Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Why Is the Trend Towards Obama?

Posted by Steven Reynolds, The All Spin Zone at 5:17 AM on February 12, 2008.


The votes are moving towards Barack Obama, and I’m thinking it is because that “unity” theme is starting to take hold.
obamamcain
Obama/McCain

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

We Democrats really like our candidate choices. Even now there's rarely a negative word about John Edwards. Still, the votes are moving towards Barack Obama, and I'm thinking it is because that "unity" theme is starting to take hold.

Dick Polman has a short column addressing why Maine voters gave Barack Obama a landslide, and it mirrors my issues with Clinton. Perhaps Dick Polman has hit on some of the reasons for the numbers trending Obama's way. He lists a whole bunch of compalints from a friend in Maine, and those complaints center on Hillary's "Billy baggage" and her being "too caught up in the old politics game." We Democrats seem to like both Obama and Clinton, but we're buying into the unity theme of the Obama campaign, and that's not a theme that works for most Democrats when we think of Hillary Clinton. Make no mistake, the numbers are indeed trending towards Obama, with the national numbers going to Obama for the very first time. From USA Today:

A USA TODAY/Gallup Poll taken Friday through Sunday finds a Democratic race between Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton that remains too close to call, though Obama is making incremental gains against the New York senator. Nearly two-thirds of Democrats hail each as an exceptional candidate.

. . .

Among Democrats and independents who "lean" Democratic, Obama beats Clinton 47%-44% -- the first time the Illinois senator has led the USA TODAY survey.

. . .

"As Obama has succeeded in some contests, his percentage of the vote has gone up while Sen. Clinton's share of the vote has remained mostly static since before New Hampshire," says Mark Blumenthal, editor of the non-partisan pollster.com.

Democratic voters are delighted with their choices: 12% call Clinton and Obama the best presidential candidate of their lifetimes.

Another 50% say Clinton is "better than most;" 48% say that of Obama.

Lookie there! Again, we Democrats really like our candidates. Not one of them will lose our votes come September, or not many votes, at least. There's not rift like with the Republicans, where radical right wing Christian Clerics and the Limbaugh/Coulter Axis of Evil are threatening and pouting about the John McCain candidacy. We like both of our candidates, but I'm convinced that this "unity" theme of Obama's is starting to resonate.

One thing, we always knew the unity theme was resonating with young voters. Obama has that demographic down cold. And thanks to Sarah Boltuck and her father Richard, even more of those young people are going to vote in Maryland. Seems they agitated for allowing 17 year olds who will be 18 by November ro vote in the Maryland primary. I've no idea how the polling is going in Maryland, but look for a big Obama win there.

So, will this trend towards Obama continue? Will it be pushed by big victories in Maryland, Virginia and DC? I'm not so sure. If Obama is the frontrunner, then the media might take off after him. No, I'm not implying a media conspiracy, but the stories are bigger when they are about the frontrunner, so the focus and the attention is going to ratchet up. Besides, maybe Hillary will cry again in order to get a couple points back in the polls.

Digg!

Tagged as: democrats, clinton, obama, youth vote

Steven Reynolds is a regular blogger for the All Spin Zone


Report: Obama Prepared to Talk to Hamas
Barack Obama is reportedly planning to ditch President Bush's strategy of isolating Hamas, and will instead move to open contacts with the group.
Post by Faiz Shakir. January 8, 2009.
Obama Can Learn from Bush: 'We Tried' Ain't Enough
We will need to remind Obama again and again that for those voters concerned about immigration, 'almost' just ain't gonna cut it come 2012.
Post by Paco Fabian. January 8, 2009.
Rachel Maddow on 'Daily Show': 'Insulted,' 'Embarrassed' By Bush
Jon Stewart and Maddow talk Bush, Obama, Bill Clinton, MSNBC and the Munsters.
Post by Danny Shea. January 8, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Yaawwwwnnnnn
Posted by: fifthworld on Feb 12, 2008 8:17 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hope. Change. Yes we can ...

American sophistication and imagination: Doorknob.


Priceless.

Over.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Yaawwwwnnnnn Posted by: g50
IF the media starts to push Obama's Candidacy? Give me a break
Posted by: odcherenow on Feb 12, 2008 9:37 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article should be titled Trending the Surge
What a disingenuous fantasy Steve has foisted off on my tired eyes.
Sarcasm drips from my pen as I write:
You are actually trying to tell us that the fix is not already in to push Obamas candidacy? You mean to say that this fix is not happening throughout the US media? Are we to believe that an orchestrated conspiracy has not been manipulating the shape and frequency of the coverage of the Obama Candidacy since after NH primary???
I have listened to weeks of surge this, and rock star that, and charismatic BS. And Obama is still a wild card full of fine phrases and no back-up plan for how he intends to do all this change. Hillary is the most qualified candidate we have seen this election year. Do I want to put an untried, inexperienced orator in the most visible hot seat in elected leadership in the world? I do not!
Remember what happened to the young, inexperienced John F Kennedy when he burst on the world scene as President in 1960: He listened to the generals and we got The Bay of Pigs and nearly had a Nuclear Winter, next he went to a summit conference and had Nikita Kruschev, Premier of USSR, wipe the floor with him.....Babes in the woods. Leave Obama to season a few more years. Vote for Hillary, Now.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Clear differences in judgement
Posted by: Frank J. Burris on Feb 12, 2008 10:20 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hillary has claimed that she was duped into voting for the Iraq war authorization with the belief that Bush would exhaust all diplomatic means. This is quite an insult to our collective intelligence, as Bush was trying to claim beforehand that he didn't even need congressional approval to invade Iraq. That vote either established her as being a dunderhead or an shrewd opportunist. Obviously she's not stupid. In choosing the politial expediency of supporting the war to keep a hold of her Senate seat, she demonstrated that she will do whatever it takes to get re-elected, no matter the long term consequences. Obama, on the other hand, had the sound judgement to call for restraint in dealing with Iraq "problem". In doing so, he joined the multitudes of people calling for a peaceful resolution to the situation. He also demonstrated considerable compassion and judgement in voting to ban the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas. Hillary's vote against this ban leaves me to conclude that she is completely owned and operated by the military industrial complex. If foresight is not a critical qualification for the presidency, I don't know what is.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Clear differences in judgement Posted by: Frank J. Burris
or just maybe the Clinton Campaign reached it's climax early...
Posted by: seacaptdon on Feb 12, 2008 10:29 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I find it comical that Clinton supporters are now complaining about the media coverage... they were not complaining when the Clinton regime was getting 2 to 1 attention in the media... but then again that was when they were the "frontrunner"...
Maybe if the Clintons release their Tax Returns, they will get some media attention... but then again it may not be the attention they crave!
Watching Queen Hillary's comments about Obama's voting record this morning, I could not help but laugh that the mean spirited media simply pointed out that she voted for the same bill she was slamming Obama regarding his vote.
One final thought, using a Clintonesque analogy... since the Clintons started the foreplay for her running for office years ago... maybe they had a premature climax and now they are petering out...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This Article Says Absolutely Nothing
Posted by: katkat on Feb 12, 2008 12:02 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Trying to get more articles on your resume Steven? Why not take the time to write one that actually has some content.

And the last sentence jab at Hillary for getting watery eyes for 5 seconds? Move on already.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: This Article Says Absolutely Nothing Posted by: Frank J. Burris
OBAMA'S FOREIGN POLICY ADVISORS
Posted by: bbfmail on Feb 12, 2008 12:07 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama And His Warmonger
Cabinet


Presidential candidate Barak Obama -- main announced project so far: BOMB PAKISTAN

Obama's main foreign policy guru -- Zbigniew Brzezinski. Main project: THE DESTRUCTION OF RUSSIA - the surest path to World War III.


Mark Brzezinski, son of Zbigniew, former Clinton NSC official and top Obama advisor. Architect of the 2004 "people power" color revolution/coup in Ukraine. Main project: THE DESTRUCTION OF RUSSIA.


Top Obama advisor and ex Asst. Secretary of State for African Affairs, Susan Rice. Main project: BOMB SUDAN

Top Obama terrorism advisor Richard Clarke, former terror czar of the Clinton and Bush administrations. Main project: originating the official myth of 9/11.

Obama's top Middle East adviser, Dennis Ross, former Middle East negotiator for Bush and Clinton. Main project: play the Arabs against the Iranians to perpetuate Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Sophistication and Imagination
Posted by: indieandie on Feb 12, 2008 2:39 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Using a dead commercial as political satirization is not sophisticated or imaginative, either.

Enthusiasm and hope, finally, after eight years of Bush's crony control, over a nation depressed and disrespected, the simplicity and youthfulness is back. Hooray for new energy!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Babyruth
Posted by: babyruth on Feb 12, 2008 5:09 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Steven, I agree with the idea that voters are resonating to Obama's theme of unity. However, if you are also resonating with unity, can't you dispense with the cheap shots? I resent the unnecessary demonizing of Hillary in your last line " Besides, maybe Hillary will cry again in order to get a couple points back in the polls." I have never heard anyone questioning the authenticity of McCain or Romney or many others when they teared up. Stop it!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obamamania is really McCainomania
Posted by: johnp on Feb 13, 2008 4:12 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Are we being told we don't have the right to implicate media in the attack on Hillary's campaign? Why? Because the Obama supporters have nothing to hang their "rock star" support on, except denying the truth about how their rock star got to his highpoint? Media have not only been attacking Hillary mercilessly and obsessively, from the beginning, but they've "also" been supporting Obama frantically. There is no ill will implied here against Obama, but there is the simmple and clear implication that had Hillary's campaign been treated with an even hand, against Obama's, we would have seen the opposite result. Obama would have been laid lower now, than Hillary, by far. The nomination would have been hers by a longshot, instead, Hillary still has a plausible chance. Someone on this list wondered why Hillary supporters are only now complaining about media bias agaisnt Hillary. Are we? I've been complaining about media bias agaisnt the Clintons since he was first elected to office nearly 16 years ago. Who said Hillary's immense lead in the polls was a view she handed to media? What makes you think the lead we all remember so vividly wasn't media created, promoted and hyped, with the idea of making media's relentless assault on her, all the more imposing at the end we perceive now? I absolutely guarantee you, that media are attacking Hillary violently and continuously, because they absolutely must defeat her, before there is any chance of her getting the nomination, and before she has any chance of defeating the man they really wish to see triumph next November, the Bush clone himself: McCain. Obama supporters are so defensive about their smoothtalking college boy, they think our charge that media have sought, and all but succeeded, in destrolying Hillary's campaign is all about them and their rock star. Our complaint about media's treachery and vileness, has little to do with Obama, and everything to do with the way democrats are being set up for a blistering loss to McCain, in November. Am I angry about media vileness? You have no idea. Media have revealed the extent to which they are prepared to go, to insure the perpetuation of republican power in the White House. All media showhosts, and particularly, all the gasbags, all the nauseatiing "commentators," all the vapid, and bullcrapping talking heads, are on notice. This is attack-Hillary time. And you had better see to it that it's done, and done thorougly and relentlessly, until she's defeated.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

ENTRENCHED POWER IN WASHINGTON
Posted by: fg on Feb 13, 2008 10:34 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Americans are fed up with it. Obama has no skeletons in his closet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]