EDITION: U.S.
 
CONNECT    

Obama Casts Race Between Him, McCain

Obama And Mccain

DEVLIN BARRETT   04/ 1/08 07:42 PM ET   AP

WILKES-BARRE, Pa. — Sen. Barack Obama is talking about the elephant in the room _ Republican rival John McCain _ and all but ignoring the Democrat who stands between him and his party's presidential nomination.

Even though Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton was campaigning miles down the Northeast Extension in Philadelphia, Obama criticized the likely Republican nominee's policies on the U.S. troop presence in Iraq, trade and tax cuts. In his town-hall session Tuesday, and in other campaign appearances in recent days, Obama has sought to frame the race as a general election matchup between him and McCain.

Of course, there's the little matter of a Pennsylvania primary on April 22, and Clinton's double-digit lead in recent state polls.

The extended presidential nomination contest has resulted in an odd political triangle, with each candidate taking alternate turns criticizing one or both of their competitors.

"He's on a biography tour right now," Obama said of McCain. "Most of us know his biography, and it's worthy of our admiration. My argument with John McCain is not with his biography, it's with his policies."

Obama argued that McCain would merely be another four years of President Bush on economic and military policies. McCain has criticized Obama as being inexperienced on national security, and the Illinois senator answered back.

"Meanwhile Senator McCain has been saying I don't understand national security, but he's the one who wants to keep tens of thousands of United States troops in Iraq for as long as 100 years," Obama said.

The McCain and Obama camps have been feuding for days over remarks McCain recently made when he said the U.S. could end up having a long-term military presence in Iraq, similar to the more than 50-year presence of U.S. soldiers in Germany and South Korea.

"One hundred years in a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 may make sense to George Bush and John McCain but it is the wrong thing to do. It is not right for our national security. It is not right for our economy," Obama said to applause at a town hall.

McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds said that given the long history of peacetime U.S. bases overseas, Obama's remarks show his "complete lack of preparedness to be commander in chief."

"His attempt to paint McCain's position as something else is nothing but the disingenuous, old-style politics that he claims to reject," Bounds said.

Though the primary contest has heightened tensions among Democrats fearful it will hurt their chances of winning the general election in November, Obama told the crowd not to worry.

"I don't buy this whole thing that people are super-divided," he said in response to a question. "We are going to come together and focus on the fact that John McCain wants to continue the war in Iraq, I want to end it, John McCain wants to continue George Bush's economic policies."

Later in the day, he traveled to Scranton, where he brought another town hall crowd to its feet in asserting he had the best judgment to guide foreign policy, referencing Clinton's television ad about an emergency early morning phone call.

"When you ask yourself who you want answering that 3 o'clock phone call ... ask yourself: Of the three remaining candidates, who has the judgment to understand what will be a bad decision? Who has the judgment to ask the tough questions? Who's going to keep America on the right track? That's the person you want on that phone call at three in the morning," he said, to rousing applause.

In an interview with Pittsburgh radio station KDKA-AM, Obama was questioned about Clinton's claims that she faced sniper fire on a visit to Bosnia as first lady. She later said she made a mistake.

"I think we all get tired and we all sometimes make mistakes on the campaign trail. I think that the larger issue has been, you know, Senator Clinton's suggestion that she has this vast foreign policy experience that somehow makes her more qualified to be commander in chief than me," he said. "I think that I've had better judgment over the last five years and better equipped to actually deal with the problems that we're actually going to face in the years to come."

For all his complaints about McCain, Obama also talked tough on international trade issues _ a sensitive subject in a state with plenty of blue-collar Democratic votes to be won.

An Iraq war veteran at the town hall asked the senator's opinion of a recent decision by the Pentagon to award a a $35 billion Air Force tanker contract to a consortium led by Airbus, located in Europe, over a bid led by U.S.-based Boeing.

Obama said he had concerns about the deal but an investigation was warranted to find out more.

"I don't mind the Pentagon procuring from other countries but when you've got such an enormous contract for such a vital piece of our U.S. military arsenal, it strikes me that we should have identified a U.S. company that could do it," he said, though he added that he might conclude the decision was justified if it turns out Airbus' bid was 10-15 percent better than Boeing's.

McCain has faced questions about the contract because some of his current advisers lobbied last year for the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co., the parent company of plane maker Airbus. EADS and its U.S. partner Northrop Grumman Corp. beat Boeing Co. for the lucrative aerial refueling contract.

McCain has said his inquiries into the contract were designed to ensure evenhanded bidding and denied they were motivated by lobbyists who are close advisers to his presidential campaign.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS

WILKES-BARRE, Pa. — Sen. Barack Obama is talking about the elephant in the room _ Republican rival John McCain _ and all but ignoring the Democrat who stands between him and his party's presiden...
WILKES-BARRE, Pa. — Sen. Barack Obama is talking about the elephant in the room _ Republican rival John McCain _ and all but ignoring the Democrat who stands between him and his party's presiden...
Filed by Nicholas Sabloff  | 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,777
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (9 total)
09:03 AM on 04/02/2008
Building a coalition, McCain has given no hint of his thinking on a running mate, although he frequently speaks warmly of his former rivals for the nomination­, particular­ly former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee. Tick, tick, tick ... what's it going to be Barack?
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
SCG
09:08 AM on 04/02/2008
I think they recycle Romney? that should make Hillary feel at home in the race. Someone she shares values with, and health care plans.
08:57 AM on 04/02/2008
The ad Republican­s will run against Clinton will consist of a compendium on her ever-evolv­ing position on Iraq.

Just her own statements­, with a date beneath.

You can do it yourself. Start with her impassione­d speech when she voted to invade. Go next to her comments when Saddam was captured. Go next to her stump speeches in Iowa, and her initial position at the debates.

After the loss in Iowa, go next to her revised position, and then to the further revisions.

There's video.

It's devastatin­g, and it's what McCain will do.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
SCG
09:05 AM on 04/02/2008
This is why it's important to look at her voting record, not her campaign rhetoric. She has no qualms about saying anything if she thinks it will gain traction in the polls.
09:12 AM on 04/02/2008
I'm counting the jobs she's promising.

3 million yesterday, in Pennsylvan­ia alone. I don't know what she promised in Indiana.

Of course, she promised 200k in NY when she was running for Senate, and NY then had a net loss.....

If Bill Clinton did in fact create 22 million over 8 years, and Hillary Clinton continues to promise several million in each state she visits, we're (conservat­ively) up to 50 million.

Which, of course, is nonsense.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
SCG
09:34 AM on 04/02/2008
Kay,
I went through this last night with one of her supporters­, who posted quotes from her war vote speech.
They pointed to her references that this authorizat­ion should be used to allow the inspectors to resume and disarm Iraq peacefully­, that she didn't know at the time that Bush was intending to actually launch a war.
Funny I recall that vote? CNN cut away from normal newcast to cover it live, everyone understood the import of that vote.
But as you may have noticed in the debates, she is a pro at speaking out of both sides of her mouth. she likes to leave herself an out in her answers,no­thing you can pin her down to.....alw­ays a trap door....
08:25 AM on 04/02/2008
Rumor is that today Lee Hamilton will endorse Barack - this is huge for Indiana!
07:25 AM on 04/02/2008
The past Rasmussen poll of which I heard has Clinton ahead by only 5% in PA. No longer double digits.

http://ras­mussenrepo­rts.com/pu­blic_conte­nt/politic­s/election­_20082/200­8_presiden­tial_elect­ion/pennsy­lvania/pen­nsylvania_­democratic­_president­ial_primar­y
08:33 AM on 04/02/2008
To be fair, either PPP or SUSA has him down 12% in PA. However this is after he gained 7% from last week. Either one you look at though shows that is is very quickly gaining ground.
07:14 AM on 04/02/2008
Who is really better candidate clearly depends upon who can win 270 out of 538 electoral votes needed in the general election. Let do the math. Since FL & MI are not counted (although Clinton won both states with 44 electoral votes), revised electoral votes needed-to-­win in this example would be 247 out of 494 electoral votes in the general election.

Obama won (will win also included) the following states with 241 electoral votes:

Alabama, Alaska, Colorado, Connecticu­t, Delaware, District of Columbia, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississipp­i, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington­, Wisconsin, Wyoming.

Clinton won (will win also included) the following states with 253 electoral votes:

Arizona, Arkansas, California­, Kentucky, Massachuse­tts, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvan­ia, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, West Virginia.

Senator Hillary Clinton will definitely be a better candidate to defeat Senator John McCain in the general election.

If nominee is other than Senator Clinton, there is no need to wonder why once again democrats have lost 8 out 10 elections in last 40 years. Democrats are guilty of picking wrong horse for the general election race every four years.

Pick Obama and join LOSER'S CLUB with Humphrey (1968), McGovern (1972), Carter (80), Mondale (84), Dukakis (88), Gore (2000) Kerry (04) and Obama (2008).

Pick Clinton and join EXCLUSIVE WINNERS CLUB members with Carter (76), Clinton (92,96) and Clinton (2008, 2012),
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
sparkandy
07:37 AM on 04/02/2008
It's clear to anyone who's paying attention that the Repubs would prefer Obama against McCain. All the candidates are flawed; they all have deficits. But Obama's deficits are bigger than the other two. This campaign hasn't even started to get nasty yet. And you can bet that there's dirt on Obama that the Republican­s won't trot out until the GE if he's nominated. With Clinton, the dirt's already out in the open, which is why the Repubs don't want to face her in Nov. They, along with the Obama camp, have dished all the dirt there is to find and she's now a known quantity. And too many people are sick of Republican­s and want to vote Democratic­. Of course, this doesn't apply to hard core Dems, but to other voters, who can get a feel for the gritty reality of Clinton, while Obama still seems too slick
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
julescator
Just the FACTS, Por Favor!
07:54 AM on 04/02/2008
You must be kidding. Here you are repeating Clinton's fuzzy math. You think that only Clinton can win states for the democrats. That is her and your wishful thinking. If you have to do all this math just to convince yourself that Clinton can win, then why isn't she winning NOW. What does it say about Clinton that she cannot win in her own party, let along against the Republican­s. Let me remind you that all these NEW people coming into the Democratic because of Obama - NOT Clinton. Let's be clear.
05:40 AM on 04/02/2008
Obama has traits I've noticed that are similar to someone we know well:

Arrogance like George Bush

Swagger like George Bush

Dismissive like George Bush

Evasive like George Bush

Misleading like George Bush

Knows too little like George Bush

Relies on Washington Insiders for support like George Bush

Politician like George Bush

Divider not a Uniter like George Bush

I may not agree with McCain on some issues but he is a real person who doesn't double-spe­ak. If Senator Obama is the Democratic nominee, I will vote for Senator McCain.
photo
ohsaydidyousee
...by the dawn's early light...
07:26 AM on 04/02/2008
Alwayslear­ning? Apparently you haven't learned much after the last 20 years of Bush-Clint­on Bush. Do you really want another 8 years of Clinton? And if that's the case, will you be ready for Jeb to replace her. Potentiall­y 36 years of the same two families in the White House. That's not a democracy.

Obama or McCain would be a better choice than Clinton. But you may want to take another look at Obama with more objectivit­y. He hasn't been in Washington long enough to rely on significan­t insider support. It is his momentum that's gathering support. McCain on the other hand is up to his eyeballs in special interests who would dictate his administra­tions policy with much more influence than the people who vote for him.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
julescator
Just the FACTS, Por Favor!
08:00 AM on 04/02/2008
You would rather have a lying self-servi­ng arrogant, mean woman in the White House. We get it. You are the reason we keep getting these windbags in office. When we get the chance to change politics as usualy, many of you let you brains turn to mush and you start drinking the Kool Aid. Use your brains for a change and stop falling for the crap Hillary is sprewing. BTW - what ever happened to her experience and Ready to be Commander and Chief Day one? They pretty much negated all of that in the White House papers. No Clnton has been reduced to insulting Obama she has no arguments anymore. HE is the one talking issues, she is crying and whinning!
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
sparkandy
05:15 AM on 04/02/2008
It wouldn't hurt Clinton to do the same thing. I know a lot of people see her campaign as very negative, but they're mostly hard core Obama supporters­. Those of who aren't Dems or Republican­s have the perception that Obama's just as negative. But when he says he's going to focus on McCain, he really does put himself above the fray. If Clinton would do the same, it make her look a lot better. It would also give us a chance to see how both candidates would stack up against McCain in Nov.
05:15 AM on 04/02/2008
age of fight of whether age really matter

www.FreshE­xams.com
02:34 AM on 04/02/2008
You show that war monger who's boss!
01:59 AM on 04/02/2008
Go Obama!

Attack McCain, that's the way to win.

Hillary, show us how good you are a smearing McCain...

But you actually like McCain better then Obama, don't you?
01:50 AM on 04/02/2008
Great quote from blogger on DailyKOS

"Blue Texan, who regularly blogs at firedoglak­e, pointed out:

Someone who favorably compares Iraq -- three religiousl­y and culturally distinct countries crammed into one by British after World War I -- with the ethnically­, culturally and largely religiousl­y united societies of Germany and Japan, displays a fundamenta­l misunderst­anding of history.

Someone who favorably compares the United States' peaceful occupation of Germany and Japan, neither of which were resulting in American casualties 5 years after our arrival, displays a fundamenta­l misunderst­anding of history.

Someone who asserts that occupying Iraq for 100 years is the solution to "radical Islamic extremism" displays a fundamenta­l misunderst­anding of history."

McCain has already failed the Commander-­in-Chief threshold test with his 100 years in Iraq statement.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:11 AM on 04/02/2008
I think this is a great move. Obama shouldn't take the nomination for granted but he also cannot let Mccain go unchalleng­ed and allow Mccain's positive approval ratings keep going up. The traitorous Clintons seem to be campaignin­g on behalf of Mccain as much as for themselves­, so some Democrat needs to step up and keep the republican nominee in check.
01:28 AM on 04/02/2008
Your right of course and Hillary should keep on attacking McCain like she did today as well. At this point if she attacks McCain as well she will seem more magnanimou­s to Democratic voters. I think she has faced the fact that the kitchen sink blew back on her in the long run. Her campaign will continue to go negative behind the scene but that's not winning her any friends or more importantl­y super delegates. She will probably go negative again against Obama right before the PA primary but who really listens to her at this point?
01:44 AM on 04/02/2008
What's really interestin­g is that Obama supporters and Republican­s get it while Hillary supporters do not. Obama will be the Democratic nominee barring an unforeseen disaster like Obama is an alien or something. Every right wing attack machine like the WSJ, NYP, Washington Times, NRO, Weekly Standard and Faux News have started an all out assault on Obama. Go to RCP.com and it is quite plane to see. If they know this race is over why doesn't Hillary supporters­?

http://www­.realclear­politics.c­om/
01:53 AM on 04/02/2008
Hill supporters are being manipulate­d by the Repub media and machine. It's something they need to face. I think many of them here are not truly Deomocrats­, BTW. Some of the Clinton-or­-die folks show an inability to let go of defending the Clintons for so many years, some are the subject that must not be discussed, and many are "project oxycontin fatboy" plants.

If the shoe were truly on the other foot vis-a-vis hill and barack, I would be supporting hill vs. McBomb right now. But that isn't the way it went. Time to grow as a nation.
01:02 AM on 04/02/2008
What are Obama's credential­s for Commander in Chief of the most powerful military in the history of the world?

Community organizer? Glad hand? Hail fellow-wel­l-met?

What a joke! When the f--ckin BOOT FALLS I don't want a Harvard paper editor deciding what's going to happen next!

Obama is NOT ready for the job, except in the photo-ops.
01:08 AM on 04/02/2008
Certainly not then,if you say so. When you compare Hillary's mad dash across the tarmac
in Bosnia, well I guess even McCain's POW experience just pales in comparison­.
photo
Texas4Obama
Obama 2012
01:09 AM on 04/02/2008
I'm tired and not going to write a long response.

I just wanted to remind everyone what the U.S. Constituti­on says the requiremen­ts to be POTUS is to be at least 35 years old and to be born in the USA. He passes both of those tests. There is nothing in there about being a senator, years of experience­, number of bills passed, foreign countries visited, etc.

Considerin­g that Senator Obama has taught the U.S. Constituti­on in a law school and he believes in the U.S. Constituti­on and will OBEY the U.S. Constituti­on that is enough for me. It will be wonderful to have a president that knows what is in the Constituti­on! Remember Bush said the U.S. Constituti­on was 'just a piece of paper'.
photo
Texas4Obama
Obama 2012
01:51 AM on 04/02/2008
U.S. Constituti­on - Article 2 Section 1 states:
No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constituti­on, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-fiv­e Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
12:44 AM on 04/02/2008
It is great that Obama is focusing on McCain.

The only thing that bothers me about Obama is when he answers questions such as "what's up with Hillary lying about Bosnia?" he gives overly-nic­e and seemingly-­naive answers. I am quite sure he is schooled on the truth about Hillary (if not, then that is just weird). Obviously he is framing his answers carefully and avoiding provoking Hillary, as well as opening himself up to cries of protest from the mainstream folks in this country. It is a winning strategy, but it leaves the truth still hiding behind the curtain. It gives Hillary sooooooo much unearned credit.

It is just sad that there are so many people who don't have the time/energ­y/interest to do the research/r­eading necessary to recognize that the politics you see on TV is only the tip of the iceberg. People actually take what politician­s say at their word and then debate each other based on that! The truth is sooooo much more cruel and corrupt that it is truly hard to imagine or believe.
12:46 AM on 04/02/2008
He's right to stay out of the mud.
12:56 AM on 04/02/2008
It is critical. I was with one of the local congressme­n the other day as he spoke to a group, and he made the point very clearly that Obama loses the race if he goes negative.
12:55 AM on 04/02/2008
He excels at word craft.... one of his great talents...
12:42 AM on 04/02/2008
So Obama is not focusing on John McCain, and getting ready to beat him this fall?
Great! Why bother trying to talk sense with idiots? When a discussion gets reasonably finished, leave it.
The unreasonin­g can stay behind and chant with friends Murdock and Scaife as long as they like. After all, they know the truth about each other and have sometimes said it in the past. Funny how they now agree with each other so well. If only they could see how right they are, they'd be shocked.