Obama: Gore, Kerry Alienated "Half the Country"

[Amerigo Vespucci]

Source: Newsday

In a speech this afternoon in central Iowa, Barack Obama seems to have widened his criticism of the politics of the past to encompass not only Hillary Clinton but John Kerry and Nobel Laureate Al Gore.

Making an argument for his electability, Obama said, "I don't want to go into the next election starting off with half the country already not wanting to vote for Democrats -- we've done that in 2004, 2000," according to a person at the event (rush transcript).



Read more: http://weblogs.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/politics/blog/2007/12/obama_gore_kerry_alienated_hal.html

[bananas]

1. So Obama is clueless about the actual vote counts?

Has he said anything about Diebold, electronic voting, etc?

[robinlynne]

69. apparently so. and about the American people.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

77. He's officially an asshole. He's alienated 3/4 of voters. nt

nt

[niceypoo]

104. Does Obama really think republicans will rush to our side in droves if he is the nominee?

He truly needs a reality check.

[roguevalley]

130. I think this is the last straw. We WON THE LAST TWO ELECTONS,

BARAK! Good grief. He will be too accomodating if elected and we need to fight TOOTH AND NAIL to get this country back. He won't obviously. I am so disappointed.

[tavalon]

191. That's my thought

and has been my thought as I've watched his Senate career.

[AmBlue]

228. How low can he go?

geesh

[Joe Bacon]

82. He talks more like a Republican with each passing day.

Anyone who had been endorsed by such liars as Tweety Matthews and Andy Sullivan isn't a Democrat.

I'll vote for the REAL Democrat in the race--Kucinich.

[comradebillyboy]

152. ouch! Joe that hurts

Anyone who had been endorsed by such liars as Tweety Matthews and Andy Sullivan isn't a Democrat Posted by Joe Bacon

[aquart]

160. Too bad Kucinich just tossed his second round support to Obama, then.

Your man likes him. So now, in the second round, you have to, right?

[October]

171. I wonder how Kucinich will feel about him after this

I wanted to like Obama...but he keeps opening his mouth.

[tavalon]

192. I actually really like Obama

I just don't want him to be our President this time around. We need a fighter, not an appeaser. We already have two appeasers in the Congress, Nancy and Harry. We don't need this kind of trifecta.

[anitar1]

190. When Liberman has been your "mentor" , it tells a story.n/t

[jeanmarc]

95. Good message

I really am tired of Hillary's dancing. She only does this to appear tough, but her votes are an absolute joke and absolutely Leiberman like.

F her. We need Obama!

[The Wizard]

235. Hillary hasn't seen a fence

she wouldn't straddle, figuratively speaking anyway.

[struggle4progress]

96. Obama, too, is ready to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory

[loudsue]

111. Obama stated in one of his books that election fraud was "conspiracy theory".

THAT is one of the two main reasons I wouldn't vote for him. (The other reason is his push for globalization & the one world agenda....as stated in his books. )

Obama is not ready to be president. He is CLUELESS as to what is really going on in this country.

AND HE IS MENTORED BY JOE LIEBERMAN AND THE DLC AS HE HAS SAID BY HIS OWN STATEMENTS!!

[bananas]

232. Thanks - to be honest, I haven't been following the primaries

almost all of them are right-wing authoritarians,
if Kucinich drops out I'll probably vote for Edwards.
http://www.politicalcompass.org/usprimaries2008

[superconnected]

149. Remember when we thought hillary was clueless and it turned out she

knew what she was doing, she's just a neo-con.

Barak Obama knows what he's doing. He isn't planning on supporting the things we believe in. With his actions consistently being like hillarys in going exactly opposite of what we would want out of a dem leader, it's not going to be surprising when people finally realize that when it got down to the wire, Obama turns into a neo-con. He won't be the first who started with what we percieved as a great record...hillary, pelosi...

[Kurovski]

225. my thoughts, too. It's very disappointing that he's not acknowledging

the reality of our recent past elections.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

2. Same story from ABC News:

...for those who will dismiss the OP as coming from "a rethuglican rag"...it is also prominently featured on Crooks & Liars, where I first read it (http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/01/01/obama-slams-gore-kerry-in-iowa/).

Was Obama Slamming Gore and Kerry?

December 31, 2007 7:58 PM

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2007/12/was-obama-slamm.html

I got yapped at the other day by the Obama campaign after wondering if Sen. Barack Obama was unfavorably comparing Sen. John Edwards to Sen John Kerry, regarding being easily painted as a flip-flopper.

On Monday Obama suggested that Kerry and former Vice President Al Gore were divisive.

In an argument about his electability, Obama compared himself favorably with Sen. Hillary Clinton who is viewed negatively by nearly half the country. Obama is viewed far more favorably by independents and Republicans.

Then he said, per ABC News' Sunlen Miller, "I don't want to go into the next election starting off with half the country already not wanting to vote for Democrats. We've done that in 2004 and 2000. 47 percent of the country on one side, 47 percent of the country on the other . . . We don't need another one of those elections."

What say you?

[undeterred]

4. Is he trying to screw things up for himself?

[speedoo]

100. I say "bullshit". NO ONE HAS CONFIRMED THIS.

Yet everyone is running around as though it has been.

Amazing. Pathetic.

I smell Mark Penn.

[susu369]

176. Thank you

*nt*

[jwirr]

184. So Democrat os divisive if he/she acts like a Democrat? I for one

will not forget this little philosophy of Obama. I have doubted his experience. Now I doubt his party orientation.

[haroldgiowa]

3. This is insulting to all Democrats

Al Gore won the popular vote in 2000 and John Kerry received 59 million votes in 2004. Both still have my up most respect. They did it the old fashion way,they earned it.

[THUNDER HANDS]

5. why is it insulting

the Gore-Bush race was the closest election ever, half the country, essentially, DIDN'T vote for our party. In 2004, again, half the country DIDN'T vote for us.

What Obama is saying is that if you go with Hillary - expect the same thing, a 50/50 split and a hope and pray that everything comes out okay approach.

Why settle for that when you could have someone who COULD win in a landslide.

[ccpup]

8. win in a landslide?

where oh where do you come up with the numbers that support THAT bit of wishful thinking?

[THUNDER HANDS]

11. i need factual numbers to stand by the word COULD?

are you unsure of what the word COULD means?

[ccpup]

23. "could" implies a possibility of something

and, as Obama is still struggling numbers-wise against most Republicans as well as in support among Dems, I just found it strange that you chose the word "landslide". As nice as he seems and as much as he blathers on about Hope and Change, I just don't see him carrying 40 or 45 States should he be the Nominee.

[comradebillyboy]

9. Pigs could fly too

what evidence is there that Obama can win in a land slide, besides in the fevered imagination of the Obamites? Think the pukes will roll over and play dead for Obama? I don't.

[THUNDER HANDS]

12. well, first off

He'll get everyone who voted for Kerry in 2004.

He'll get more independents, because he's doing well with that group right now.

And of all the Dem candidates, Republicans like him the best.

so, yeah, if he pulls off 10% of republicans, 60% of independents and 95% of democrats, he's going to win in a landslide.

[zalinda]

13. And, how many are bigots in this country? n/t

[Scriptor Ignotus]

50. I think we'll find out soon enough

fortunately I suspect they're all in the Republican party.

[davidinalameda]

173. all?

you're kidding right?

[Scriptor Ignotus]

200. ok most

i try never to use "all" when referring to a group of people. slipped up there.

[davidinalameda]

206. okay

you're forgiven


;-)

[tavalon]

198. Gosh, I'm sorry, you're wrong

I'm from the south and spent my teenage years living with my racist grandparents (who were, otherwise wonderful people). It was my grandfather who told me to "just pull the Democratic lever". Of course, that was in the day where it made sense to actually pay attention to who was running and what their platform was, no matter the letters after the name, so I didn't listen to him. Funny, I didn't listen to him about blacks either. Does that make me a lousy grandchild?

[Scriptor Ignotus]

204. yea "all" is too strong a word

but the racists I have encountered in my travels could hardly be considered Democrats. my opinion is anecdotal, I haven't researched racsim in either party. would love to know how that shakes out but I have a feeling the anti-immigration, anti-Muslim, minority voter-caging party may just be a tad more racist than our party. maybe I'm wrong though.

[tavalon]

210. You're not wrong on that one

and in fact, many of the dixiecrats (sp?) became rethugs when the Dems became too inclusive for them.

[ccpup]

24. He'll "get" everyone who voted for Kerry?

yeah, no need to earn those votes, right? They'll just flock to him, I guess. :eyes:

[NOLALady]

122. Of course the republicans like him.

I call that a red flag.

[tavalon]

194. He'll get everyone who voted for Kerry?

You might want to check the southern numbers. I don't think Obama has the racist vote locked up.

[lumberjack_jeff]

220. He'll get everyone who voted for Kerry?

And to assure that this happens, he's attacking Kerry's campaign.

oh-kay.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

20. Crooks & Liars:

I agree with Nicole Belle from Crooks & Liars, where I first read this story:

Obama slams Gore, Kerry in Iowa
By: Nicole Belle on Tuesday, January 1st, 2008 at 6:33 AM - PST

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/01/01/obama-slams-gore-kerry-in-iowa/

I have a LOT of issues with Ronald Reagan, but his commandment “Thou Shalt Not Speak Ill Of Fellow Party Members” is one that the Democrats would do well to take to heart. Not to mention that this kind of circular firing squad is really insulting to those of us (namely, would be voters) who know that framing it this way might make Republicans feel better, but just really is not so reality-based.



Newsday (h/t Taylor Marsh)

In a speech this afternoon in central Iowa, Barack Obama seems to have widened his criticism of the politics of the past to encompass not only Hillary Clinton but John Kerry and Nobel Laureate Al Gore.

Making an argument for his electability, Obama said, “I don’t want to go into the next election starting off with half the country already not wanting to vote for Democrats — we’ve done that in 2004, 2000,” according to a person at the event.

[indimuse]

63. omg...lol...

Obama had a star appearance on C&L??? Big Time now aren't cha big fellow??? lol... No. You don't EAT YOUR OWN!! Might piss so peeps off. :mad:

[AmBlue]

229. What's to like about this guy??

Sorry, but I'm not seeing it.... At all.

[Benhurst]

22. A little perspective:

Look at the Kennedy/Nixon race, in particular.




http://www.infoplease.com/spot/closerace1.html

And pigs could fly; but so far they haven't.

The is absolutely no reason to believe that Obama or any other of our candidates will have an FDR or Eisenhower type landslide, as nice as that would be.

"I don't want to go into the next election starting off with half the country already not wanting to vote for Democrats. We've done that in 2004 and 2000."

If Obama said such a stupid thing, I'll write it off to his being tired (this campaign has been far too long) or desperate, as the case may be. But such a remark is beneath him.

[Fed_Up_Grammy]

120. Many in 1960 thought the race was fixed,just as in 2000.

The beat goes on !

[aquart]

162. "Beneath him"? No, I think he'll go lower.

And he has no reason to be desperate with current polling.

[hedgehog]

25. Agreed - I like what Obama said when he said something to the effect that he

isn't planning another easily stolen squeaker - he wants a land slide.You won't get anywhere if you don't aim high.

[aquart]

164. So he's aiming for the Republican vote?

How...noble.

[hedgehog]

242. Maybe he's aiming to get some of the people who stayed home last time

Fired up, ready to go!

[merwin]

70. It was close, except for the whole vote fraud thing.

I propose that in actuality it wasn't close at all.

[loudsue]

117. Yep. When the votes are gerrymandered, there is no telling what the actual

outcome would have shown had we had an honest election.

Anyone that isn't aware of what is going on with vote scamming in this country isn't ready to be president.

[October]

170. Landslide for whom?

What are you talking about?

[DissedByBush]

199. The reason for the close numbers

Unless one side is a complete and obvious loser to the populace, the populace doesn't really matter.

First, each side has an equivalent small number of people who really care and really follow the important issues. But these are statistically insignificant and pretty much cancel each other out anyway.

What matters is that both sides have approximately the same amount of money for ads and people on the streets, and their political strategists are approximately talented. Thus each will lead half the sheep their way, resulting on 50/50 splits.

[tomreedtoon]

6. They earned it...then threw it away.

I admit Obama is being kind of cocky, openly dissing our 2000 and 2004 losers, but maybe he has a point. And yes, they lost. They lost because they had the votes and refused to fight for them. Their winning the White House and preserving our freedoms wasn't important to them.

And as far as that goes, I think Edwards would be more willing to kick Republican ass in the expected 2008 vote fraud than Obama. I think he'd give up too.

[rosesaylavee]

234. What is the next step that Gore should have taken

when the Supreme Court gave the election to Bush in 2000? How should he have started the revolution?

[Freddie Stubbs]

236. Both elections were close

Obama is arguing that by reaching out to Republicans he can win by a large margin.

[AlGore-08.com]

238. And you think Gore and Kerry did not reach out to Republicans?

Every Presidential candidate reaches out to Independents and the other party. Even SMIRK reached out to the Dems - - in 2000 AND 2004.

What's clueless about this statement of Obama's is that the reason "half the country" hated Dems in 2004 and 2000 was not because we picked a divisive candidate or had a divisive platform. It's because the Republicans have sunk billions of dollars into shaping public opinion, and we haven't spent dime one. We keep running around, looking for the magic candidate who won't be smeared when the entire MSM turns on him/her, and being stunned when the blindingly obvious happens again.

[Bitwit1234]

7. And the nutcases WANT THIS PERSON

as the Democratic candidate...what a bunch of idiots. He's doing more harm to the party than the republicans.

[FreakinDJ]

10. Good Point

He is one of those "Let him sink his own ship" types

[Honeycombe8]

34. He's not being critical of Gore or Kerry. This is an inflammatory post.

He is being critical of the strategies of 2000 and 2004, which netted a loss for the Dems.

Neither Gore nor Kerry decided the strategies of those general elections. The heads of the party did, in conjunction with the campaign strategists.

Maybe we should try a strategy of being somewhat more inclusive this time. Maybe that will result in a win, unlike in 2000 and 2004.

[defendandprotect]

78. Why don't we just become Repugs? Actually, isn't that what the DLC is doing to Dem Party?

[debbierlus]

99. Yes, let's include those who believe in creationism & won't admit global warming is real

This is the same b.s. that allows the mainstream media to use their 'fair & balanced' farce as journalism.

Have to give equal time to each 'side'....even if all evidence, logic, reality, reason, & truth are represented on one side &
only lies and pandering are on the other.

Have to be fair.....

With this, Obama has shown he has no clue as to how this country needs to be led. Republicans divide the nation through lies, and Obama blames the dems for being divisive.

Please do not vote for this man. He is NOT Potus material.

[NOLALady]

129. You mean like the Republicans

inclusive strategy?

[Laurab]

108. Considering you want HRC, I don't think I'd be so quick

to call those of us who like Obama "nutcases" or "idiots". Hillary is quite cozy with repukes, likes big business and lobbyists, seems to like war a lot more than Obama and the other dem candidates, and those things seem a bit more important than a "quote" from Obama that is so obviously being taken out of context.

In fact, when using those words to describe someone, perhaps a good look in the mirror would be useful.

[Scriptor Ignotus]

201. his statement hurt our party how exactly? - nt

[PSPS]

14. That's our Senator Milquetoast talking!

First, he makes fun of "baby boomers" and their quaint notions of democracy. Next, he preaches about the need to "extend a hand" to the treasonous thugs who have been destroying the country in a "spirit of bipartisanship." Now, he's jumping on the republican "sore looserman" bandwagon.

Hey! It sounds like he's a guy the RW media machine can really get behind! (And control like a puppet.)

[aquart]

163. Yeah, he's just full of "CHANGE."

[AmBlue]

230. What HE said... #@#$% *stomps off grumbling* eom

[Guaranteed]

15. Seems like he's running to the center already.

Which is kind of too bad because he hasn't built his credentials that well with the base yet.

[cornermouse]

29. I think he's decided he doesn't need to earn the base

I don't like being taken for granted. I get too much of that as it is.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

41. A recent article on Obama's "populist" message:

Obama moves onto Edwards' populist turf

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-dems29dec29,1,7339205.story?track=rss

By Peter Wallsten, Maria L. LaGanga and Seema Mehta, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
December 29, 2007

CLINTON, IOWA -- He knocks CEOs who "dump" employee pensions while "pocketing bonuses." He laments Maytag workers who "labored all their lives only to see their jobs shipped overseas." He recalls humble beginnings and says his experience is "rooted in the lives of the people."

That kind of hard-driving populism has formed the core of John Edwards' campaign for president. But those words have come this week from Barack Obama -- one of Edwards' chief rivals for the Democratic nomination -- who has recalibrated his campaign to appeal to working-class voters before Thursday's caucuses.

With Iowa's first-in-the-nation nominating event looming, Obama has shifted away from his almost singular emphasis on transcending Washington's partisan divisions -- a message that appeals to upper-income and independent voters who form a minority of caucus-goers. Instead, he is aiming for the working-class voters who are the party's core, and who have been moving to Edwards in growing numbers over the last few weeks.

The two candidates' campaign speeches and advertising sound nearly identical now -- stressing the needs and struggles of working people and the desire for change.

[cornermouse]

66. But in Obama's case it comes across as too little, too late, and insincere.

Like I said elsewhere. Obama has probably been the biggest disappointment I've had over the past 4 years in the political arena. I try to learn from my mistakes the first time so I don't have to repeat them.

[LWolf]

73. I'm an independently inclined democrat,

and a working class person, and I won't be voting for Obama. Not now, not next fall.

[acmavm]

75. I know exactly how you feel. I'm unsure about that next fall thing though.

We have to get a democrat (or the closest we can get) in the White House.

I don't like Hillary, think even less of Barrie. But I'm not ready for pResident Crazy Hucklebee.

[LWolf]

90. Well, we've got 6 better candidates;

for now, I'll hope one of THEM gets the nod.

I'll consider GE options after the convention.

My mom and I were talking this morning, and she said the typical, "I don't like them but we have to get rid of Bush!" I reminded her, gently, that he won't be back, regardless. I'm sure she feels the same about any republican replacement, though.

[jwirr]

193. We need to remember that what happens in Iowa is not the final

decision. There are Democrats in every state waiting to have their say. Iowa is only a beginning. May the best candidate win!

[LWolf]

212. I'm certainly hoping to salvage something positive.

My primary is not until May 20th, so I may not have the same range of choices that early primary voters do.

[grytpype]

16. Obama's pitch is that he could be a National Unity candidate which Hil could never be.

Hil is too divisive to unify the country. We don't need a repeat of the Clinton years.

That's his argument and I tend to agree with him, PROVIDED Obama could really unify the country, and that is questionable.

The Repugs are so insane they will never get behind a reasonable, centrist president. Bill Clinton tried to be that president and the Repugs pissed all over him.

What we need is a fighter, and that man is John Edwards. He gets it and he is itching to cut the Repugs a new blowhole.

[krabigirl]

59. Agreed, but we don't need another uniter. We have one in White House.

[K8-EEE]

91. UNITY? It's a little late for that after the BushCO years....

The UNITY thing just isn't working for me....I want the neocons crushed and gone.

[lunatica]

17. His entire premise is based on a lie

Anyone who refuses to see that the election in 2000 was stolen through a series of actions from the media working overtime to shove Bush down the American throats, to disenfranchising voters, to refusing to count the votes, to the illegal SELECTION by the Supreme Court of Bush as President is basing their arguments on lies. The so-called division is a manufactured myth. Florida wasn't the only state with voting crimes.

Just remember what the exit polls said. Funny how they've always been the most accurate way to gauge the results, but suddenly they were flawed and they didn't work in 2000 for some reason.

:sarcasm:

I'm sick of people basing their arguments on inaccuracies and blatant lies. Gore and Kerry didn't divide anything. The corporate owned media and Karl Rove's minions and the Supreme Court and power grabbing people like Jerry Falwell did. I'm sick of people who refuse to see that the Emperor is frigging NAKED!

[Benhurst]

42. Thanks.

:hi:

[humbled_opinion]

125. and if we win by a slim margin the Repukes are going to say the same thing

Obama's point is this country needs a real shake up it needs a landslide no questions asked election... I think he can get that done and I know that Hillary cannot... She is as divisive as Bush from the perspective of the Right.... i.e., Her nomination will inspire a host of Jesus freaks to get out the vote... It will be a sunami that we cannot overcome.... Obama does not inspire that kind of hatred and if given a chance on the national stage his message is resounding...

[NOLALady]

134. I believe his nomination would draw out the racist in droves,

as well as the "I'm not racist but" crowd. The Republicans would see to that, that's why they like him. The code words would begin coming out of the wood work. The Jesus freaks can't compare to them.

[humbled_opinion]

138. So your contention is Obama is unelectable because

OF THE COLOR OF HIS SKIN?

What a world, What a world...:mad:

[humbled_opinion]

140. Well then Hillary can't win either because...

All the sexists will be driven in droves not to vote for her... so maybe that why Zogby polls 50 percent of Americans will never vote for her for any reason ever... so she can't win ... PERIOD..

Don't waste your vote sweet heart.:banghead:

[aquart]

167. Worthless argument.

Unless you're saying the Democrats are racists. Are you? Because we don't need a single Republican vote to win. All we need is 13 million of 42 million in dependents. That's it.

[Le Taz Hot]

231. And where exactly, is this landslide going to come from?

He's alienated the Boomers, he's alienated the GBLT community, the Progressives can't stand him . . . so, explain to me where this "landslide" is going to come from, the 18-35 year olds? I've got new for you, THEY DON'T VOTE! And you talk about inspiring Jesus freaks? From the man who went to a church and had an "ex-gay" (whatever the hell that is) speak? He's pandering to the nutso fundie Christians just as bad as Hillary.

You're delusional my friend.

[ChiciB1]

207. Ding, Ding, Ding.... You Win the Prize.... I Haven't Put Obama Down

until today. He's just turned me off BIG TIME!! And yes, I do support Edwards, but I haven't said anything bad about him before. He's giving me the jitters now because he sounds like he's kissing up to the Repukes a bit too much.

I don't know what he's thinking, but I'm feeling less respect for him now. I didn't support him as number one, but I didn't feel he was going to start talking like he has lately!

Too bad! I probably won't say much here, but I will be spreading the word to my friends and neighbors. Sorry, but it's how I feel. Even Clinton seem more liberal than he is! I don't trust Repukes and I don't see how you can just invite them into the inner circle and think it's going to all be "hunky-dorey!"

[indimuse]

18. Well you WON'T Obamawnnabe!

YOU won't be nominated. YOU are UNELECTABLE! YOU and YOUR wife are Nothing more than OPPORTUNIST!!! Yeah...Exploiting the EMOTIONAL vote...A brand you are...A novelty.. What happened to CHANGE???? YOU are a bumper sticker...that WON'T stick anymore. The TRUTH about YOU and your OLD campaigning tactics...(rovian sneak!!!) are finally coming to light! I have been trying for a while now to show the HYPOCRACY of YOU and YOURS for weeks...
I used to love you... You made me cry while giving your speech at Dem Convention 2004...I thought WOW..he is amazing... Did not take you long to CHANGE alright.

[harmonicon]

62. you know, I don't think he's reading this - maybe go for 3rd person next time.

[indimuse]

67. lol...

probably...lol...i forgot. i get sooo excited and still having a happy new year moment. to you too. Happy New Year. :toast:

[harmonicon]

68. happy new year :)

[EFerrari]

19. Is it possible he's referring to the polarization of American politics

and not to Kerry and Gore? I don't pay enough attention to know.

[Lorien]

26. It's a weird connection if so. Gore and Kerry didn't go on the attack

or even fully answer the attacks of the repugs. One of the biggest complaints of those I worked with on their campaigns was that they weren't being combative enough or hitting back when they should.The polarization is entirely Bush's fault.

[EFerrari]

32. Before Bush, Rush had been at it for years, though, 'member?

Clinton was hounded for his whole two terms.

It just seems like a weird move on Obama's part to reach across party lines by insulting his own party. That's why I was trying to see if he was only referring to the elections and not the candidates. He seems too measured to do something that silly.

[Lorien]

37. Well yes, obviously-Rush, Knute, O'Rielly, Coutier and all the rest have

helped to polarize the country. They really got the ball rolling on that in 1994, but Bush RADICALLY polarized us. Before all the (faux) anger was on the Right. Now the Left is every bit as pissed off-and then some.

[EFerrari]

40. That's true. I hadn't thought of that. n/t

[Honeycombe8]

30. Yes. It is not the candidate that decides strategy. It's the heads of the parties and the

campaign strategists. The candidate can nix the strategy, but they rarely do, since they defer to the experts and the people who run the parties without whose support they would have no campaign at all.

Obama doesn't mention Gore or Kerry for a reason: He is not being critical of specific candidates, only the strategy of playing to half the country and not being inclusive.

We've seen what the strategies of 2000 and 2004 brought the country. Maybe we should listen to someone with a different strategy, and maybe there will be a different result....like winning!

[EFerrari]

35. We won 2000 and 2004. The mistake was letting them steal both.

And, I have a real problem when inclusivity results in abandoning party principles. The DLC has been pushing that for years and losing really well with that strategy.

[Honeycombe8]

45. If there had been a CLEAR win in those years, the "stealing" wouldn't have worked.

Because those elections were so close, it was easy to finagle some votes and give the losing side a supposed win.

Obama supports the Dem. Party Platform. The DLC hasn't abandoned it, either. The devil is in the details of how those platform principles are transferred to the practice of running the country. For example, it is not part if the party platform to be against a border fence with Mexico or in favor of leniency toward illegal immigrants. Still, most candidates have that position.

Most people, I think, aren't that familiar with the party platform of both parties.

Gore was hardly middle of the road. While Kerry was more so, the other side was able to convince the public that he was one of those "liberal northeastern senators" that the conservative public hates so much. And he sort of is, according to his voting record.

[EFerrari]

55. I have no reason to believe it was "close enough to steal".

With electronic voting, "close" means very little in the federal races. The numbers are cooked from the outset so we have no real point of reference. Also, the size of the country make it much easier to steal federal elections than, say, local ones. But they manage it anyway. If the Democrats had paid attention to election reform, they'd likely have a functional majority right now instead of a nominal one.

What is clear is that we were all asleep at the wheel on election fraud when Gore was running. And, too many people still were even in 2004. The disgust at Bush was PALPABLE on Election Day 2004. They would have elected a '57 Chevy if it meant getting rid of Bush, let alone someone as inoffensive as John Kerry.

[Honeycombe8]

180. We had empiric evidence of the closeness: all polls, for months, had said so. nt

[karynnj]

241. Kerry was far more liberal than Gore

in the years 1984 - 1992 when they were in the Senate together. Kerry even had the better record on the environment. Gore was awesome on Global warming, but less awesome on other environmental issues.

Gore favored supporting the Contras, while Kerry risked his career doggedly fighting to investigate them. Gore was the first DLC sponsored candidate in 1988. Gore was as middle of the Road as you can get.

Also, Kerry's proposals were more aggressive oin health care and the environment then most of the DLC was. Kerry actually is "sort of liberal", but as he said in 2004, he doesn't like labels.

[Prophet 451]

47. Weird way to put it if so n/t

[defendandprotect]

80. Because, geez, who would want opposition to the Corporate-party?

Would the DlC and DLC'ers want opposition to the Corporate-party or are they trying to further
corporate control in the Democratic Party?

[Califooyah Operative]

131. yea but then it wouldn't be as easy an attack on Obama.

It's much easier if you disregard the facts.

[eridani]

226. He's blaming the polarization on the Democrats

Which is bullshit.

[nevergiveup]

21. 2000 should have been

a monumental landslide for Gore. 2004 should have been a monumental landslide for Kerry. The result of these terribly run campaigns is George W. Bush, who will likely go down as the most pathetic and disastrous president in American history. Obama wants to stop the political national hemorrhaging. He is speaking to this as he damn well should be and if we can't face up to the reality that we let the Republicans eat us alive then we have little hope in 2008. To suggest this statement by Obama is a personal attack on Gore and Kerry is nonsense and you know it.

[Rockerdem]

36. I think that it's more of a youth-cum-outsider type of year

There have been 3 elections in my lifetime where Americans were tired of the old pols and elected outsiders or backbenchers: JFK, Jimmy Carter, and Bill Clinton.

They were looked at as agents of change and a fresh start. 2008 America seems to have the same feel to it. It might not be Obama, and it could be Edwards. But both are charismatic without being offputting. I think that what Obama meant, and I tend to agree. Enough with the dinosaurs and the DLC mentality; there won't be any kind of needed wholesale change with that bunch.

[Benhurst]

38. Bullshit. Both Kery and Gore won. The elections were stolen.

And thanks to our "leaders" in Congress failing to address the issue of our corrupt elections, the is a high probability the 2008 election will be stolen as well.

How long do you think it will take the talking heads to come up with "America wasn't ready for an African American president" to explain away our third stolen presidential election in a row? This is not to suggest they won't pull an "American wasn't ready for a woman" or a combative populist trial lawyer if the nomination goes to one of the other so-called top three.

No mater who we choose for our nominee, we're going to have a tough fight on our hands. And Obama, or whomever else we choose, had better keep that in mind. If it is Obama, he won't be facing Jack Ryan (who was outed for abusing his ex-wife, the beautiful and famous Jeri Ryan of Star Trek) or his replacement Alan Keys (dear God, Alan Keys!) this time around as he was when he ran for the Senate in 2004.

[madamesilverspurs]

106. After 2000 , 2004, and

the profound disappointment that has sucked the sadly temporary joy out of 2006 --- who's to say that even a landslide victory by a Democrat wouldn't be summarily set aside by Bush's BOGUS SCOTUS?

[AlGore-08.com]

240. Gore started his campaign 1 mo. after the impeachment ended and was 20 points down

Gore ran against 8 years of smears by the MSM, calling the Clinton/Gore admin "the most corrupt in history". He was outspent by Smirk by over 2 to 1. He had almost no support from the party (who disapproved of his populist agenda).

If he had run a terrible campaign, he would have stayed 20 points behind and Smirk would have won in a landslide.

If he had run a really terrible campaign, he would have lost ground and ended up more than 20 points behind - - and Smirk would have won in an historic landslide.

[Honeycombe8]

27. I don't see how that's a criticism of Gore or Kerry specifically. If the Dems wanna win...

they need to be INCLUSIVE. That's what he means. We've seen how playing to just half of the country works out for elections. Hey, the Dems might actually WIN if they at least include some of the Independents!

That's all he means.

BTW...the strategy for the general election in 2000 and 2004, or in any year, is not up to the candidate, really. The strategy is determined by the heads of the respective parties, in conjunction with the candidate's strategists. The candidate could nix the strategy, of course. But candidates are not strategists. They generally defer to the experts and the heads of the parties.

So that statement by Obama is a good thing, as I see it, and is not being critical of Gore or Kerry specifically. This is the path to winning. If exclusivity and a hard line is what some people want, they need to follow Kucinich or Duncan Hunter or any one of the others polling at 1%.

[Cheney Killed Bambi]

28. That's a BS spin

on what Obama said.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

43. So what did he say?

His words seem pretty clear to me.

[dorkulon]

223. Here's what he DIDN'T say:

Gore, Kerry Alienated Half the Country

[vi5]

31. Look, every single dem candidate will be trashed...

EVERY SINGLE FUCKING ONE OF THEM.

If our nominee is Hillary she'll be trashed by the media and republicans, and not only won't any republicans vote for her, bu the mushy, milquetoast, easily swayed so called independents will not vote for her either.

If our nominee is Edwards he'll be trashed by the media and republicans, and not only won't any republicans vote for him, but the mushy, milquetoast, easily swayed so called independents will not vote for him either.

And YES, if Obama is our candidate he'll be trashed by the media and republicans and not only won't any republicans vote for him, bu the mushy, mikquetoast, easily swayed so called independents will not vote for him either.

It's a losing game to court the middle. What Obama is missing is that both Gore and Kerry lost (yes, we can debate the meaning of lost but for purposes of this conversation neither man are president) because they played to that middle and by being nice to republicans and what happened to them both happened because of that not because they were too divisive.

I'm going to vote for whoever our nominee is, but with the exception of Dodd who I don't think has a chance, they've pretty much all been disgusting me with their rhetoric against each other. Yes it's politics and yes it's bloody but more than anything I hate so called democrats parroting right wing talking points.

[Lorien]

33. So is the translation "I want republicans to vote for me"?

as a wise person once said " given the choice between a Republican and a Democrat who acts like one, the people will choose the Republican every time".As this country IS fairly evenly split, Mr. Obama WILL have to choose a side. He's not going to unite us into one big happy party, try as he might.

I had been considering him as my second choice. Sad to say he's off my list entirely now.

[Scriptor Ignotus]

57. i'd wait to hear more about this

look at the link. it's one anonymous, uncorroborated report of what he said, and out of context. Pretty weak.

I wouldn't be shocked if he really said this, and I do agree with him, but that article has some real lazy reporting in it.

[aquart]

169. The country is NOT evenly split. That's a LIE.

72 million Democrats.

55 million Republicans.

That ain't fifty-fifty. We need a lousy 13 million of 42 million independents and you think that's going to be hard to get with the slate the Republicans have? STOP LYING.

[killbotfactory]

39. He's criticizing campaign strategy

And he's goddamn right. Stop reacting to every nuance in his speech as if he's slandering God, it's fucking bullshit.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

44. Maybe he's not "goddamn right." Time will tell. n/t

[killbotfactory]

53. Yeah, let's target half the country like last time

Let's repeat the DLC strategy until only republicans are left in office, that'll teach 'em!

[Divine Discontent]

139. ok then

"And he's goddamn right. Stop reacting to every nuance in his speech as if he's slandering God, it's fucking bullshit."


the phrasing is too rich to ignore...


And in regards to this story, and Iowa, Barack seems to be going awful negative the past week, which shows his advisors think attacking Hill and John is the way to go. I don't think it is. I cannot see how Iowans want to see Barack yelling about the other 2 main candidates since he really is an unknown. The polls may defy that rationale, but still, it's heavily risky and could play into Hillary & John's favor in the final days of commercials and advertising.

[killbotfactory]

224. Yeah, highly negative

You know, comparing plans, records, and strategy in a light that's more favorable to himself.

My god, the horror. What a monster.

[johnaries]

46. The RW smear machine is divisive, not Gore, Kerry, or ANY Dem.

Is it because of Gore or Kerry that "Liberal" became a "bad word" to many Americans? Did Gore or Kerry come up with the terms "Big Government" or "Entitlement Programs" or "Tax and Spend Democrats"?

Until ALL Dems step up and show the RW Smear Machine as the purveyor of lies that they are, all Dem candidates will be considered "divisive".

We were finally successful with the Swift Boat Veterans. Now, the term "swift-boating" has come to mean preading outragious lies to smear a person's reputation. But that didn't happen until after 2004.

WE, all of us, have to expose the RW Smear Machine and render it impotent.

[lisainmilo]

48. What??????

Obama speaks out of his arse! This is an insult to Gore and Kerry......:grr:

[barbtries]

49. that's bullshit

bush was never elected to the presidency

[sojourner]

51. obama clueless, period.

[Scriptor Ignotus]

52. Obama: "Let's not drive over this cliff

we've driven over this cliff before and it was really painful. Remember?"

Democratic Party: "No, let's drive over that cliff again. This time we'll win."

[killbotfactory]

54. The last two guys who drove over the cliff were HEROES! How dare he undermine them!

Obama has some people running scared.

[Scriptor Ignotus]

56. I know you're just the messenger

but this article is crap. The full text is found at that link and it's a showpiece of lazy journalism. Check out this comment - she sums it up well.

ed by Rebecca | January 1, 2008 12:18

Lazy, lazy, lazy reporting. First, your "source" is an unnamed "person at the event". Second, you provide no context in which Obama's remarks were made. And third, you provide no evidence that Obama said that Kerry and Gore "alientated half the country".

This post is as irresponsible as anything coming out of Katie Couric's mouth, with the whole "some say" style of *cough* "journalism".

Can't you do better than this? Say, provide a transcript or a video?

Perhaps your point was just to fabricate something you could use as an attack against Obama.

Okay. But not everyone will fall for it, you know.



He may very well have said these things, and it does seem like something he would say, but holy crap, what a poorly sourced article. One anonymous source, uncorroborated and out of context.

[Rockerdem]

60. Good sleuthing

God, that article blows. A "person" at an Obama rally seeks out a New York-based reporter (who wasn't even there) and spins a generic, vanilla comment. And the helpful reporter saddles it with a headline that goes way beyond the comment.

A plant. And we know where that negative shit comes from.

[Scriptor Ignotus]

87. newsday is a Long Island publication

hmm, wonder if they're supporting Hillary?

[susu369]

175. Thank you for a voice of reason

*nt*

[krabigirl]

58. Good! I'm glad they alienated them. Now, it is likely to only be 25% alienated.

Since so many are disgusted with the Republican party. I don't see how people support this guy.

[antiimperialist]

61. This coming from a blog called "spin cycle"

I'm tired of bloggers "translating" what our candidates say.

[gaspee]

64. Naive

I'm disliking him more and more each day.

It's the right wing noise machine that caused that, not the Democratic candidates. If he truly believes this, then he'd drop out of the race because the half of the country that hates Democrats and falls for the right wing propaganda are racist fucks - which means he's going to have half the country against him before this starts. Hell, most of the Republican party are racist fucks. I know, they're in my family.

[Forrest Greene]

65. Black Cops

...always have to act whiter than white cops.

[NOLALady]

143. So true. n/t

[IndyOp]

71. I'll be wanting to hear the audio before I believe this 100%...

What kind of weak attribution is "according to a person at the event"...

:(

[Scriptor Ignotus]

182. you're one of the few with any common sense

on this forum...

[ckramer]

72. Hmm...dangerous comments from Obama

Watch out...be careful of your mouth.

[Infinite Hope]

74. I'm a Gore fan and not an Obama fan. But casting bias aside, I can say...

...his point has merit. He's referring to likability factors and our candidates have been strongly disliked before even being nominated.

[The River]

76. The Country Was Already Divided

Due in good measure to Ray-gun trashing the Fairness Doctrine.
That signaled open season for the right wing smear machine to
begin the demagoguery of "Liberals" and creating the divide we have today.

[defendandprotect]

83. Since the mid-1960's, we don't KNOW what the country is with computer steals ---

PLEASE understand, Votescam-The Stealing of America with computer fraud elections goes back
to the mid-1960's . . .

Two journalists, Jim & Ken Collier wrote about this after a 26 year investigation ---
their book was suppressed. You can scan the book or read it at their website.

This is history we must know and understand if we want to analyze what's been happening in the
last decades ---

[BlueJac]

79. Neither Obama nor Hillary........

Will win in a landslide.

[tinrobot]

81. Gore and Kerry both won, so what's his point?

It's my understanding that Florida was stolen from Gore and Ohio stolen form Kerry.

If Obama doesn't realize elections can and have been stolen, then he's in a heap of trouble come the general election.

[Canuckistanian]

84. I think Gore and Kerry did very well

DESPITE the constant media smearings, vote rigging, character assassinations, financial disadvantages and third party interferences.

Gore and Kerry "were considered divisive" by the public mainly because the public were constantly TOLD they were divisive.

[madrchsod]

85. well that settles that-obama is a traitor to the democratic party

and he must be purged from the democratic party. the people of the state of illinois must start a recall petition to remove him from office. he has sullied the good name of the democrats of illinois and the united states of america.

the democratic party leadership should make sure that no independent or pissed off republican ever votes for any democrat in any local,state,or federal democratic candidate. we must maintain party purity

[wisteria]

86. The Republicans alienated half the country and are still doing it.

Listen to Limbaugh and Hannity and some of the lessor RW talk radio hosts.

Kerry and Gore would have made excellent Presidents. Both are intelligent leaders. IMO, both won their races.

I doubt that Obama would really suggest this, it would be very disappointing if he did. He has recently worked with Sen. Kerry on bills.

[madrchsod]

89. he`s talking about the independents and pissed off republicans

where i`m at he received more votes than kerry and was about even with keyes..this part of the state is solid conservative republican.

[wisteria]

102. Are you referring to votes he received in the Ill state legislature?

Your post is confusing. Half the country is not independents or pissed off Republicans. IMO, he is referring to the divisions in 2000 and 2004 which the Republicans exploited. Both Gore and Kerry did not alienate independents or Republicans.

And, BTW, Keyes was and is a major kook. He scars even Repubs. He jumped into the race in Ill. after the original Repub candidate was accused of scandalous behavior. Obama was a shoe-in in that race. It was an easy win for him.

Look, I don't hate Obama. I have no horse in this race. I would even support him if he gains the nomination- so back off. I am just bring up a point that Democrats shouldn't blame other Democrats for the divisions in this country.

[karynnj]

243. The problem is that is not an apples to apples comparison

Although we know what a disaster Bush was, that was NOT the view in 2004 for many people. Keynes was seen as a joke by almost everyone. Because there were people who voted for Obama over Keynes doesn't mean they would have voted for Obama over Bush. There is no relationship to esitmate that.

[LTR]

88. i'm beginning to dislike Obama more and more each day

Talk about 'the audacity of hope.' Sheesh!

[colorado_ufo]

92. Here's the deal:

The guy does NOT know what he is doing. (Apologies to all Obama supporters, who I know are sincere.) He lacks the experience. Obama has gotten where he is by massive charisma, good looks, good ethics, intelligence and education. Not bad, for sure! But in running for president, he has gotten ahead of himself, career-wise. Compliments to him, though, as it takes a heck of a person to go as far as he has in this most difficult endeavor. But he is not the man for the job - at this time.

[western mass]

93. Gore and Kerry drove away progressives & the left,

a big part of the reason that they managed to turn victory into defeat.

Why do I suspect Obama doesn't have this consituency in mind when he talks about "inclusion"?

At least he's honest about his plans to pander to the right.

[tavalon]

208. Truth. Hmm, refreshing

I almost want to reward that, but see my sig line. Not right now. The bully needs to be slapped down hard. It's the only thing bullies understand.

[JDPriestly]

94. This is where Obama's inexperience becomes evident.

He is getting tired. When you are tired, instincts and habits take over. Obama has not developed the instincts and habits he needs to stay on topic. He has gotten completely off his themes. What is his campaign about? He should be focusing on that.

Pundits are characterizing statements by Edwards as "attacks" on Obama. They are wrong. Edwards' statements about the need to fight and the fact that you cannot expect the powerful to give up power without a fight are central to his message. He is not responding to things Obama is saying when he says those things. He is not fighting with Obama. He is differentiating his message from those of Obama and Hillary, but staying on message.

Obama's statements about trial lawyers and about the electability of the candidates in 2000 and 2004 are not central to his message. These statements tell me that he is not focused, that he is not really empowered by his own message, that he is getting off topic. That shows weakness and is a waste of time. It is confusing to voters.

Here is where Edwards' trial experience pays off. He knows how to handle this part of the campaign. He is focusing more, not less, on his message.

Obama has potential, but he is not ready for the general election campaign, not ready to run against a Republican.

[SlowDownFast]

103. Well said. n/t

[YDogg]

181. I concur.

[ChiciB1]

209. I'll Second That... And You Really Worded That Very Well... I'm

proud of you. You said what needed to be said, weren't nasty or mean and the point was made VERY CLEARLY!

I AGREE with you!

[debbierlus]

97. It stuns me the support Obama has here

He is such an obvious pandering politician. He has neither the experience or the political acumen to lead this nation.

I am SICK to death of his pseudo-unity schtick. There is no unifying with people who won't acknowledge reality &
demonize all they don't understand and fear.

It is a crock. An outdated, outmoded pandering technique that doesn't translate to reality. The democrats problems have come precisely because they haven't fought the fight with the gloves off. People are STARVING for leadership that stands up for the truth.

He reminds me of Mitt Romney.

Please think before you vote for this man.

[ejbr]

98. well said!

It's no wonder he campaigned for Lieberman!

[alteredstate]

101. If you can't provide the link to Senator Obama's actual words

your OP is a load of crap.

[niceypoo]

109. Personally, I will wait for a refutal or audio...

...before making any final judgment, but if this is true then Obama is officially full of it. Slamming Hillary or Edwards is fair game, but attacking Gore or Kerry's presidential bids is sacrilege. It would also signal a detachment from reality, republicans will never vote for Obama. If he is the nominee the GOP will turn into, "racists gone wild," and their efforts to disenfranchise black voters will be all out.

[MidwestTransplant]

105. Obama has alienated 100% of my vote.

[PATRICK]

107. I am going to be patient

here because we have one of those revelatory moments that apply not just to one person. This is the fundamental blindness of many in this country, but most tragically in democratic leaders whose political common sense or healthy respect fro the lessons of pain should teach them better than this. this is victim philosophy at its worst, fatal judgments programmed into perpetuating victimhood. Former slaves, bewildered by the insane evil their whole lives have been marked by respond HOW to this evil? Sometimes one is marked by the conflict into being tainted by the enemy in emotion and thought. Great conflicts create this paradox. The evil tries to morph the good into its destructive ways. The good attempts the same, but in this case the twisting and morphing itself tilt the balance to evil and destruction. it is not just violence that begets violence but lies that beget untruths.

In the heat of this campaign, the very thoughtful Obama has revealed the paradox trap completely and this is what he will carry into his November campaign. It ignores cheating, media fraud, the pernicious influence of money itself. Instead, in irritation over its own illogic not working, it complains that liberalism or populism is the problem. Gore and Kerry were destroyed by media fraud(lies) and their blindness to it(or inability or unwillingness to tackle it) and buoyed by populist fervor and the rising of the sane. Obama sees it exactly as the establishment DLC critics saw it and explains their further blind,, disastrous legislative strategy. Obama therefore will be no more effective or vibrant than the record of the 2006 congress as exemplified by the leadership(not the progressives caucus). Hillary doesn't say it this deeply, being a more established practice than a theory grounded, she thinks, in the proof of Bill's success.

This is a tragic mindset to carry into the election and anyone wondering why I am less wild about Obama that Edwards or DK, or Dean, or Clark or a lot of others is how fatally deep these convictions run right into disdainful practice. Insofar as Kerry rejected the significance of fraud, his politics doomed him. Taking on advisers with these bent thoughts is even worse. You can't begin to beat this crap and get out of victimhood. You beat those liberated from this, even though politically weak, because their vision threatens the settled blindness. it becomes too horrible, too different, too out of the power structure dominated by the frauds, to signify.

This isn't just the flaw of Obama, but this is a fatal disqualifier in my book. people fearing we can lose this election can see it within this "new" vision, the bipartisanship with fraud. This is a kinder gentler, more emotionally sincere Joe Lieberman.

You can complain about many many candidates present and past this way, but the crux is how we see things and what we will do. The more we are directed toward a cliff with our hands tied, especially by
weirdly SEPARATING from raw populist power to change and reform, the more we have to educate or reject
our not ready for prime time candidates. We can "win" without this(we keep saying) but not illogically it makes the victory of fraud all the more possible in the end. And the hampering of reform and the survival of fraud all the more likely. And the return of fraud and dictatorship inevitable.

If we become confused enough enough about what friends or evil or truth are, we lose all of those things.

[Faygo Kid]

113. You said it, kiddo.

This is breathtakingly dismissive of all that happened in 2000, 2004. My preferred candidates have always been Edwards and Obama. I finally came down for Edwards as someone more likely to fight for us than to try to get along with evil. Appears I made the right choice, and while I still like Obama, I am awfully disappointed.

[PATRICK]

123. This is something

that can be unlearned. No time or likelihood during this presidential run and carrying that into the WH creates worse hardening of the poltical arteries.

[jonnyra]

110. I have just lost

ALL respect for this guy. He's taken to using right wing talking points to try to garner votes and slam other dems. I never really saw anything too special about him and now hes proven himself (to me anyway) just another crappy politician saying anything he thinks will get him a vote. Really kind of pathetic.

[MonteLukast]

114. Handlers putting words in his mouth?

Maybe it's right what (Krugman?? somebody else??) said-- Obama shows an amazing naïvete about how he'll really perform under pressure from handlers et al. He overestimates, greatly, the effectiveness of his charisma against a determined and entrenched political "corporate culture". He needs to get a bit wiser, IMO, before he's ready for the big time.

Go Edwards! The candidate who IS wiser, who HAS proven for himself, an ability to be wiser and still optimistic.

Addendum: Yes, it is Krugman: Obama Naive About Influence Of Corporate Power

[flordehinojos]

112. when a man resorts to using "cheap-shots" ... is there any credibility left as to his

honesty or integrity?

I don't think so. Obama has shown his *ss and it ain't pretty.

[MonteLukast]

116. we do slip up and show unsavory aspects of ourselves...

... under enormous pressure.

I wouldn't necessarily take this as "Obama's true colors"... although I do worry, as a result of seeing this, about what he would do if he WERE president.

Another idealist chewed up and spit out by the corporatist agenda-- I do NOT want to see that happen to Obama.

[Drunken Irishman]

115. I give Gore a pass because it's difficult for Veeps to win the presidency.

However, Kerry's race should have never been close. It just shouldn't. You can whine about how the election was stolen from him, however, it was Kerry who managed to keep things THAT close with Bush in the first place to make it possible. And I don't want to hear all the public polls were fixed to have Kerry losing, so it made the outcome possible. Campaigns have internal polls and not once has Kerry produced an internal poll that showed he solidly would have beaten Bush.

The problem I had with Kerry is that he ran that race like a puss. He was easily defined by the Republicans from the get-go and failed to ever fight back those charges. I thought Kerry was a bad candidate in the primary and I thought he would doom the Democrats to defeat the second he won the nomination. I was right. In fact, many people shared my same opinion and even though I eventually voted for Kerry, it wasn't a vote I felt confident in. Mostly because I knew if the race were close, he would lose and it was.

Kerry's problem was that he LET the media define him as a flip-flopper. Kerry's problem was actually expecting that American people would ignore the Swift Boaters, but they don't. Politics is dirty and we need a candidate who isn't above getting dirt under his nails playing tough. I'm not saying doing anything immoral, but they need to fight just as much as the Republican candidate -- who will throw everything and the kitchen sink at the next nominee. However, if we're too passive again this year, IT WILL BE TOO CLOSE TO CALL.

If Huckabee is the nominee, run ads showing a fascist religious state. Hit him hard and hit him often on his wack-job ideas. If it's Romney, show every damn flip-flop he's made in the history of his life. If he said he liked brunettes in high school and married a blonde, MAKE THAT AN ISSUE. No more "well we don't want to stoop to their level". Fuck that, bitch slap them upside the head, throw sand in their face and if you can, grab their nuts because IT NEEDS TO GET UGLY. We need someone who is going to fight, someone that isn't just going to roll over for most of the campaign, only to turn it on late in hopes of making a comeback. And that's exactly what Kerry did. He ran a blah campaign for much of the year, only turning it up in the late stages to close the gap. Instead he should have been going in for the final blow against an inept president.

Whether Obama said this shouldn't be an issue, I don't know. In fact, I doubt he said it. BUT I remember shortly after the election and how upset many DUers were for Kerry giving up the fight and how that was a constant of his campaign. We nominated a candidate in '04 that was defined early and didn't do jack shit to change that in the presses. It wasn't until the debate where Kerry finally realized things were going south and he needed to save his ass. But had Debate Kerry had been around from the months of March-September, Bush would have been KO'd by then and Kerry would be gearing up for a reelection run.

[Little Star]

118. This pisses me off! Both had their elections stolen. Dumb Ass!

[MonteLukast]

119. Doesn't sound like his own words, that's fersure.

Sounds like somebody told him, "Make yourself stand out! Show everybody how you'd do better than those weasely, baby-eating, puppy-kicking opponents of yours.... I don't care how you do it, but DO SOMETHING!!"

Time pressure forced him to choose the easy way out, I guess.

Whatever... Go Edwards.

[Desertrose]

121. Oooh. Thats harsh.

and not really true. Take into account that the elections were pretty well trashed with BBV....??

Hmmm...not the best move you could make IMHO, Obama.

[NashVegas]

124. My Gawd! He's the Candidate for Apologists and Doormats!

No WAY he gets my vote. He's pandering to the Republican base!

[Bluebear]

127. nothing new with that trend, unfortunately

[unblock]

154. right on! let's get a nominee who can't win ANY votes other than partisan democrats!

look, i can't stand primary politics because it's filled with idiotic infighting like this thread.
my only decision is to vote for the democrat over the republican, and i have little to say about the choice beyond that.

but looking to the general election, we do need someone who can pull in independents and maybe even a few republicans. heaven knows there are a lot of disillusioned republicans looking for some reasonable alternative.

in this case, obama was clearly claiming he'll be better at pulling in independents and republicans. in the general election. i have no idea if he's right or wrong on this, but the headline on the original article and this thread are gross distortions of what he actually said.

at worst, he implied that gore and kerry simply did not effectively pull in enough independents and republicans (whether by alienating them, or by failing to offer a more appealing image, or whatever -- he offerred no reason), and, election fraud aside, i don't see how you can disagree with this claim.

[humbled_opinion]

157. Very Succint...

:applause:

[spooky3]

211. I think what some people are reacting to is

that the remarks attributed to Obama seem to imply that he knows better than Gore and Kerry how to pull in those voters and that he believes he will do so. As you yourself say, he wasn't quoted here as explaining exactly what his basis is for saying this. That strikes some as arrogance or worse, particularly given the fact that he has never been through what both of them went through, and isn't even the clear front runner among Dems. at this very early stage.

He has borrowed heavily from Edwards' 2004 run (as well as some of Edwards' recent policy articulations), in which Edwards also tried to stay positive and campaigned on a theme of "hope". I haven't ever liked this as it strikes me as "me too-ism", but I especially don't like that, while Edwards learned the hard way from his experience and now has a somewhat different approach, Obama does not seem to have learned that you can't be sure that this approach will work any better for him than it did for Edwards.

[KingFlorez]

126. He didn't single them out

In both 2000 and 2004, the strategy of the Democratic Party as a whole was very poor and allowed the Republicans to shape every aspect of the debate. And of course, these elections were subjected to fraud, but the fact still remains that the Democrats weren't in good shape. He clearly didn't single out Kerry or Gore.

[Califooyah Operative]

128. Wrong.

He's making a statement of fact, that about half the country didnt support us in 04 and 00. It has nothing to do with Kerry or Gore and is a reflection of the political climate. It still exists and Obama is arguing he can get us past that. The fact that the anti-Obama crowd is willingly disregarding the facts with this one and hyping this as an 'attack' shows huge desperation.

[humbled_opinion]

132. This is getting played wrong

The context is that the country needs unity and sorry if it offends some people but he is right. Hillary is a divider and the country being split is not good right now...

[Tarc]

137. Unity is a code word for appeasement

I'd certainly not want a candidate who is willing to compromise core progressive values. Between this and the appeasing of gay-hating bigoted ministers, I'd say Obama just completed his "jump the shark" phase.

[TeamJordan23]

133. Haha. This is why Obama has been so successful, he can end the polarization and unify the country

Nice try by the OP to mislead. Of course, anti-Obama jump on this without any rationality.

[earthlover]

135. Much ado about nothing!...

For one thing, the story does not show Obama saying what the headline says he said so we have no evidence that he said it at all. Second, the source is not named....it is a "person at the event". Like who, a Hillary supporter?

Here's what Obama was quoted as saying: "I don't want to go into the next election starting off with half the country already not wanting to vote for Democrats -- we've done that in 2004, 2000," according to a person at the event....

Where does this say Kerry or Gore alienated half the country?...he didn't even mention their names, let alone give them personal blame for this.

Obama is criticising the whole strategy of just trying to squeak by in an election. He is saying we should shoot for a higher goal. And, in order to do this, we have to reach out to independents and cross over Republicans. If we can't motivate more people to vote for us than in 00 or 04, we lose. It is that simple. This is not an attack on the candidates but on the strategy.

Of course, the Obama pile-on-ers won't read the story with any skepticism or perspective. It reinforces what they want to believe in the first place. So much for objectivity! But if you read what the story actually said, it did not support its headline....at all.

[depakid]

144. ".he didn't even mention their names."

The implications are quite clear- particularly when placed in context of ther things that he's been saying and doing these past several months (not to mention his criticism of the Alito filibuster in 2006).

The man's an attorney- he knows all too well how to choose words that convey more subtle meanings.

[earthlover]

183. the implications are not at all clear....

...best to look at what he said.

Also be careful not to be totally DUPED by a reporter's HEADLINE

[Harper_is_Bush]

136. I guess we can call this inexperience now, huh? n/t

[Gloria]

141. First, "trial lawyer," now this! Why doesn't he join Hagel and the rest of

that crew!

Please IOWA, don't make me drop out of the Democratic Party for good!!!

[humbled_opinion]

142. There sure seems to be a mass of trolls on this thread stirring up shit... n/t

[Divine Discontent]

148. I would go with, ' a lot of people pointing out the mistakes of the Obama campaign'

I gotta run, Donnie McClurkin's at an Obama 08 rally screaming about homosexuals needing to repent - can't talk, cuz I love when I see the Obama signs in the background and hear Donnie's sweet lush gay man's voice rant on and on about the queer needing to convert and then saying how Obama's the one!

Great decision making skills by this candidate! awesome! oh, wow, here comes a baby boomer, it's my mom! I can't wait to tell her what Obama said about her generation's quaint views of democracy.

Image of Donnie proud to be with Der Fuhrer -----
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=&imgrefurl=http://thebeautifulstruggler.blogspot.com/2007/10/what-what-in-pulpit.html&h=213&w=320&sz=21&hl=en&start=23&um=1&tbnid=xfk5hN6a__HcFM:&tbnh=79&tbnw=118&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dobama%2Bdonnie%26start%3D18%26ndsp%3D18%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN

[hyphenate]

219. Trolls?

I don't think so. I have never come out and smeared any of the candidates on our side here or anywhere else for that matter. In fact, I have conscientiously attempted to keep my own opinion on the matter to myself, trying at times to keep smearing of any of the Democratic candidates down as much as possible from DUers in general.

However, when I hear comments about the elections of 2000 and 2004 in such a fashion, I can't help but wonder how deep Obama's insecurities lie--if he can't stay on message and stop such criticizing, he obviously feels he cannot win without taking down others.

The 2000 and 2004 elections WERE won by Democrats without a doubt, so if Obama doesn't want to "divide" the nation like these two elections purportedly did, he better drop out of the race now. If pukes are fed up with the Rove-Cheney-Bush regime, then I don't feel one bit sorry for them--they bought into the propaganda machine, and they can rot in hell for putting it back in the white house in 2004. They created the divide, and anyone who can't see that is obviously NOT presidential material.

No troll here--been here since June, 2001.

[Scriptor Ignotus]

145. why is this thinly sourced heresay on the front page of DU?

???:shrug:

[killbotfactory]

146. It confirms a bias some people have

so obviously, it's true. :eyes:

[Divine Discontent]

151. just take one of the other really really bad mistakes he's done

that have been confirmed, if you need to wait to have someone else you've never met tell you that Barack said this. I don't believe DU would have put it on the front page unless they trusted the source.

[Scriptor Ignotus]

188. jesus fucking christ

you're essentially defending every smear and baseless allegation that was used against Gore and Kerry to begin with! Did Al Gore invent the internet? Did Kerry shoot himself to get the Purple Heart? These are things people believed because of poorly sourced, rumor-inducing articles like this one.

Look, this quote may very well be accurate, but a journalist shouldn't leave a kernel of doubt in the mind of the reader. If Obama said such a controversial thing, name names, provide audio or video, or a firsthand transcript. This "person" named in the artile could have been a fucking Hillary supporter. You have no idea because the journalist didn't do his fucking job.


Sorry about the language but I'm pissed. People on DU bitch day and night about the sad state of our media, and when given a textbook example of lazy reporting, there are dozens of DUers believing every drop with no hesitation. It really makes me embarrassed to be a part of this community.

[Divine Discontent]

214. I am never amazed anymore how negative the tone

from Obama and Clinton supporters has gotten in the past 3 months on everything, basically. It's fact. Nothing else needs said. It's ridiculous.

[humbled_opinion]

153. Exactly....

Obama must have got a little too much traction on Ms. Inevitability.:scared:

[superconnected]

147. I so much wanted to believe in Obama, before he started making me

blink all the time the way Hillary did when I was in the early stages of denial about her neo-con status. Of course after it was no longer deniable I became more leary and can pick people riding on the dem ticket that don't have the goal of representing the people who elected them out quickly.

Gee Obama. I DON'T trust you anymore.

[NWHarkness]

150. Another day, another dissing of Democrats

I hope that if he's the nominee Obama will take aim at the Republicans the way he has at so many Democrats. Oh, wait, he can't do that, he wants to reach out to them and "bring us together".

[humbled_opinion]

155. Well if you think that this country can withstand

A replay of the 2000 race... I think that has civil war written all over it... We need a candidate that can inspire THE PEOPLE... not some people...

[autorank]

156. Dear Obama: Get a life. Stolen elections 2000-2004. The five year wonder strikes.

This totally pisses me off so I'll be brief. How about the lies, the manipulation, the bull shit no-investigation of 911, the fake Osama tapes, lies about WMD, etc.

What about this:

I see dead people...5,000,000 Iraqi orphans because of this war.

All the pious moralists, religious, "faith based" politicians - Obama, Huckabee, etc - say nothing
about1.2 million dead Iraqis, 1.1 injured and the 5.0 million orphans.

I can tell you exactly what Jesus would say:

Matthew 21:12-17 (King James Version)
King James Version (KJV)
http://tinyurl.com/3a9s83
Public Domain


12And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves,

13And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves.

14And the blind and the lame came to him in the temple; and he healed them.

15And when the chief priests and scribes saw the wonderful things that he did, and the children crying in the temple, and saying, Hosanna to the son of David; they were sore displeased,

16And said unto him, Hearest thou what these say? And Jesus saith unto them, Yea; have ye never read, Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise?

17And he left them, and went out of the city into Bethany; and he lodged there.

[aquart]

158. What. An. Insufferable. Prig.

Come on, Obama followers, tell me how sucking up to the Republicans is noble and full of CHANGE.

[Jim Sagle]

202. It IS a change. Most DLC Dems try to hide their Republiconism. Obama flaunts his.

[Blue_In_AK]

159. Obama is entirely too full of himself

for my tastes. I hope he gets trounced (along with Mrs. Clinton).

[GoddessOfGuinness]

161. This was a huge mistake on Obama's part.

If he wants to promote unity, he shouldn't be using divisive language.

[ShaneGR]

165. I've got some news for him, he's black, they're republicans....

Republican's don't like black people. I mean, I know I'm crazy, but is that really controversial?

[humbled_opinion]

195. Your statement is absolutely insane....

You blanket statement that all Republicans hate blacks.... So do black Republicans hate themselves? Obama's message is of hope and change and it is truth.... We do not need a President that squeaks thru in the general election with 50.5 percent of the vote or 1 over electoral votes and losing the popular vote... We don't need a rehash of Bush V. Gore or Kerry recounts in Ohio.. All that serves to divide this country politically, we need a candidate that is strong on all the issues that can truly bring this country together and unite it toward common goals.. A person with character that can get things accomplished working in the realm of politics. We do not need a divisive figure like Hillary even Zogby shows that Hillary cannot win 50 percent of public support in the general election... Why would anyone waste their vote on her... People need to take the blinder off and get informed before its too late and the WH goes back to the Repubes for 4 or 8 more years...:banghead: :rant:

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1376

[dpbrown]

166. That wacky Obama - always the uniter, not the divider!

Now where have we heard that phrase before?

:rofl:

[humbled_opinion]

196. but in his case it seems that it may be the truth..

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1376

[Name removed]

203. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MasonJar]

168. Well, that does it for me and Obama...when he starts putting down

my fav, Al Gore, who is trying to save the whole damn planet on his own dime, then he will never get my vote in the primary. Kerry too. John Kerry has spent his life in service to this country. Both won the elections!!!!!!!!!!!

[mdelaguna2000]

174. Agreed. Naive & Selfish - can't hold a candle to Al Gore.

That's it for me.

[Bluebear]

172. The "politics of hope!" Very "uplifting".

:silly:

[ruggerson]

213. I see few Obama defenders on this one

n/t

[azmesa207]

177. Obama

attacks Gore and Kerry look like the MSM has pick out the new Candidate for the Democrats that just what they did with Kerry in Iowa last election and you know how that turned out . By attacking Gore
and Kerry he's become a shill for the republicans & MSM and will probably be the nominee just like they wanted . He will be easily defeated by the republican slime Machine just like 2004 .

[ElboRuum]

178. Alienating half the country?

Is he effing kidding?

So basically, his reasoning is half the country wants change and half want to maintain the status quo? Look, one thing he should realize is that, provided 100% turnout, you can write off 25% right off the bat. Those 25% won't vote for him regardless because they are wildly Republican. But, he can pretty much count on 25% regardless, that being those wildly Democrat? Which leaves about 50% to fight over. Given that Congressional approval ratings are so low primarily because of the desire for change (promised but not yet received), how is a centrist, put your arms around everybody kind of strategy in any way merited? Half the country doesn't vote for a party so much as the issues (as much as it pains me to say... one issue) that are valuable to them. Keep worrying about losing votes on the moderate right and you'll lose the ones on the moderate left, which is a much easier sell.

[understandinglife]

179. Last I checked Gore WON in 2000, Kerry had his victory STOLEN, as well ...

... and if ANY candidate wants my vote they better address, explicitly, the criminal actions of Bush and the neoconsters in stealing both elections, destroying the central values of OUR Constitution, waging illegal and immoral war of aggression, and, readily supporting those whom are destroying the environment that sustains life on this planet.

Period.

Happy New Year, fellow members of the clued world,
Bob

[rosesaylavee]

245. Ditto

What UL said.

[Mojambo]

185. These are the kinds of sentiments that keep me out of his camp.

If Obama has such a skewed view of the current ideological scale, he's likely going to try and sit in the middle and end up tipping this country even further to the right.

[spooky3]

186. It's funny...

I am beginning to feel about him the way I did about Kerry in 2004--will gladly vote for him if he's the nominee, he's a zillion times better than Rethugs; but I "like" him less and less compared to other Dems., meaning there are a lot of things he's said and done that are disconcerting. This is not the only type of comment along these lines attributed to him, so I am inclined not to think that he's being misquoted. Many of the campaign missteps are understandable given this is his first time out, outside of his Dem. area of the country, but there is too much at stake this year and we have better alternatives.

None of our candidates is perfect, but I cringe whenever I hear these comments. If he really believes he is more popular with the general public than Kerry or Gore, I think he is sadly mistaken. We need people who will tell the public what they honestly believe in and get them out to vote. Democratic positions are far more consistent with the views of the general public; there is no need to fuzz things up. Obviously we want someone who can work effectively with people with whom s/he or he disagrees. But clearly Kerry and Gore were capable of doing this, as are many of our other candidates this year.

I hope that he really did not say the latest comments.

[TheCowsCameHome]

187. Not a very smart move on his part, if you ask me

This doesn't help his cause one bit.

[tom_paine]

189. Poor Obama, still trapped inside the Bushies' False Reality Bubble.

I suppose I cannot blame him and the other 90%+ of Imperial Amerikan Subjects who are also clueless as to the nature of the Nazi-like insanity (though much less violently inclinded, for the moment, Thank God) that has settled over our nation.

It is designed to blind, and blind it does.

[humbled_opinion]

197. Obama speaks the truth ...

He can unite and Hillary will divide see Zogby on the matter of whom America will NEVER vote for under any circumstance.

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1376

[JoFerret]

205. What a lightweight.

.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

215. Dear Sen. Obama

Go Fuck Yourself.
Seriously.
Anybody willing to say something that spectacularly stupid has no business in the White House. He shouldn't even be allowed on the tour.

[cooolandrew]

216. Obama has a clear strategy to get in the WH. To criticise his party is good because change comes ...

... with self crticism. Obama is not saying any of these candidates are bad people, he is just sayhing they had the wrong strategy. Obama recognises America is a conservative nation, which is shown in Bush's poll figures on the rise again. Once we understand that it's then a matter of gathering americans together under one cause.

[hyphenate]

217. That's enough!

When Obama comes out saying that kind of shit, I'm through with him. I don't care what he says from this point on--unless he is the actual nominee, I want nothing to do with him or his politics. You don't insult people like Al Gore or John Kerry like this and expect Democrats to support you. The 1/2 of the nation that Gore and Kerry supposedly alienated were filled with bullshit from the pukes, and even now, a clear 1/2 of that 1/2 is still so delusional that they're still behind the asshole in the white house.

[CoffeeCat]

218. Obama didn't even say this!

Look at this quote! The source is "a person at the event".

The source is some unknown person who is paraphrasing Obama.

This is not even an Obama quote!

Shame on anyone who took this seriously. This is a joke!

There's no context, no verified source and these aren't even Obama's words.

Let's not all get indignant and shocked because some reporter decided to play 'telephone'
and call it journalism.

[Horse with no Name]

221. Fuck Obama.

And I am being nice.

[dorkulon]

222. So he didn't say "Gore," Kerry," or "alienated?"

That's some first-rate reporting there. Congrats to all you level-headed DUers for not being sensationalistic morons or anything.

[killbotfactory]

227. and this is according to an unnamed person at an event

fine reporting, all around.

[iamthebandfanman]

233. actully it does give a name

not that it helps much in verfication ;)

"Glenn Thrush"

[Mountainman]

237. About half of the people were already voting rupub how can you alienate a person who is already

alienated?

You can't mean that Kerry and Gore could have gotten 100% of the vote do you? Obama will have nearly that many people alienated if and when he runs also.

[LittleClarkie]

239. This from someone who's alienated most of the gay people I know.

Sure, dear, sure.

[readmoreoften]

244. Fucking disgusting, divisive, pandering bullshit. I can't stand this guy.

Obama's more concerned about winning Republican votes than he is about mine.

You want to win over some Republicans? Start talking health insurance and jobs. Oh wait, that's Edwards' territory. And that's why he's the real crossover candidate.