Obama '08?

nimh wrote:

Well, right, but he was black too. So being black apparently is not by itself enough to get the votes Obama now gets, which is what you have been arguing here.

I said that he would get an overwhelming number of Blacks voting for him with the underlying reason for many being his skin color.

Consider would a white candidate with the credentials, or lack thereof of Obama even get honorable mention in a race for candidacy of the office of president?

OCCOM BILL
And I am smart enough to recognize someone with a bloated sense of self worth.It shows itself in all your postings.

nimh wrote:

au1929 wrote:

Jesse was a wll known commodity with plenty of baggage when he attempted to run.

Well, right, but he was black too. So being black apparently is not by itself enough to get the votes Obama now gets, which is what you have been arguing here.

I said that he would get an overwhelming number of Blacks voting for him with the underlying reason for many being his skin color.

I wonder why you did not ask about the reverand Al "Charlatan"

Why would he take 2 to 1 if he can get 20? Where is that, btw? Edwards is a steal at 20 to 1...

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Why would he take 2 to 1 if he can get 20? Where is that, btw? Edwards is a steal at 20 to 1...

https://www.intrade.com/aav2/trading/tradingHTML.jsp?evID=23190&eventSelect=23190&updateList=true&showExpired=false

Maybe I picked the wrong column. Edwards's stock currently trades at 8.5%, or about 12:1 -- better than the 20:1 I remembered.

snood wrote:

Something that I think is sadly obvious, and yet remaining unsaid thus far, is that Edwards may be the beneficiary of all those votes that won't go to Obama because he's black. I think he is probably going to be the nominee, and not the least of the reasons is that he's the only major dem candidate that's not female or black.

Since you are talking about what is sadly obvious. Obama will the benificiary of a vast majority of the black vote because of his skin color. I would not be surprised if it was a high as 80%

OCCOM BILL
If someone gave the reason for not voting for Obama was that he was a black. You no doubt would call that person a racist. I wonder what you would call it when someone votes for Obama because he is black. "Affirmative Action.?"

Jesse was a wll known commodity with plenty of baggage when he attempted to run.

au1929 wrote:

Jesse was a wll known commodity with plenty of baggage when he attempted to run.

Well, right, but he was black too. So being black apparently is not by itself enough to get the votes Obama now gets, which is what you have been arguing here.

<gestures>

Kind of interesting article about how George Clooney is a major Obama supporter (I hadn't known that) but is trying to figure out how he can best help Obama. There is a concern that the whole celebrity-endorsement could harm more than it would help.

There's nothing special about George Clooney that isn't just as special about the guys and gals all over America hosting neighborhood House Parties this weekend and joining in on the national town meeting video conference with Senator Obama.

You mean Clooney doesn't have the ability to invite a small, manageable group of people to his house?

Right now the average size of each of the Obama House Parties this weekend is about 8 to 10 people.

Saturday March 31, 2007 10:28 EST
Presidential candidates and "substance"...

...It is way too early (at least in my view) to know whether he is sincere about it and willing and/or able to follow through -- and there are plenty of valid criticisms of him one can make -- but at least thus far, Barack Obama is the only candidate even thinking and talking about the deeper and more fundamental diseases plaguing how our political system works. Whatever criticisms of his candidacy thus far are valid, a "lack of substance" isn't one of them, and that's true even if he hasn't yet developed the details or even broad contours of his health care plan.

Analyzing the dynamic of how the national media works is an extremely complex undertaking and the factors are virtually endless -- some of those journalists are genuinely malicious political operatives; others are just politically biased. Large numbers are just careerist sycophants, while others still simply lack critical faculties and/or the initiative to do anything other than recite what they hear. And the socioeconomic transformation of journalists into coddled, rich elites -- along with the dependence of journalists on those in power for access and scoops -- obviously create a greater identification with the political officials they are supposed to investigate, scrutinize and check.

But one overarching influence affecting the group as a whole is that they have been enmeshed in the culture of national journalism for so long that they are incapable of viewing it critically. In every environment and every profession, broken and corrupt behavior becomes commonplace and then normalized. When that happens, even decent and well-intentioned people can engage in such behavior believing that it's constructive and proper. And because those rules of behavior are normalized, they actually come to believe that the more they adhere to them, the more appropriately they are acting.

Is anyone else attending to Glenn Greenwald?

Quote:

but at least thus far, Barack Obama is the only candidate even thinking and talking about the deeper and more fundamental diseases plaguing how our political system works. Whatever criticisms of his candidacy thus far are valid, a "lack of substance" isn't one of them

Nimh, have you read his book?

I do still think that a lot of the "where's Obama's substance?" is bunk, and prescribe that everyone who says that read his books. But I acknowledge that the books are more about clues into his way of thinking and what he thinks about general issues (abortion, death penalty, whatever) rather than specific proposals.

A lot of his musings note [..] a lot of the WAYS he'd reach a decision on what a policy should be, convening experts, that sort of thing, which actually sound good to me as a method of coming up with specific proposals [..]