Obama Goes After Hillary

Obama is out in force.

In what was billed as a definitional speech by his campaign, Sen. Barack Obama Saturday accused Sen. Hillary Clinton of “vague, calculated answers” in the most recent Democratic presidential debate and vowed that he will “turn the page” in Washington.

“Much has been said about the exchanges between Senator Clinton and myself this week,” Obama said. “Now, understand that Hillary Clinton is a colleague and a friend. She’s also a skilled politician, and she’s run what Washington would call a ‘textbook’ campaign. But the problem is the textbook itself.”

Obama, who was interrupted several times by applause and standing ovations in an auditorium at Converse College in Spartanburg, displayed an energy he sometimes lacks on the stump while playing to the enthusiasm of the audience.

“It’s a textbook that’s all about winning elections, but says nothing about how to bring the country together to solve problems,” Obama said. “As we saw in the debate last week, it encourages vague, calculated answers to suit the politics of the moment, instead of clear, consistent principles about how you would lead America.”

Does Obama stand a chance?  I have always thought that a campaign by such a lightweight would eventually lose support as voters get real, but I’m beginning to doubt.  Or could this be something where Obama takes out Hillary and leaves Edwards standing? 

1. Barack Obama is such a navel gazer, it’s almost unbearable.  His campaign has been an abysmal failure and he only gets press because the media thinks its novel to have a black guy in the race.

   But hey, when this campaign fails, perhaps Obama can use it to write his third autobiography.  For someone who professes to be so humble, Obama sure the hell is fascinated with his own life.

   Posted by Recess Supervisor on November 04, 2007 at 0122 hrs




2. The choices on both sides makes me think that God must be angry with this counrty....Obama doesn’t stand a chance against Clinton and neither does Edwards...I’ve heard but haven’t confirmed that even Murdock of Fox News held some kind of event or lunch for Clinton...some may think that she at least is getting something good out of her marriage but would we be getting something good...I don’t think so.

   Posted by on November 04, 2007 at 1248 hrs




3. I think Obama is viable by the strength of his charisma and personality first, and his acceptable, if not stellar, record as a politician second.  Sure he’s viable.  He’s exactly the kind of candidate that can inspire people.  Vote the man, not the policy; isn’t that the old American voter’s expression?  If it weren’t for the extra special case of Hillary he’d be in a much, much better place.

   If Hillary stumbles, look out.  The only real threat to his nomination then would be if Gore enters the race.

   Posted by scott on November 04, 2007 at 2001 hrs




4. Obama would be better for getting the country to get along with itself - a “healer” kind of personality.  Which is something I think we’ll need after GW.

   But Hillary will be better for big business.  Even with the health care issue, she really is the candidate of big business.  Big companies like Wal-Mart are already getting on board for it.  Small companies will take a hit, and we’d probably see higher unemployment if she gets her wish list pushed through Congress.  But if make some key stock purchases over the next couple of years you could make a killing off a Hillary Presidency.

   Don’t get me wrong, I don’t support either candidate and will not be voting for either next November.  They, along with all the GOP candidates, support expanding the size and scope of Federal government power.  That’s an automatic no-vote from me for the whole lot of ‘em.  But purely in the interest of asking: who is better for the country?  I’d have to say Obama.

   I’m registered independent in California so I get to pick either party’s ballot for the primaries.  I may pick a Democrat ballot and toss a vote at Obama.

   Posted by David Svendsen on November 04, 2007 at 2158 hrs




5. Just to answer your question, no, I don’t think Obama has much of a chance. He’s still just a little too green. He should have sat this one out, and waited until next time, when he would have been really hard to beat.

   I think Clinton is liable to take herself out, with help from Obama and Edwards, of course. Remember, four years ago, Howard Dean was seen as the probable nominee at this point. National polls show Clinton way ahead, but in the polls that count at this point, Iowa and New Hampshire, it’s still really close. She made a lot of Democrats really uneasy with her vote on Kyl-Lieberman, and despite all the rhetoric from the wingnuts who want to paint her as the second coming of Vladimir Lenin, she’s by far the most conservative of all the Democrats running. If I were Obama or Edwards, I’d try to figure a way to say in every stump speech, “If you want the highest GOP turnout ever, then you want Hillary as the nominee.” That’s the only thing I can think of that might drive up turnout in a dispirited Republican Party.

   Posted by on November 05, 2007 at 1436 hrs