Back in the days when Obama was pushing Hopium and hustling for change, the flim-flam routine included a riff on how he would “expand the map”. Part of the “expand the map” riff was that Obama would help elect down ballot Democrats running for Congress. No longer.
As we wrote in Barack Obama – Party Pooper Republicans are already mailing literature demanding Democratic House candidates “renounce or embrace” Obama’s bitter and clingy remarks.
Obama at the top of the ticket will force all Democrats to denounce Obama for Rezko, Wright, Bitterness. It will be wholesale slaughter at the ballot box in November in a year when Democrats expected to win.
We quoted Politico (which did not mention similar tactics by Republicans in a House race):
The piece underscores the extent of which Republicans, up and down the ticket, will seize on the comments should Obama get the nomination.
Disaster with Obama. Superdelegates Beware – Obama will destroy Democrats such as Brad Ellsworth in Indiana and Heath Schuler in North Carolina. Obama will destroy entire state Democratic delegations.
More evidence of the destruction Obama will wreak on the Democratic Party in November will appear starting next week. Democratic House candidates are now – in televised advertisments – under attack because of Barack Obama’s bitter words. Words have consequences Barack.
In hundreds of House elections as well as Senate and state and municipal elections Democratic candidates for elective office will soon be under attack, forced to denounce Obama’s bitter words. And Wright. And Ayres. And Rezko. And Auchi. And Dohrn. And Stroger.
More evidence of the destruction Obama will wreak on the Democratic Party in November will appear starting next week.
“Obama is weak” – on crime and terrorism – say the ads which will flood across America – therefore Democrats are weak. Hillary is tough. Republicans cannot argue Hillary is anything but tough.
More evidence of the destruction Obama will wreak on the Democratic Party in November will appear starting next week as Obama’s “Pastor” speaks again.
The controversial Rev. Jeremiah Wright — Sen. Barack Obama’s pastor — is speaking Monday at the National Press Club as part of a divinity conference of black church leaders. Wright’s decision to headline an event at the Press Club — open to all media — risks giving Obama’s critics more fodder, as if they don’t have enough already.
Meanwhile, PBS is touting an interview with Wright to be broadcast Friday on “Bill Moyers’ Journal.” Fresh material from Wright — no matter how well-intended — is not what Obama needs. [snip]
Wright looms as a serious problem for Obama in his fight to be the Democratic presidential nominee over Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and, if he wins, as a general election candidate against Sen. John McCain. Look no further than an ad the North Carolina Republican Party released Wednesday featuring a clip from Wright’s “God Damn America” sermon and calling Obama an “extremist.”
Fox News has been all over Wright — helicopter shots of his Tinley Park mansion under construction — and host Bill O’Reilly has been pounding Obama over Wright regularly on his show. [snip]
When the uproar over Wright started, Obama chief strategist David Axelrod asked his friends at Jasculca Terman — a public affairs firm — to advise Trinity on how to handle the crush of media coverage, and they did, pro bono.
Big Media bamboozled the public with silly reports that Obama’s entanglements with “Pastor” Wright were of no interest. Big Media tried to sell Obama’s race speech as an answer to why Obama sat for 20 years listening to Wright. Pennsylvania voters proved Big Media wrong.
In The Rise Of The Anti-Obama Voter we wrote:
Barack Obama injected race into the nomination process in order to tarnish Hillary Clinton, a longtime advocate for civil rights for all. When Barack Obama was caught lying about his “Pastor”, Obama instead of addressing questions about his own judgment in listening to “Pastor” Wright for 20 years, distracted and diverted the attention of Big Media supporters and once again injected the topic of race. White working class voters were not fooled and are now Anti-Obama.
Hillary has turned the Big Media/Obama demands to drop out to connect viscerally with voters in Pennsylvania – voters long derided by Big Media princes because they entertain themselves by bowling
Obama’s campaign big shot David Axelrod helped “Pastor” Wright’s chuch acquire free publicity management. Republicans will foist Axelrod on Wright, Wright on Wrong Obama. And Axelrod continues to insult the intelligence of working class voters as Bill Clinton sides with working class voters.
“Today her opponent’s campaign strategist said, ‘Well we don’t really need these working class people to win, half the time they vote for Republicans anyways.’ And I will tell you something, America needs you to win and therefore Hillary wants your support….”
Apparent response to earlier remark to NPR from David Axelrod: “The white working class has gone to the Republican nominee for many elections, going back even to the Clinton years.”
Barack Obama has had months of primaries to allay the fears of swing voters that he is a weak elitist condescending loser.
John Judis, echoing our earlier reports dubs Obama – The Next McGovern. [Note the wonderful George McGovern is not the issue. What is at issue is that Obama will have less electoral success than George McGovern did. McGovern only won Massachusetts and D.C. Obama might not even get Massachusetts in which he leads McCain by a paltry 2 percent.]
Indeed, if you look at Obama’s vote in Pennsylvania, you begin to see the outlines of the old George McGovern coalition that haunted the Democrats during the ’70s and ’80s, led by college students and minorities. In Pennsylvania, Obama did best in college towns (60 to 40 percent in Penn State’s Centre County) and in heavily black areas like Philadelphia.
Its ideology is very liberal. Whereas in the first primaries and caucuses, Obama benefited from being seen as middle-of-the-road or even conservative, he is now receiving his strongest support from voters who see themselves as “very liberal.” In Pennsylvania, he defeated Clinton among “very liberal” voters by 55 to 45 percent, but lost “somewhat conservative” voters by 53 to 47 percent and moderates by 60 to 40 percent. In Wisconsin and Virginia, by contrast, he had done best against Clinton among voters who saw themselves as moderate or somewhat conservative.
Obama even seems to be acquiring the religious profile of the old McGovern coalition. In the early primaries and caucuses, Obama did very well among the observant. In Maryland, he defeated Clinton among those who attended religious services weekly by 61 to 31 percent. By contrast, in Pennsylvania, he lost to Clinton among these voters by 58 to 42 percent and did best among voters who never attend religious services, winning them by 56 to 44 percent. There is nothing wrong with winning over voters who are very liberal and who never attend religious services; but if they begin to become Obama’s most fervent base of support, he will have trouble (to say the least) in November.
The primaries, unfortunately, are not going to get any easier for Obama.
Obama supporters will face electoral defeat and disaster. They do not care. They will being their electoral defeat and disaster to Democrats nationwide.
Hillary Clinton was endorsed by Representative John Tanner. Tanner is a Blue-Dog Democrat. Tanner will not face electoral disaster. Tanner supports Hillary.
The Hillary campaign can repeat to Democrats nationwide the tag line from the movie The Terminator: “Come with me if you want to live.”