Obama's Electability Questioned
By Dan McLaughlin Posted in 2008 | Barack Obama | Obamafiles | Paul Krugman — Comments (9) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Another pundit weighs in on the risk the Democrats are taking if Obama coasts to the nomination:
[F]aith in Mr. Obama's transformational ability rests on surprisingly little evidence.
Mr. Obama's ability to attract wildly enthusiastic crowds to rallies is a good omen for the general election; so is his ability to raise large sums. But neither necessarily points to a landslide victory.
Polling numbers aren't much help: for now, at least, you can find polls telling you anything you want to hear . . .
What we do know is that Mr. Obama has never faced a serious Republican opponent — and that he has not yet faced the hostile media treatment . . .
+++
Bob Somerby of the media-criticism site dailyhowler.com predicts that Mr. Obama will be “Dukakised”: “treated as an alien, unsettling presence.” That sounds all too plausible.
+++
And some Illinois legislators apparently feel that even there Mr. Obama got a bit more glory than he deserved. “No one wants to carry the ball 99 yards all the way to the one-yard line, and then give it to the halfback who gets all the credit,” one state senator complained to a local journalist.
The rabid right-winger making these arguments? Paul Krugman.
To the death!!!! convention!!!
___________________________________
Two thirds of the world is covered by water,
the other third is covered by Champ Bailey.
Could things escalate to the scale of a religious war, as two secular religions in stalemate with each other each try to pull out a victory for their side? Last one standing wins?
n/t
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
is definitely & unapoligetically shilling for Hillary. He does bring up some good points, but it feels kinda dirty to agree even in part... :>
He and Michelle have transformed themselves from low earning political front lawyers to multi-millionaires in just a few short years.
He has accomplished this without ever holding a responsible job or passing any significant legislation.
This proves he has great ability to change.
To change our money and his experience into his money and our experience.
I wish Krugman the best of luck in making trouble for Obama, but this Clinton groupie is yesterday's news like his idol. I doubt he's much value in the Democratic infighting department.
Clinton and her campaign are the only ones that can accomplish much for McCain. Go Hillary, we're all counting on you!
HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater
So, just so you understand that context. He's hoping he can persuade enough Democratic voters to go his way. And, natch, he's doing so by citing the "Republican slime machine" they all identify with.
However, once this is over and Obama has the nomination, you can rest assured that Paul "Don't call me Jack" Krugman will have "come to Jesus" (so to speak). You won't be reading anything but glowing things about Obama from him.
He's right of course -- the Dems are putting an awful lot of faith into an unknown. And they're betting that because Obama makes them swoon, he'll also make voters in the general election swoon.
They may be right. But it may also come crashing down to earth. It's the political equivalent of going to the casino and putting every dollar you've got on "red" at the Roulette wheel. You either score big and score quick, or you crap out and go home.
and from what I gather the reason he doesn't like Obama is that he dares to blame the system, both Reps and Dems, for our problems rather than the Dems themselves. This piece will likely do Obama more good than harm.
The Provocateur