Obama's Ohio Problem?

• Author: Ben Keeler
• Filed under: Democrats '08, Obama, Ohio 2008
• Date: Jun 9,2008

Dispatch: Many in southern Ohio still wary of Obama

The outcome in Appalachian Ohio, a swing area where residents voted twice each for Democrat Bill Clinton and Republican George W. Bush, could go a long way toward determining who wins Ohio and perhaps the presidency….In this Appalachian town and others along the southern Ohio trail that Hillary Clinton blazed in February, voters such as Rebecca Harper are asking: Now what?….Harper was impressed by Clinton's empathy for the struggling middle class and said she would have voted for her this fall. But now that Barack Obama has sewn up the Democratic nomination, Harper isn't sure whom to support.

This is where Kyle and I have our major 2008 Election disagreement. He lives in some fantasy land where all Clinton voters go for Obama at the end of the day. In reality, we all know that is not the case. Many soft Ohio Democrats will not vote for Obama. Period. Just like some Republicans aren't going to vote for John McCain. Some Democrats are ardent Hillary supporters and think that she got screwed over (she did and should definitely fight to the convention for justice). Some think Obama is too liberal. Others don't like his association with people like Wright and Rezko. And still more people haven't forgotten the "bitter" insult. Sure, most of these voters will vote for the Democrat candidate in the end. But some will not, and it doesn't take a whole lot of them to change things at the ballot box. Just ask people you know about family members, friends, co-workers and others they know who are Democrats that feel this way. He hasn't impressed everyone, and some people are not going to change their minds. I heard it multiple times myself this weekend.

"It was like we meant something to her," said Chuck Denney, 55, of Gallipolis, who works at a nearby power plant and was having lunch last week at the original Bob Evans restaurant in Rio Grande where Hillary Clinton stopped in February.

No, Chuck, you meant nothing to Hillary Clinton. The Clintons care about people in Gallipolis about as much as I care about what happened on the last episode on The Hills (none). However, many people feel like the Clintons do care about them for some reason and Obama doesn't (he cares about people in San Francisco). Mr. Denney isn't alone here. I don't understand it so I can't explain it. On a side note, I drove through Gallipolis once and I have to say I wasn't a big fan. Sorry to all Gallipolis readers.

Many people out there think Obama (pictured, enjoying a nice bike ride) should just not even contest Ohio and try and win other states instead. I can not think of a dumber strategy, and I am fairly certain the professionals running his campaign would agree with me. Ignore the lynch pin of the GOP Electoral Map? Great Idea! Democrats have to - have to - force Republicans to play in Ohio and spend time and resources here and at least try to win. Bush was able to nickel and dime Kerry to death in rural counties in south and west Ohio in 2004 to offset Kerry gains in urban counties. Bush improved in every county in the south of the state from the WV border over to Cincinnati from 2000 (except for communist/socialist Athens County, home of Ohio University). If McCain doesn't have to fight for those votes, then I don't see a conceivable way Obama wins Ohio, unless he wins 360+ Electoral Votes, and in that case Ohio didn't matter anyways. But if Team Obama wants to write off Ohio and place their hopes on flipping multiple other Bush 2004 states, be my guest. I'd love to see our resources go elsewhere and be able to watch TV in October without every commercial being election related or having some MoveOn.org volunteer knock on my door while I am trying to play Madden 2009 (I assume I will be in the middle of a season or dynasty at that time - it is actually possible I will be tired of the new Wii by then).

Ohio Related: Mike DeWine update.
Update: DeWine out of AG race.

Obama Clinches The Nomination

• Author: Kyle Kutuchief
• Filed under: Democrats '08, Presidential
• Date: Jun 4,2008

Tonight, Barack Obama finally became the Democratic nominee to be the next President of the United States. It is a sight that has been a long time coming for those of us who have supported him through out this process. I first saw Senator Obama speak up at Cuyahoga Community College about 15 months ago. We got there two hours early and the lines were already out the door. Leaving that speech my friends and I knew that he was a different kind of candidate and the one that we wanted to see become the nominee. It is nothing short of amazing that he made it. Senator Clinton ran a tough race and our party is counting on her to help move us forward. I truly feel for my fellow Democrats who supported Senator Clinton, but came up short. I know those folks need a little time to reflect on the race and I respect that. However, I believe that after a little time passes the Democratic Party will be united like never before and ready to win in November. Tonight, it feels good to be a Democrat. Turn your speakers up.

BHO to Campaign Staff: "We Need a Bigger Bus"

• Author: Ben Keeler
• Filed under: Democrats '08, Presidential
• Date: Jun 1,2008

Tonight we saw the continuation of the pattern of tossing people under the bus by Barack Obama. But I don't get it. In Philadelphia back in April Obama said "he could not more disown the Reverend Jeremiah Wright than he could disown the black community or his own grandmother and spoke about how Trinity United "embodies the black community in its entirely.'" Then he dumped Wright. Now the church. Maybe it had something to do with the latest video from that Pfleger guy….by the way if I am Obama's church (former) why am I letting people record what is going on there after all that has happened? The most recent tape was actually likely the final straw; it wasn't a great first outreach to Clinton voters. From the AP:

"I'm not denouncing the church and I'm not interested in people who want me to denounce the church," he said, adding that the new pastor at Trinity and "the church have been suffering from the attention my campaign has focused on them……….It's clear that now that I'm a candidate for president, every time something is said in the church by anyone associated with Trinity, including guest pastors, the remarks will imputed to me even if they totally conflict with my long-held views, statements and principles," he said.

The damage is done and has been done. This won't help and if anything it hurts him. I do like the attempt to blame the media. Barack Obama trying to blame the media. That is worth a laugh, even at this late hour.

Plain and simple, Obama is just your average politician. He always has been despite his facade. Just like John McCain. They both are. They will do whatever it takes to win. That is the only reason you do what Obama did today. It didn't just occur to him in the last couple days that it was time to move on from Trinity United Church of Christ due to what was being said there. Obama hasn't changed, but the political seasons have. Oh, and the sermons he listened to for 20 years and other recent ones showed up on YouTube. Obama tonight made two mistakes. He said nothing to denounce what was said and secondly we now know that he is only interested in the political burden of this problem.

Many Democrats pledged their lives to Obama on the basis of a very good speech at the Democratic Convention in Boston in 2004 without knowing much about him. Those that didn't go that route have to be a tad nervous right now in a race they should be leading by double digits.

Tom Blumer raises a good point:

*The theory among the Truth in Blogging radio corps is that Barack is afraid that there is an explosive video of Michelle Obama going off from TUCC's pulpit, and that his "resignation" is partially an attempt to prevent that from happening.

Not related at all: Did anyone see that fight on CBS Saturday night? Pretty disgusting when the ear of the guy from England broke open and started bleeding everywhere.

Clinton Democrats Are Not Voting For John McCain

• Author: Kyle Kutuchief
• Filed under: Democrats '08, Presidential
• Date: May 22,2008

Republicans, pinch yourselves. Stop dreaming. I know you guys love to point to Kentucky and West Virginia as evidence that Barack Obama can't win because white Democrats voted for Senator Clinton. I've got news for you: Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton share so many issues it would take me too long to list them. Clinton Democrats are not going to vote for John McCain this fall. Here is why:

Forget The Primary Exit Polls
If you are going to take time out of your schedule to go vote in a primary, you are more engaged than the average voter. Primary voters are more sophisticated. Chances are, many of those voters have heard polling data before, receive Clinton campaign emails, and are very aware of the dynamics of this primary. Clinton Democrats are devoted to her. They understand when a poll is being conducted to collect data so that someone can make the case for Senator Clinton to drop out. "Would you vote for Senator Obama if Senator Clinton dropped out?" A loyal and savvy Clinton supporter is going to say no to a pollster because they don't want to give the media or the Obama campaign fuel to run Senator Clinton out of town. Many of them probably genuinely feel frustrated with Senator Clinton's second place finish at the moment. However, once the dust from the primary clears, it will be the issues that matter most to those Democrats and we will be a united party.

Read the rest of this entry »

No Thanks on Your Advice, Senator Obama

• Author: Ben Keeler
• Filed under: Democrats '08, Presidential
• Date: May 20,2008

From the appearance of The Chosen One (not LeBron, Barack) on Good Morning America on Monday morning: "But I do want to say this to the GOP. If they think that they're going to try to make Michelle an issue in this campaign, they should be careful. Because that I find unacceptable.”

If Michelle Obama doesn't want to be attacked, or her husband doesn't like it, then she shouldn't be out giving campaign speeches as a surrogate for her husband. She shouldn't be telling people in Zanesville about the rigors of paying for expensive summer camps for your kids. She shouldn't tell people she wasn't proud of America until now. If she wants to be left alone, she would go the route of Mrs. Howard Dean. She painted a target on herself when she started making comments. That isn’t my fault. I have said that a spouse of a candidate for president is not off limits. Go after Cindy McCain if you are so inclined, leftists. I have seen it out there, so I know it is done. I have learned from the last 7.5 years that they don't care about going after family members of Republicans.

So in sum, she can go out and give political speeches, but she is off-limits in return. They don’t like being held to account for her campaign statements. It’s okay to discuss Michelle when it is done to promote the cause, but that is the only time she can be brought up. You can't have it both ways. Sorry, oh mighty ones. Typical liberal think here; just create more victims.

This is part of a broader strategy by the Obama campaign. They are trying, and with some success I might add, to build a bubble around their candidate where any criticism of him is going to be considered out of bounds. It is starting to be set up where any attack is a "personal attack." It is almost going the way where it is inconceivable that anyone could disagree with him. They are trying to dictate what people out there can and cannot say.

No, Senator Obama. I won't lay off verbally attacking your wife if I want to. Your warning doesn't scare me. What are you going to do, have me jailed? I better be careful? Of what? This is America. The country whose flag pin you are now wearing.

This makes me wonder if the rumors flying around out there about campaign sinking video tapes that show Michelle Obama speaking at the infamous Chicago church aren't indeed true and the groundwork is being laid to fend off criticism of that. But even if that is true, I won't be allowed to bring it up because it will just be a "distraction."

I noticed that Invincible Armor also wrote about this.

Obama Beats Edwards by 20%

• Author: Ben Keeler
• Filed under: Democrats '08, Presidential
• Date: May 14,2008

As the Republican losing streak in special House elections reached three tonight, the probable Democrat nominee for 2008, Barack Obama, took a beat down in West Virginia. With 98% reporting Clinton leads by around 67-28%. That is about 125,000 votes.

Since his big win and almost win in North Carolina and Indiana respectively last week, Obama has been called the certain nominee by all the MSM. He had a week of good press - and by my math, there are 24 weeks until November 4. Of those 24 weeks, Obama will get favorable MSM press coverage for about 23.5 of them. Something will happen for a couple days where even Olbermann and Kyle and the crew can't cover for him. Regardless, despite the glowing reviews and proclamations of it "being over" he got trounced Tuesday. He managed to pull in just about 20% more of the vote than John Edwards who has long since departed the scene. That is pathetic, just like the Republicans loss in MS-1 was. Obama continued to struggle with demographics he needs in November. A lot of West Virginia looks an awful like parts of Ohio and Pennsylvania. I would like someone to tell me how he can win in the Fall without those two states. Yes, I know mathematically you can figure out a way to do it, but I mean realistically. And you have to understand he certainly won't win Florida if he can't win OH or PA.

It is obvious to me that both decided and undecided Democratic Supers believe that turning off black voters is less of a risk than turning off the rural bitter simpletons in places like Southern Ohio. Maybe. I don't agree with that thinking, but it seems clear that many of them feel that is the case. They feel they can compensate for those losses with the always vaunted new voters, a massive upshoot of black voters (not quite the voting gap here you would think), and a huge turnout among other strong Democrat demographics. It's a gamble, especially when your candidate is an extremist and the most liberal senator in the United States Senate. Obama supporters will say tonight meant nothing. Delegate race wise, yes, you people are right. It really didn't. She is not going to catch him that way. But I don't think limping home and exposing that you are still in trouble with a large segment of the Democratic electorate is the way Team Obama wants to do it.

John McCain has his problems too, but I am not sure they are bigger than Obama's at this juncture. Unfortunately when this Democrat mess is over, we will have to turn to those problems. Back to now though. Mr. Chicago is slated to get drubbed again next Tuesday in Kentucky, and these same questions will be raised again. I would rather be in McCain's shoes, losing portions of the vote to Huckabee and Paul and whomever at this point. If Republicans are able to win in November, when we look back we will probably have to send a thank you card to the media and Obama supporters for dragging him across the finish line and disregarding their better general election candidate.

This summed it up best in my undervalued opinion: As in all of these recent Republican defeats (House races I alluded to before), analysts will be able to point to factors unique to the particular race. But my takeaway is that the Republican brand is in such bad shape that the Dems can win virtually anywhere if they nominate a candidate whose position on key issues is, or can be made to seem, close to that of the Republican. Fortunately, the Democrats will not nominate such a candidate for president.

Also, I am really warming up to Windows Vista. I am on week 2 of it. I hated it for a few days, but it just took some getting used to.

BIG WIN BY DEMOCRATS LAST NIGHT IN MISSISSIPPI
The big political story out of last night's results is Democrat Travis Childers defeat of Republican Craig Davis in a special election held last night in Mississippi's 1st Congressional District. Here is a little background on the district from the National Republican Congressional Committee: "Mississippi’s 1st Congressional District includes the Columbus Air Force Base and two VA facilities. Nearly 12 percent of the people living in Mississippi’s 1st Congressional District are military veterans." The NRCC spent $1.27 million trying to keep the heavily Republican district and lost 54% - 46%. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spent $2 million in the win. On Monday of this week, Vice-President Cheney made a rare campaign appearance to try and help the Republican hold the seat. I hope Ohio Republicans welcome the Vice-President to their districts also. Last night's win helps to illustrate the success of the Democratic message in the wake of the national frustration with the current administration.