ask.com

New Republic: Obama's Coalition Shifting From Moderates To McGovern-esque

The New Republic   |   April 23, 2008 05:02 PM

Read More: Barack Obama, George Mcgovern, Obama Coalition, Obama Mcgovern, Obama Moderates, The New Republic, Breaking Politics News
Show your support.
Buzz this article up.

Hillary Clinton won a decisive ten-round decision over Barack Obama in Pennsylvania's Democratic primary, but she didn't score a knockout. The struggle continues. Clinton still has virtually no chance of overtaking Obama's delegate lead or his edge in the popular vote. And the superdelegates will be loath to ignore this advantage. Meanwhile, Obama's weaknesses as a general election candidate grow more apparent with each successive primary.

Clinton's best chance of winning the nomination was to win Pennsylvania so decisively that she would have set off a media firestorm about Obama's electability--one that would lead superdelegates to wonder whether she would not be a much, much stronger candidate in November. In the wake of revelations about Obama's relationship with Pastor Jeremiah Wright, Clinton was ahead by 15 percent or more in polls. I visited Pennsylvania during this time, and could feel the growing disillusionment with Obama.

Read the whole story here.


Comments
337
Pending Comments
0

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

Hint sample
View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next › Last » (4 pages total)
collapse ajax2 See Profile I'm a Fan of ajax2

As Hillary thundered for nuclear annihilation and fired the flames of bigotry, John B. Judis herd a nuance that shifted Obama. What big ears you have sir.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 03:35 PM on 04/24/2008
collapse beautykilledbeast See Profile I'm a Fan of beautykilledbeast

Even though I was only nine years old, George McGovern's loss hurt me very deeply and in this Republican Ascendancy, the anger and pain have become chronic.
Please remember people a statistic I saw in the Spring of 1973. Had they known then what they didn't know before, sixty-five percent of the public would have voted for George McGovern.
That's some serious buyer's remorse.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 01:51 PM on 04/24/2008
collapse vsign See Profile I'm a Fan of vsign

That was painful to have him lose so badly. We all lost so much.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 03:34 PM on 04/24/2008
collapse heal57 See Profile I'm a Fan of heal57

It is apparent that since Obama is going to win the Democratic nomination, all the republicans, MSM, the Wall Street Jurnal owned now by Rupert Murdoch, our conservativer newspapers such as the Arizona Republic are spinning this nosense against Sen Obama because they don't know what else to do but try to somehow ruin his campaign. However, this is an impossibility. Just do the math!
Even Jenna Bush said she may not vote republican. The status quo is not ready for the sweeping changes an Obama administration will make. Obama will pull from the middle and even some on the right. I ought to know. Obama supporters, hold tight.

Independents for Obama '08

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:07 PM on 04/24/2008
collapse castlerider See Profile I'm a Fan of castlerider


Hold everything!

I was there, and witnessed very strongly the McGovern campaign. Because of the lack of good communication and the total ease that corporate elites had in manipulating the Media in 1972, McGovern's message was never really brought forth.

People, get a clue!!
McGovern would have been a HELL OF A LOT BETTER PRESIDENT THEN RICHARD NIXON!!
What did Nixon give us that term? Watergate.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:42 AM on 04/24/2008
collapse antaeus See Profile I'm a Fan of antaeus

Who is saying that McGovern would not have been a better president? Of course he would have, but that's not the point. The point is that Middle America, rightly or wrongly, perceived McGovern as being too far out of the mainstream. As did the voters in Ohio and Pennsylvania with Obama.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 01:06 PM on 04/24/2008
collapse vsign See Profile I'm a Fan of vsign

I think as Democrats we have ignored "Middle America" too long and not won the Presidency because of our own failings. My husband is a "Reagan Democrat" and is upset that he voted for Reagan. He is a disabled worker from the lead and gold mines. His career was shortchanged when the mines shut down in the mid 80's because of economic changes that Reagan made. He was determined to vote Democratic this year. He does not want to vote against his economic interest ever again. But he will not vote for Obama. Obama is not in touch with who he is and he cannot feel right about voting for someone that out of touch with America.

Obama is too far out of the mainstream. I don't like the way working class people are talked about by his supporters either. And I don't like the way Obama praises in anyway Reagan and disses on Bill Clinton's presidency. If he doesn't respect the Clinton era - why call yourself a Democrat?

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 02:15 PM on 04/24/2008
collapse castlerider See Profile I'm a Fan of castlerider


Of course He respects the Clinton presidency. It's not his fault that he is placed in the position where he has to take up for himself against his opponent when her husbanc happens to be the one attacking him.
Obama will be an excellent president for the working class because the working class is the fundamental part of our economy that must be recharged.
All this talk about him not being for the working people is nonsense. Clinton will be hated and attacked from every angle, not able to get legislation that is so badly needed, and will probably be instrumental in Dems losing the house in Senate to thr rethugs in 2010 the way her husband lost them in '94.
Sorry, we can't afford that.
Your husband may not vote for Obama, but when he wins and has been Pres. for over a year, I'm sure he will be pleasantly surprised.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 02:26 PM on 04/24/2008
collapse vsign See Profile I'm a Fan of vsign

I appreciate that you still want to believe in him. It is out of our hands now.
Obama has already alienated middle America. The numbers from PA show that. The numbers from the remaining primaries will show that too. His negatives will only go down.

It is Obama's decision when to leave the contest. If he wants a future in the Democratic Party he will have to try not to be seen as the loser. We in the Democratic party do not give losers another chance. So Obama needs to make sure he doesn't let his negatives go too low.

Obama cannot blame Hillary and Bill and the debate moderators and the press and working people - any longer. The Republicans are attacking him now and he needs to show how well he can stand up to them and to McCain.

I predict he will let it go on too long and lose his change to run again over it. He'll be like Kerry or Kennedy in the Senate and no longer have any real influence over the party. He will become one of the losers.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 03:31 PM on 04/24/2008
collapse MoreCowBellNow See Profile I'm a Fan of MoreCowBellNow

Anything that isn't completely pro-Obama is scare talk?

Women that have spent more than a few years on the professional field that support Clinton in the remaining primary are now NEVER going to switch to Obama. They've been hearing the same bs for years--that they're not polite enough and need to soften up. This whole, "Clinton is a negative campaigner" is not only going to fall on deaf ears to these women, but it's totally sexist. No person ever running for president has been accused of being negative like Clinton and this is soooo benign of campaign compared to past years. Unless you compare it to Kerry who was too nice and failed. JFK primary was the nastiest one in history. So cut the crap with this negative campaining argument aginst Clinton.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:40 AM on 04/24/2008
collapse vsign See Profile I'm a Fan of vsign

I agree "MoreCowBellNow".

There are so many of us that will not vote for Obama - I hope the superdelegates listen to us.

Obama shows how weak he is by complaining about Hillary's campaigning. His trying to pretend to "be above it all" does not work with us and it won't work with the general public in the long run. His campaign tactics are far worse than Hillary's because he has to pretend too much to be what he isn't. Hillary makes comparisons. Obama's campaign kicks and screams at Hillary (gives her the finger) and then runs away and hides behind Obama's "coolness". None of it will connect to voters outside of the far left who are elitist enough to think Obama actually represents them.

We are beginnning to see how the Republicans will "define" Obama as an extremist. And he is. Hillary supporters have seen it for a long while. The definition will stick because it is true.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:09 PM on 04/24/2008
collapse ajax2 See Profile I'm a Fan of ajax2

Anybody against corporate wars is extreme to war profiteers.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:26 PM on 04/24/2008
collapse vsign See Profile I'm a Fan of vsign

That is why Obama can't win the General. No matter how "right" you are (and I actually agree with you) - the American public is not ready to dismantle our national security interests.

Think beyond your ideology and think about the American public as a whole and what most Americans are ready for. This will determine how people vote in the General.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:40 PM on 04/24/2008
collapse ballewb See Profile I'm a Fan of ballewb

I actually think that the primary has not been all that negative, despite what people would have me believe. I remember other primaries and general elections that were much more mean spirited.

Additionally, I think the notion of switching to an entirely different political party simply because your prefered candidate does not in the nomination is retarded. Sorry, I meant to say immature (at least as immature as calling someone's ideas retarded). The positions of BO and HC are not that far apart. Switching to the Republican side rather than voting for the OTHER Democrat boggles my mind. It's like saying that if you cannot have Oreos rather than Hydrox cookies, you will just munch on some broken glass instead. It does not make sense.

Finally, please stop generalizing your opinions on larger portions of society than you have the authority to speak for. Just because you may never vote for BO does not mean that all women that would have voted for HC will not vote for BO in the general election.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:02 PM on 04/24/2008
collapse vsign See Profile I'm a Fan of vsign

The results from the exit polls in PA show that about twice the number of Hillary voters will either not vote or vote for McCain.

Hillary supporters represent more of the moderates in the party so this makes sense to me that the strongest feelings against Obama are from this group. We will not vote for someone so ill prepared to have this much power and control over our resources - no matter that he is a Democrat. As far as I'm concerned, Obama represents a third party trying to take over the Democratic label.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:17 PM on 04/24/2008
collapse EinChicago See Profile I'm a Fan of EinChicago

Did Obama start out as a McGoivern type candidate? No. But he has effectively been backed into a corner by the fringe who have selected him as their Cult leader following Kucinich's withdrawal, and now he is stuck in the McGovern role. That's the problem with the fringe; they're louder and more shrill than any other group, which creates a false impression of size. Obama is on track to make McGovern look like 72 look like a respectable loss. He is systematically alienating the important swing states and putting all his eggs in one basket that hardcore red south-eastern states will have some type of apotheosis on a mass scale and turn blue in the fall. It won't happen. McCain, for all his faults wa sa pretty smart choice by the repugs because he effectively takes most western states out of play when run against Obama. UT, NV, NM, WY, TX, WY and ID are guaranteed wins for Arizona McCain if he runs against Obama, who is as unpopular with the hispanic voters in the southwest as he is with the AA voters in the south east. Obama has done a bang up job of alienating the traditional big swing states such as FL, OH, PA and MI. The so-called 50 state strategy was always nothing more than a small state strategy as it intrinsically involves telling the traditional big swing state voters they don't matter to the dems anymore, e.g., Obama's handling of FL/PA.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:09 AM on 04/24/2008
collapse ajax2 See Profile I'm a Fan of ajax2

Is Racism Moving Clinton Camp From Bush Lite To Goldwater Crazies.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:42 AM on 04/24/2008
collapse fourex See Profile I'm a Fan of fourex

Has Hillary move past Bush Lite into pure bigotry and racism, the core of the Radical Right?

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:23 AM on 04/24/2008
collapse heal57 See Profile I'm a Fan of heal57

Yes, Hillary should be on the McCain ticket.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:10 PM on 04/24/2008
collapse EinChicago See Profile I'm a Fan of EinChicago

And the core of a Rev. Wright sermon. ;)

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:10 AM on 04/24/2008
collapse ajax2 See Profile I'm a Fan of ajax2

No it wasn't. But it is centered in Bush, Lott, Thurmond, Hannitty, Rush and O'Reilly, racism a core Republican value.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:29 PM on 04/24/2008
collapse EinChicago See Profile I'm a Fan of EinChicago

Which would make Obama "typicla white person" a republican, I guess.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:42 PM on 04/24/2008
collapse bison1 See Profile I'm a Fan of bison1

McGovern has endorse Clinton.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:53 AM on 04/24/2008
collapse ajax2 See Profile I'm a Fan of ajax2

Hagee has endorsed McCain.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:29 PM on 04/24/2008
collapse ibsteve2u See Profile I'm a Fan of ibsteve2u

Hey, watch it - this is politics...you know that facts just get in the way.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:58 AM on 04/24/2008
collapse JerryTheAngel See Profile I'm a Fan of JerryTheAngel

Senator McGovern was a war hero. He received medals for flying dangerous missions during WW2. Richard Nixon became one of the most corrupt presidents in our history. Just another example of where the American voters cared more about negative campaigning then the issues and got it wrong AGAIN, just like in 2000 (scratch that, Al Gore won in 2000) and especially in 2004, when Senator Kerry another war hero who was attacked for his service to his country and Bush the war criminal won, instead of an American war hero. It just shows you how the majority of the electorate in this country can be manipulated so easily with propaganda and lies. Will it happen again this fall?

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:47 AM on 04/24/2008
collapse ballewb See Profile I'm a Fan of ballewb

Go read some history.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:04 PM on 04/24/2008
collapse vsign See Profile I'm a Fan of vsign

McGovern represented the anti-war activists, far left of the Democratic Party. Obama represents the same people within the party.

Most Americans prefer leaders who govern from the center. We really don't want extremists as leaders.

Anti-war activists believe they are more powerful than they are at times like this when there is an unpopular war. They come out in great numbers and challenge the centrists in the party during the nomination process.

It has happened before - it is happening now. And like before - they will lose in a big way in the general. They are over estimating the sentiments of the country. They do not know the American people. They have always tended to be elitist - thinking they know "better" than most people.

Most of us want a change in Iraq - but we are not ready to lay down our weapons.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:38 AM on 04/24/2008
collapse heal57 See Profile I'm a Fan of heal57

I'm pretty conservative on quite a few issues [economics, etc] and I have been against the Iraq war since it started. I am no left winger. Go spin somewhere else. Our soldiers are dying for oil revenues. You're terrified of an Obama victory; well get used to it.

Independents for Obama

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:13 PM on 04/24/2008
collapse KYSmiling See Profile I'm a Fan of KYSmiling

Most Americans prefer leaders who govern from the center. We really don't want extremists as leaders.

Can we say Bush?

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:19 AM on 04/24/2008
collapse ballewb See Profile I'm a Fan of ballewb

Can we say wedge issue voters being manipulated by the evil genius Karl Rove?

Can we say that using the first person plural annoying?

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:06 PM on 04/24/2008
collapse vsign See Profile I'm a Fan of vsign

Bush got elected (kinda) with the help of the religious right who were extremely anti-abortion. I think Bush got re-elected because Americans wanted experience since we were in the middle of a war. Now the Republicans have gauged it correctly again by excluding the religious right to a great extent and are presenting Americans with a General Election candidate without the an extreme wedge issue like anti-abortion. They will run on experience again.

If we offer a candidate with little experience - Obama will fit within the "extreme" stereotype.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:29 AM on 04/24/2008
collapse ajax2 See Profile I'm a Fan of ajax2

Your analysis of the past seven years is devious and juvenile.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:31 PM on 04/24/2008
collapse SuppersReady See Profile I'm a Fan of SuppersReady

Unlike in 1972, the majority of the public was not against the war. Only the young who were regarded as hippies who were crazy and irrational. The young of that time (Including Hillary) are now in thier late 50's and early 60,s. The middle-aged majority who voted for Nixon are either dead or living in a nursing home in Pennsylvania. This was over 30 years ago. The most high-tech thing in an average home was a T.V. and a blender......You cannot even compare the two. This time Obama supporters want to think about the future not dwell in the past.

As for you VSIGN, you don't want to lay down YOUR weapons? How ironic. It is those who are not fighting in this war and probably never will who are so pro-war. Why don't you vote for McCain. He will surley give you or one of your family members a chance to die for thier country. The Draft....it;s coming and you will be crying your eyes out when it does.......

Veteran for Obama

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:19 AM on 04/24/2008
collapse vsign See Profile I'm a Fan of vsign

I am not pro-war. In 1972, I voted for McGovern. Most Democrats in 1972 were against the Vietnam War. Isn't that what got McGovern nominated? Did McGovern win the General? Nixon knew he had to bring our troops home from Vietnam to get reelected and did.

The Republicans know they have to stop our troops from getting killed in Iraq in order to continue our presence in the middle east. That will happen no matter who is elected. Americans will not support this war if we are paying too great a price. McCain is promising to end the "cost" of this war. With his experience, he will likely win the General.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:39 AM on 04/24/2008
collapse vsign See Profile I'm a Fan of vsign

McCain will win unless the superdelegates "save the party" and nominate Hillary.

We need a candidate who is seen by the general American public as "in touch" and experienced so that matched against McCain - the Democrats can talk about our solutions being better.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:59 AM on 04/24/2008
collapse ajax2 See Profile I'm a Fan of ajax2

We do not need two corporate war mongers.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:32 PM on 04/24/2008
collapse vsign See Profile I'm a Fan of vsign

Vote for who you want.

But why do you think he could win the General?

Maybe small Democratic changes are better than the Republican changes.

And what makes you think Obama would do anything different than defending our national interest? What makes you think he'd lay down our weapons and we'd have war no more?

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 02:26 PM on 04/24/2008