McCain will win Republican nomination, and he appeals across party lines, in your hearts you know HILLARY cant beat him; elect me, I alone have a chance to beat him- I can reach beyond the base.
 
  2. START coopting economic populism argument from Edwards- this is still CHANGE from Bush 8 years of corp greed, and have specific programs targeting women, old and hispanics EVERY DAY

  3. FOCUS ON WOMEN AND FAMILY- econ issues, right to choose, women in workplace- trott out OPRA and his own family again- and in commercials

  4. FIX Social Security  

   

I pray Obama wins Dem nomination-I believe he is most electable Dem, and has best chance against McCain, the likely Repug nominee, and is best hope for Dems- I have supported him throughout.

That said, I would say its 55-45 that Hillary will win Dem nomination as of right now (I hope I'm wrong)

That said, I implore all Obama (and Edwards) supporters (like me)not to trash Hillary- If she beats Obama we HAVE to support her- Let them fight it out mano e  mano- but don't trash DEM oppoision- Think Reagans 11th Commandment- though shall not speak ill (of Dem ) nominee. Their all ok.

We might be stuck with her- dont bloody her up- if they fight it out and she wins- she deserves it in 2008- Dem HAS TO WIN in 2008- regardless of who it is.

OBAMA is doing quite well despite NH loss, but reports are saying for example that again in California he is focusing on independants and colege students-

This is not enough- he must reach out to DEM base-

woman
lower middle class voters
old voters
 

HOW-

1. START coopting economic populism argument from Edwards- this is still CHANGE from Bush 8 years of corp greed

2. FOCUS ON WOMEN AND FAMILY- econ issues, right to choose, women in workplace- trott out OPRA and his own family again- and in commercials

3. FIX Social Security  

I am trying to digest the loss by Obama (it hurts); what happened:

1. Bradley effect- (from LA Mayor Tom Bradley past) Theory- black candidates poll good, but come election time polled voters stray from black candidate

2. OBAMA/EDWARDS gang up on Hillary at debate- women flock to Hillary in support; Obama and Edwards SPLIT the anti Hillary vote;

3. The Hillary cry- it humanized her, and again DEM women flocked to her in sypath/empathy (but repug and indep women WONT)

4. The Polls- they had Obama up SO MUCH, that NH voters resented it, and decided to show em up

5. McCain siphoned indep votes from Obama- his rise was Barack loss

The HILLARY Dem sympathy vote is what worries me; she can carry DEM Woman possibly all the way to nomination; but she will NOT carry ANY MEN, and no Repug or indi woman- she will be 45 % gen elec candidate and Dems will lose again.

DAMN!

Is this the poorest political argument you've ever heard -

Right up there with I was for the war before I was against it.

She's debating her self and flip flopping in ONE SENTENCE

First half- she is change-
second 1/2- she is ancient-she's been part of establishment for 35 years

This, along with (1) support for Iraq war and Iran ramp up, and (2)her cackle, (3)her presumptive attitude as inevitable for months, and (4)her harsh mean looking tirade at the debate last night, are NOT going to win election (Dem, or esp. General)  

All us Dems have agonized over Congressional Dems compromise/capitulation on IRAQ spending, FISA, Energy bill, etc- all of the key issues of the day-

However, it appears the strategy is this: We cant win w/out the Whitehouse in these fights, so lets compromise and capitulate- I hate it too, but I think it may be the way to go- why?  

Our goal must be Whitehouse and Congress in 2008. Iraq is best example, we cant get over Repug filibuster/Veto to force the issue- we have tried.

BUT, BUT, we can go to voters in 2008 and say IF YOU DONT ELECT DEM AS PRESIDENT, we will NEVER get out of Iraq, reform Fisa, torture, etc.

The futility in 2007 will be our best argument to win Whitehouse in 2008.