Reverend Wright ... the aftermath
By MICHAEL HALEY
October 28th, 2009
September 23rd, 2009
August 31st, 2009
August 20th, 2009
My wife is full on board with John McCain at this point; in fact I have been forced to wear a McCain t- shirt and cap around the house just to get along this week. Myself, I still reserve my judgment and may go with either Barack Obama or McCain. Obama did take a beating the last two weeks, but he appears to have taken a lickin' and kept on tickin'.
The fall out from the Wright debacle is starting to settle, and it is telling us some interesting things about the campaign and where it may go from here.
It appears that only slight damage was done to Obama, including his favorability ratings. The latest Gallop poll from 3/24 to 3/26 shows Obama up four points over Hillary Clinton in that time. He dipped against McCain, but that appears to be recovering as well.
There are two other poll numbers that actually are more intriguing. One is the steep drop in Clinton's favorability ratings over the last week. Commentators on MSNBC last night were attributing it to her comments about Rev. Wright, mainly her statement that she would have left the church if it were she. My sentiments exactly, and I doubt if that is what hurt her, although it probably hurt Obama.
My view is that what hurt her was her blatant, videotaped proof of lying about her trip to Tuzla, trying to pump up non-existent foreign policy credentials. It is rather incredible that she thinks she can get away with such blatant lying. It shows how desperate she is to win, but what else is new?
Hillary's favorability ratings dropped to their lowest level since 2001 to 37 percent, down seven big points in a week. But another interesting poll has been done by Rasmussen showing that there is a big increase in the number of potential cross over Democratic voters whose favored nominee does not get the Democratic nomination.
In other words, Rasmussen found that 28 percent of Hillary supporters would vote for McCain if Obama were to become the Democratic nominee, and 19 percent of Obama supporters would vote for McCain if Hillary were to become the nominee.
Those are huge numbers of cross over voters, and it reflects the level of hostility developing between the two sides of the Democratic party. It also reflects Hillary's scorched earth approach to the primary and her unrelenting negative campaigning toward Obama. McCain and the Republicans are delighted by this turn of events, and even though it is early and there will be some revamping of those numbers as we go, it is clear that Hillary's campaign tactics are hurting the Democratic parties chances in November.
One also has to believe that hurting Obama as much as she can is a deliberate strategy. Right now her chances of winning the nomination are very low, simply based on delegate numbers along with a gradually dwindling super delegate count. In the last month she has lost 60 super delegates to Obama, and things are not turning around for her, they are getting worse. Her own advisors said that her chances of getting the nomination now are about 10 percent, which means they are actually about 5 percent, probably even less. She is not going to get the nomination and she has to know that.
What that means? By dumping on Obama, she is throwing a Hail Mary, hoping to turn around the super delegates by showing that he cannot win the general election against McCain, mainly because she has managed to tarnish him so badly. If Obama loses, then viola, in 2012 after McCain serves one term, its Hillary all over again. One has to wonder if that is her main agenda at this point.
Am I cynical? There is no too low you can go in estimating Hillary's opportunism and willingness to play dirty.
This really is a watershed campaign, and despite all the talk about gender vs. race, the Obama vs. Hillary campaign is really about the dirty politics of the past vs. the hopeful politics of the future. McCain is a decent person too, and I look forward to a campaign that is actually about issues, and not about trash talk.
That really will be something new.
The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.
What gets your comment posted?
• Staying on topic
• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less
• Avoiding name-calling
• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger
What gets your comment deleted?
• Personal attacks
• Derogatory remarks
• Name-calling of any sort
• Going off-topic
• Hate speech
• Racially-insensitive comments
• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict
• Posting e-mail addresses
• Posting comments of a commercial nature
• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS
• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.
The fine print
- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.
- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.
- Comments may take several hours to be posted.
- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.
- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our
virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.
- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact
online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.
jasper wrote on Mar 27, 2008 6:34 PM:
glenroy wrote on Mar 27, 2008 9:34 PM:
"
Kevin wrote on Mar 27, 2008 9:39 PM:
sickothis wrote on Mar 28, 2008 10:12 AM:
Sickothis wrote on Mar 28, 2008 11:45 AM:
russ wrote on Mar 28, 2008 7:38 PM:
glenroy wrote on Mar 28, 2008 10:37 PM:
JimClark wrote on Mar 29, 2008 6:44 AM:
That being said, I am not a republican; as if any really exist. Conservatism has been refuted, denied, insulted and demeaned for all too long. You need only look at the current economic and taxation conditions to know that democrats and republicans are sleeping in the same bed. I find your frivolous verbal assaults to be typical of one who has no real argument to present. Next time you need a prescription filled, just say no.
If there is to be a debate, let us discuss the issues and leave the innuendo and name calling to lesser people; assuming you are not one of them. "
sickothis wrote on Mar 29, 2008 12:21 PM:
Brittanicus wrote on Mar 29, 2008 6:44 PM:
STOP THE TRAVESTY OF OUR IMMIGRATION LAWS! SAVE YOUR JOBS, LANGUAGE, FLAG & CONSTITUTION FROM ALL THOSE ANTI-SOVEREIGN, PRO-ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT ADVOCATES WHO WOULD UNDERMINE THE RIGHTS OF THE PEOPLE!
When the new personage steps into 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, then we will be seeing the 12 to 20 million getting a path to citizenship. Once a new amnesty is signed into law, then nobody will be able to stop the next tsunami of destitute, uneducated illegal humanity pouring across our borders. A new amnesty will be seen as an open door for yet another future welcome to the world.
Demand the FEDERA SAVE ACT! "
russ wrote on Mar 29, 2008 9:55 PM:
napablogger wrote on Mar 30, 2008 12:07 AM:
Kevin, I think Limbaugh and Ann Coulter's encouraging people to vote for Hillary is a low integrity thing to do. I have gotten so I can't stand either one of them. Limbaugh always struck me as the whiner of small things, blown up as big as he could get them, but this gambit is really just dirty politics. "
JimClark wrote on Mar 30, 2008 6:55 AM:
JimClark wrote on Mar 30, 2008 7:08 AM:
There's those 1s and ls AGAIN!!! "
Lengle wrote on Mar 30, 2008 10:10 AM:
russ wrote on Mar 30, 2008 1:13 PM:
Lengle wrote on Mar 30, 2008 7:39 PM:
I actually didn't accuse him of a felony. It would be far to hard to prove his intent to prosecute him. However, in Ohio what he encouraged people to do was to take part in voter fraud. Look it up. It's not really arguable.
Also, since when does ratings have anything to do with someones wisdom or moral character. He may be the funniest guy on earth to you and entertain you but to defend him is another thing. "
napablogger wrote on Mar 30, 2008 10:49 PM:
Ok, now I do not condone either parties unethical behavior. What I was saying is that everyone has some things that may be considered by some unethical, and all the things I am seeing Obama criticized are not sufficient to get much negative traction with the voters, that's all. I am not saying they were not a problem ethically, at least necessarily. I may not agree that some of these things were unethical, like the Speaker of the Illinois house helping him by letting him sponsor a lot of legislation. "
JimClark wrote on Mar 31, 2008 11:04 AM:
Incidently, Ohio concluded Mr. Limbaugh's were Constitutional and unworthy of prosecution. One wonders where the charges came from at the outset.
I continue to ask the Ls & 1s be eliminated. "
russ wrote on Mar 31, 2008 5:48 PM:
Lengle wrote on Apr 1, 2008 9:07 AM:
russ wrote on Apr 1, 2008 7:47 PM:
Madison Jay Hamilton wrote on Apr 1, 2008 11:04 PM:
JimClark wrote on Apr 2, 2008 3:00 AM:
Lengle wrote on Apr 2, 2008 7:36 AM:
I have to assume you're just pulling my chain at this point because I don't know how I or the Ohio law could be any clearer.
and Jim, don't get me wrong I don't think "operation chaos" had any real impact on any primaries. I'm just speaking to the ethics and disrespect to the process. Rush was a miserable being before this happened, I'm more surprised at the people who defend his actions. "
russ wrote on Apr 2, 2008 6:45 PM: