My Conservative friend told me he could see voting for Obama

because Obama reminds him of Kennedy, aka a more Conservative Dem, and he also likes Obama's no-nonsense way of speaking, of saying that things are broke and need fixing.

I thought that was intersting. What do y'all think?

And this is after he received 3 years of positive press from the CMSM. Only since last week have they criticized him. If he is not the most electable candidate now it is unreasonable to think he will be after the media goes after him, like it does with every candidate (even their previous repuke darling, Ghouliani). Obama's unfavorables have only one way to go--up.

One 11 state survey that included all three candidates had him winning only 2 states against Ghouliani. He even lost in Massachusetts to Ghouliani...

I like him fine, but I am really missing what others are seeing. Good, young, smart guy who talks about a 'new wind blowing', or something like that. But what else is there?

Sincere question. What am I missing here?

Obama's reputation exceeds his ability right now. But that's fine. Give me perception.

I realize this sounds ridiculous, but IMO a big part of it stems from his name. Barack Obama sounds different and cool. A name like that must be attached to a unique charismatic guy. If he were James Robinson I think he'd be at about 9%.

When I watch him speak it's full of "uh" and awkward pauses and generally nothing brilliant. Then the next day I'll read about the great buzz.

I'm through trying to analyze it. All my life Republicans have gotten away with bullshit reputation so we might as well benefit for a change.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=956538877666825429&q=barack+obama+take+america+back&total=51&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

"After graduating from Punahou, Obama studied at Occidental College for two years, then transferred to Columbia University, where he majored in political science with a specialization in international relations.<21><22> He received his B.A. degree in 1983, then worked for one year at Business International Corporation.<23> In 1985, Obama moved to Chicago to direct a non-profit project assisting local churches to organize job training programs.<24> He entered Harvard Law School in 1988.<25> In 1990, The New York Times reported his election as the Harvard Law Review's "first black president in its 104-year history."<26> He completed his J.D. degree magna cum laude in 1991.<27> On returning to Chicago, Obama directed a voter registration drive.<27> As an associate attorney with Miner, Barnhill & Galland from 1993 to 1996, he represented community organizers, discrimination claims, and voting rights cases.<28> He was a lecturer of constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School from 1993 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004.<29>"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama#Early_life_and_career

You're telling me that this man is inarticulate? :shrug:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln#Lincoln_1809_to_1854

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=956538877666825429&q=barack+obama+take+america+back&total=51&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

He's not just good, young, and smart...he's genuine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_obama#Early_life_and_career

I'd seen it, and this is my point : what a good guy, hopefully more progressive than many think, but he's just, well, this is very middle of the road - he has some nice phrases, but you ask if he is 'inarticulate', and his degrees don't help on this: compared to the oratory of most other candidates he is, in fact, a little inarticulate...lots of brief lost pauses, lots of mispronounced words (4 or 5 in the opening of the piece you linked)...not a big deal, but it's part of the thing.

also - it does feel like this is all about perception, not substance. the perception is great, the substance is, so far, mediocre.

did you see Edwards speech at TBA? rousing, flowing, substantial, very high level of oratory.

I think Obama is very, very good with a prompter and a written speech.

extemporaneously, not so much. this would be a problem should he get the nomination.

I am sure there are many people who share your friend's opinion. The flip side, though, is he has liabilities, namely that he lacks experience (which is a significant minus in the GE) and is untested. Until last week he received nothing but positive press from the CMSM since the summer of 2004. We don't know how electable he will be once the MSM, ever eager for a horse race, goes after him. His appeal is largely based on image (which is why he was in the 20's in polls before he said a single word about what he would do as prez. One poll had him in the 20's as early as November of 2006). If the image is tarnished, how much appeal will be left?

and quite obviously the genesis of Edwards two Americas speech.

It is a shame Mario never took the plunge... :(

imagine my excitement.

How could I miss that? :(

:shrug:

Makes me wonder how much depth of understanding he has on the issues. :) He says the same thing as your friend, though, that Obama is direct and trustworthy.

I've got other conservative friends who are leaning towards Hillary. I don't know many who have chosen one of the actual Republican candidates.

out of all other candidates. She is a non-ideological swing voter. Who she picks, tends to win. God, I hope Dems don't screw up in the primaries and go nominate someone who doesn't have a chance in the General.

for the winner in every race she has told me who she voted for. Gore (hey, he won), Bush, and in Virginia, Kaine and Webb. She votes for the winner.

Let's stop campaigning then and just let the oracle tell us who would win anyway. ;)

Polls include large, representative samples.

they didn't predict anything. I say my one person poll is no better or worse than these way too early polls. And, yeah, I'm having fun here. I have no idea who will get the nomination or will win the general, but I swear, whoever this person likes and votes for, wins.

he doesn't do what they want.

That is what I've noticed from reading articles about him from when he was head of the Harvard Law Review to now.

In that way, he is the exact opposite of Bush.

When you actually hear him speak it is reassuring because he comes across as so reasonable and mature IMO.

I can't count the number of times, even at DU, where the population is well-informed, someone has said something to the effect of, "I don't know why but he just gives me hope".

unlike Edwards and Hillary. Edwards has the perception of changing his views to prevailing political winds, and Hillary comes off as programmed. Obama is one of the few candidates on BOTH sides who people actually feel like he's a genuine guy who says what he believes. And that's very important and part of the reason why Obama is so appealing to people of all political stripes.

Thursday, June 21, 2007
By James O'Toole, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
U.S. Sen. Barack Obama was in Pittsburgh yesterday, raising money during a quick lunchtime visit to the Rivers Club at One Oxford Centre, Downtown.
Clifford Levine, one of the event's organizers, said that a crowd of roughly 225 was "mesmerized" by the senator from Illinois during the event that was closed to the press and public. Ticket prices ranged from $500 a head to the Federal Election Commission maximum of $2,300. Mr. Levine said the campaign took in $150,000.


http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07172/795985-53.stm

Obama will make a great running mate for either Al Gore or Wes Clark.

He is a powerful speaker who knows how to connect with a crowd.

I just watched Obama's speech to "TAKE BACK AMERICA".

He represents change and cleaning up Washington DC.

Obama would make an awesome VP - chairing the Senate for the next 8 years.

Then Obama can run for President in 2016 and again in 2020.

But I'm not sure that he is ready for the top job right now.

I think either Al Gore or Wes Clark - both are ready for the Presidency.

I would like to see either Gore-Obama or Clark-Obama in 2008.

That would be a strong, progressive, winning ticket.

Plus - great leadership for the next 16 years! B-)

...and they, on the initial impression, looked like people who you'd think were GOP Bushbots...

They see him as a uniter and perhaps even realize that they have been duped by the GOP with Bush helping them reconsider their alliances with the GOP.

I've heard the same thing from self-professed conservatives, that they like Obama. And I've heard several life-long Dems who just can't see voting for Hillery. One of them even pulled the "Vince Foster" crap out!!!! And they insisted that it had never "really" been investigated. :mad:


To be clear, I will vote for whoever gets the Democratic nomination, from Kuninch to Obama to Clinton, whichever get the nod, gets my vote. But I am very worried that the wingnuts have so smeared both Clintons that Hillery can not be elected.

They are not going to flip for any of our candidates. Independents (are there really that many of them?), maybe.

He liked Kennedy, and he likes Obama, and so far he doesn't like the Republican field. He's one of the few Conservatives I can have a decent conversation with. While not exactly pro-choice, he's flexible enough on the subject not to be a raging pro-lifer, and doesn't have a problem with civil unions.

So I bullshit your bullshit. Every person is different, and you never know how people might lean. I knew a few Republicans who said they thought they could vote for Clark, for example.

They have become disenchanted with the neocons and say Obama has appeal.

But there are idealogues here who think that's a bad thing.

there are also some Republicans that would probably vote for Hilary.
It is my opinion that in the general election, Hilary has a better chance for the simple fact that the majority of Republicans are bigots. It is nice to hear Republicans say they will vote for a Democrat; however you cannot forget about the majority.

You will have to get some independents as well as republicans. I do not know of a republican voting for Hillary. I have heard several state they are willing to vote for Obama. However in order to win the election the person will have to appeal across the party line and be willing to unite people.