May 12 2008
OK, I’m Convinced Obama Is The Next Dukakis
I had not really seen any connection between Sen Obama’s campaign and the disastrous campaign of Governor Michael Dukakis against George Bush Sr in 1988. But that was up until I read Susan Estrich try and make the case Obama is not another Dukakis. Tried and failed, that is. By the time I got through her article she had me convinced Obama was going to be another Dukakis, without a doubt. Seems the Environmental Republican was all over this one a while back.
24 Responses to “OK, I’m Convinced Obama Is The Next Dukakis”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
The exact same support base the eggheads and blacks.
A recipe for a repeat of the Dukakis Caucus.
Paul Begala even said so on a recent appear on one of the taking head shows
Clinton herself is more forcefully disparaging Obama’s chances to win in November, asserting that his support “among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again.” Her friend and unofficial adviser Paul Begala went further, bluntly charging that Obama’s coalition of “eggheads and African-Americans” spells defeat for Democrats.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Buqry41EC8k
Okay, let me get this straight:
One candidate is an honors graduate from Columbia and Harvard Law School, the other a bottom feeder graduating 894 out of 899 who has never had a paycheck in his entire life that didn’t come from Uncle Sam or his wife.
One candidate is attractive, articulate and informed, the other is borderline senescent who can’t keep straight who we’re fighting with and who we’re fighting against, and who wants to perpetuate the policies that have made George Bush the most disapproved president in US history.
But, money speaks louder than words, so let us look to the Futures Market and the Invisible Hand of the marketplace, where the Dems currently enjoy a 58-41 advantage among people who put their money where their mouth is.
AJ, Obama is Dukakis only in your dreams.
Soothie’s post clearly defines what the Left looks for in their leaders: all style and little substance.
Oh, and they worship at the altar of the “elite” universities as G_d’s gift to the world.
Soothie, I got news for ya: an honors class of seniors at one of the I V League schools (aka Ivy League) couldn’t answer this question: who is George C. Marshall? Zero, nada, not one got it right.
How can you guys defend a country you know nothing about?
And, as to the polls : you all are making the same big mistake you made before…misreading the polls. All true Americans want to win in the GWOT theater of Iraq. Period.
Yep, an “attractive, articulate and informed” candidate who doesn’t even know how many states there are in the US.
An “attractive, articulate and informed” candidate who said that 10,000 people were killed when it was really 12.
Yep, he’s articulate and informed all right.
Gosh, this looks like the Libby trial all over again.
You can all apologize for being woefully wrong and willfully ignorant on November 12th. Look forward to hearing from you
The nastiest thing Dukakis had behind him was hippies, lawyers, and dopers, and Code Pinko types. Obama has hardcore enemies of America in his corner. Obama is far more dangerous that Dukakis ever could have dramed to be.
“dreamed”…sorry. it’s monday
Right on, 75!!!
Dukakis is Greek for “Mondale”. Obama’s election loss is really going to emotionally upset some people.
Soothie
You still “don’t have it straight.” Your street hustler candidate is deficient in geography (57 states) and history (FDR negotiating with Hitler), reflecting badly on Ivy League degrees.
Doing the right thing is seldom popular, and certainly not with the Terrorist Lobby.
In light of the fact that true Conservative Bob Barr has announced he will run as a 3d party candidate, and Ron Paul (another REAL conservative) has been organizing folks across the country to stage an embarrassing public revolt against Sen. John McCain when Republicans gather for their national convention in Minnesota at the beginning of September . . . I will sit happily by as the Republicans self destruct and suffer the most humiliating defeat since LBJ spanked Barry Goldwater.
Actually, Macker…there are 57 states. They just happen to be th 57 nations of the OIC!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organisation_of_the_Islamic_Conference
From Wikipedia…
“The Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) is an international organization with a permanent delegation to the United Nations. It groups 57 nations, most of which are Islamic, from the Middle East, Africa, Central Asia, Caucasus, Balkan, Southeast Asia, South Asia and South America.”
There are 57 states, they’re just not American.
How does soothie know so much about that dem operative, Ron Paul…hmmmm.
Ron Paul is NO conservative. Sorry, Soothie.
Amd, fyi, the Libby trial was a farce. And you know it, Soothie.
Tim Russert’s memory against Scooter’s. You should be afraid, very afraid of what was done to Mr. Libby, Soothie. One’s memory should not be prosecuted/persecuted.
But we shall see. I bet Hillary never thought all her garbage would be coming out as it is today, either. So ya just nevah know when the truth will be set free.
What the hell has the Libby trial got to do with this? Besides, this is Obama we are talking about, some of his best friends are felons.
Hmmmm . . . latest WaPo poll:
Obama 51% - McSame 44%
With 82% of the populace saying Bush has the country on the wrong track . . . and McSame offering Bush leftovers as the totality of his platform.
There may be a McGovern in this campaign . . . but John Sidney McCain aka Crazy Old Coot will be playing the losing role.
Soothie,
By “crazy old coot” you have to mean “unpredictable.” This must leave the “Terrorist Lobby” scared spitless.
Whistling past the graveyard with your MSM popular polls?
This proves soothie 100 percent wrong:
Obama, Underperforming Kerry Among White Voters
The Hillary-friendly bloggers at TalkLeft note that “Barack Obama has not gotten more than 40 percent of the white vote since Wisconsin, where he won the white vote.”
It’s an imperfect comparison to weigh demographics from a primary election against a general election. Still, it would seem hard to imagine a scenario in which Obama gets a larger share of the white vote in the general election than he did in recent Democratic primaries. A not insignificant chunk of the white vote is Republican, and while “Operation Chaos,” a disinterest in the fairly-quickly-settled GOP primary, or genuine Obamacans may have boosted the number of Republicans who voted in this year’s Democratic primaries, the pool of voters who will turn out in November are likely to be whiter and less inclined to vote for Obama than the Democratic primary voter pools.
In other words, if Obama can’t close the deal with white Democrats, it will be an uphill climb to win over white independents and white Republicans.
There will probably be a little more than 32 million votes cast in the Democratic primary this year. The total turnout in 2004 was 122 million Americans, which amounted to 60.7 percent of eligible voters. In other words, there are probably about 90 million Americans who will vote in November who did not vote in this year’s Democratic primary.
(Obama will almost certainly drive up African-American turnout in the general election this year, but the gap between this and other demographics has shrunk significantly. In 2004, 87.4 percent of registered African-Americans cast a ballot in the Presidential election, according to statistics compiled by the US Census Bureau, compared with 89.4 percent turnout among registered, non-Hispanic whites.)
In state after state, Barack Obama is drastically underperforming John Kerry’s general election numbers among whites among a voter pool almost entirely limited to Democrats.
In the Ohio Democratic primary, Barack Obama carried 34 percent of the white vote. In the 2004 general election, John Kerry carried 44 percent of the white vote.
In Pennsylvania, Obama carried 37 percent of the white vote. In the 2004 general election, John Kerry carried 45 percent.
In Missouri, Obama won 39 percent of the white vote. In the 2004 general election, John Kerry carried 42 percent of the white vote.
This phenomenon occurs in states that aren’t seen as teeming with those classic Rust Belt/Midwest demographics. In Connecticut, Obama carried 48 percent of the white vote; John Kerry carried 51 percent.
In New Jersey, Obama carried 31 percent of the white vote. In the 2004 general election, Kerry carried 46 percent.
In Rhode Island, Obama carried 37 percent of the white vote. In the 2004 general election Kerry carried 57 percent of the white vote.
In Maryland, Obama carried 42 percent of the white vote; Kerry carried 44 percent in the 2004 general election.
There are a few states where Obama’s primary percentage outpaces Kerry’s general election share. In North Carolina, Obama carried 37 percent of the white vote. In the 2004 general election, John Kerry carried 27 percent. (So much for help from John Edwards.)
In Indiana, Obama carried 40 percent of the white vote; Kerry carried 34 percent.
In New Mexico, Obama carried 55 percent of the white vote, Kerry got 43 percent. (Of course, in that state, Kerry carried 56 percent of the Latino vote (32 percent of the electorate that year), while Obama carried 36 percent of that key demographic in this year’s caucus, according to exit polls.)
But overall, it seems extremely likely that Barack Obama will get a smaller share of the white vote than John Kerry did in 2004 – requiring a huge turnout among other demographics. Some, like African-Americans, have already demonstrated great enthusiasm for Obama. Others, like Latinos…haven’t, at least not yet.
“One candidate is an honors graduate from Columbia and Harvard Law School,”
Soothie, it’s a good thing they(Barack and Michelle) had the advantage of affirmative action, both in getting into these schools and in classroom performance, otherwise you would never have heard of either of them. Just because they got affirmative action grades does not mean they are intelligent. Anybody that gets to start near the top with the benefit of the same affirmative actions, can stay there.
According to this poll, 1 in 5 dems will defect to McCain…
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200805/POL20080512f.html