Seriously, what is the argument to the superdelegates by the Obamaniacal?

This is what I see. Senator Obama pulled out all the stops to try and win the nomination. Early in the campaign when Obama had done badly in the debates and Clinton had won New Hampshire, Obama and his supporters played the race card out of desperation, by turning comments that were not about race into racist comments, such as the "fairy tale" comment by Bill Clinton about Iraq, and the comment by Senator Clinton regarding Martin Luther King and Lyndon Johnson, a comment directed toward experience; the tactic succeeded in energizing the black vote. But the short term gain smeared many fence-sitters as racists, turning their geniune concerns into firm conviction that Obama was not temperamentally suited to be President. He lost big states even before the Reverend Wright revelations turned blue collar voters away from him. Even earlier in the campaign he had lost people concerned about his lack of experience, his perceived naivete in foreign policy; further, Clinton has always been perceived to be stronger in domestic and economic policy. When his team realized that he did badly in debates, they simply refused to debate Senator Clinton any more. Again, short term gain but extraordinarily concerning: How exactly does he plan to negotiate with world leaders, allies and enemies, if he can't debate and defeat one woman, prefering instead to evade her and the voters' questions? This does not bode well for our nation, but I digress.

There is absolutely no question in my mind that Senator Clinton is the better qualified candidate; even if you don't think she's "experienced" (silly when you consider her background), she's at least equally as smart, tougher, more seasoned, more resourceful, and has offered better plans such as for health care. Senator Obama offers "change," whatever that means, but lacks the credentials, the experience, the maturity, the judgement, the understanding to implement even the one thing he offers IMHO.

I disagree that Senator Clinton ran a bad campaign, though in some aspects she did exercise bad judgement, no question. I think that Senator Obama ran a better financed and savvier campaign. Along the way, he's alienated virtually every key constituency in the Democratic Party. He's lost the big states. He obstructed Michigan and Florida from being seated or from getting a re-vote, something they are not likely to forget. Blue collar, Hispanic, Catholics, women, poor white, rural white, union, at least some portion of all these groups as well as people like me who have genuine concerns about Obama's qualifications, are planning to either abstain or cross over to vote for McCain. Frankly, the Obamaniacs have done their level best to alienate us too. All the threads/posts I see from them are utterly hostile and insulting.

Okay that's the set-up.

Clearly the superdelegates will have the final word on who gets the nomination, and they surely must know Senator Clinton would win in November if she is the candidate. Given all the damage he's caused within the Democratic Party, Obama may win some Dems back that he lost, say even a majority, but not all, and as I said earlier, those that won't vote for him will either abstain or cross over. Further, while many Republicans would surely vote for Clinton based on economic issues, virtually no Republican would vote for Obama on any basis.

Since Obama can't win, why would the superdelegates give him the nomination? I hear this Will of the People argument all the time, and it isn't convincing. The only will that's being forwarded here is the will of the Obamaniacal within the Democratic Party who aren't thinking about the general election. Getting out of that subset and into the larger electorate's hearts and minds is supposedly what the superdelegates were created to do. I don't buy that Democrats will eternally hate the superdelegates or delegates who do what's best for the party, either. Of the two superdelegates I know, I believe at least one would support Obama if left to his own devices; I won't hate him or try to vote him out of office whatever he may do because he's a good Representative.

So what is Obama's strategy for winning the general election? I don't see it.

(Please, no rants, rhetoric or ideology.)

I appreciate your sincerity. My guess is that you were a strong Hillary supporter before the voting began. The reason I guess this is because your assembly of evidence leaves out sooo much. That is the hallmark of a mind striving to reach a conclusion already decided upon.

I'm sorry I don't have time to go through your points step by step. But I would suggest you consider taking a deep breath and try to see the points others are making. Especially consider posts from people who were open to all the candidates at the beginning, and formed their conclusions during the campaign.

Um, what I asked was, What is Obama's strategy for winning the general election.

Maybe he could pray to Allah for the victory?

Regarding Hillary, many of us with moderately conservative inclinations, myself included, remember her husband's administration with no particular fondness. No would we care to see a repeat of what I liked to call the "We KNow hat's Best For You" Administration. Admittedly, there were some pluses to the Clinton Adminstration, but for many of us the negatives outwighed them. Only George Bush could have made one nostolgic to return to that era.

I'm no fan of McCain's, but would vote for him before voting for Hillary. I might even vote for McCain before voting for Obama, but it's far too early to make such a call.

Tegardless of who is to blame here for the largely negative campaign in the primaries, the bitter in-fighting and harsh words have managed to divide the Democratic Party, and it's not too likely the animosity will die out soon enough to give either candidate a united front to face the Republicans with.

This election should have been a shoe-in for the Dems. Any Republican candidate would have a formidable obstacle to overcome in the person of George Bush.

But the Dems have levelled the playing field with their petty bickering and squabbling.

Which makes it a priority to see that both Houses of Congress are in Democratic control.

Balance of power would seem to be our best hope for the next four years. That hope certainly wouldn't seem to rest in either Democratic candidate.

Or in McCain.

Sheesh, what a mess...

Please forgive the typos.

Not a problem. Between my grammar and your typos, we will figure something out.

Still waiting for the winning argument, though.

In case you hadn't noticed, I am pretty angry and depressed.

For most Americans the election will be about whether they want another 4 years of Bush's foreign and economic policies under McCain, because that's what he's promoting, because that's what the GOP's campaign bankrollers want. (Hence all his flip-flops.)

For many Americans the election will also be about whether they want a serious effort to get corruption out of the federal government, because that's a main Obama goal, because it's at the root of many of today's problems.

For some Americans the election will also be about whether voting their racist attitudes is worth getting shafted by the corporate robber barons for 4 more years.

Overall, the issues clearly favor Obama. And I think he's capable of making the case well. The main GOP issue will be racial bigotry. This may start to seem quite stale, given the open coverage it's now getting. And given the current terrible mess, it's even possible Obama can get some racists to wake up to how costly their stupid racism has been to them. Society is already trending decisively in that direction. A fresh future, even without their comforting racism, might seem appealing.

For most Americans the election will be about whether they want another 4 years of Bush's foreign and economic policies under McCain, because that's what he's promoting, because that's what the GOP's campaign bankrollers want. (Hence all his flip-flops.)

Superdelegate: Um, Senator Obama, McCain will not fail to point out that you have no experience in foreign policy or economic policy or any other kind of governance.

For many Americans the election will also be about whether they want a serious effort to get corruption out of the federal government, because that's a main Obama goal, because it's at the root of many of today's problems.

Superdelegate: Um, Rezko. Millions raked in from oil company employees and lobbyists. And Rezko.

For some Americans the election will also be about whether voting their racist attitudes is worth getting shafted by the corporate robber barons for 4 more years.

Superdelegate: Under President Clinton, this nation had eight years of peace and prosperity. Polls have shown that the voters believe Senator Clinton would do a better job in handling the economy. In fact, they have shown that Senator Clinton would beat McCain by nine points, while you are in a statistical dead heat with him, and that's the Republican war machine hasn't even begun to gear up against you. Given that you have no record that we can defend you on, how exactly are we supposed to help you win?

Overall, the issues clearly favor Obama. And I think he's capable of making the case well. The main GOP issue will be racial bigotry. This may start to seem quite stale, given the open coverage it's now getting. And given the current terrible mess, it's even possible Obama can get some racists to wake up to how costly their stupid racism has been to them. Society is already trending decisively in that direction. A fresh future, even without their comforting racism, might seem appealing.

Superdelegate: Senator Obama, you can not be serious. You think racism in America is suddenly going to go away because you give pretty speeches? Or is it far more likely that you have given racists cover by your own conduct? Oh yes, when the ads start running Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan, and your wife's own words against her, you think they are just gonna see the f*cking light and decide you are a different sort of black man?

Don't come crying to me about your electibility problems. YOU were the one bragging you weren't going to wear a flag pin. YOU were the one who didn't salute the flag. YOU were the one who gives every appearance of hating America. You think you had a problem with Democrats in the big states? Just wait till you face Republicans in the Bible Belt.

If your whole winning strategy is more of what you've been feeding your fool supporters, that dog ain't gonna hunt. But hey, it's the Will of the People. We are just gonna jump right over the best chance we have to give it to the worst candidate since Dukakis.

You wrote: "(Please, no rants, rhetoric or ideology.)" and then proceed to do just that.

It's hard to figure out on here when someone truly wants a dialogue or when they just want someone to put out their bare foot so it can be stomped on.

Obama's strategy (although admittedly he has not called me and told me) could be something like this:

The Democratic Party is not split - it is a vigorous, active group of American citizens who want to change the direction of their country, who want a voice at all levels of their lives and who want some accountability from their leaders.

The Democratic Primary was between two candidates, both qualfied, who have different styles but similar objectives. and the party is large enough and strong enough to survive a difference in style and appeal.

Becoming focused on the target - The Republican Party - we can unite in our efforts to provide a safe and secure homeland for our people, to address the needs of the sick and infirm who need vital medical services, and we can - together - address the pressing need for a new policy in Iraq. One that will bring our troops home, without abandoning our duties in this global world.

Now, me personally - I think Obama can do a hell of a lot better than anything I can come up with. He is smart, he is connected politically to people who understand all the finer points. He has kept his cool during extremely difficult issues, and he has kept his integrity and his dignity.

I think he can reasonably and rationally offer a hand of reconciliation to ANY American who is willing to shake it.

entire voting mass of the Democratic Party to vote for him it's the end of the contest period.

So Obama is going to set out to woo back the enraged Hillary supporters and the rest of main stream democrats that fundamentally do not trust Obama's political and personal habits and family background; which is full of red-flag warnings.

The entire Democratic Party was prepared to vote for Hillary [already knowing precisely her good and bad points] before Obama got into the race and the national press essentially became his campaign groupies. The irony in this is that the entire Democratic Party is not prepared to vote for Barack Obama, as demonstrated by the national voting pattern.

So how can Obama woo people that are, even at this late date, proving to be utterly immune to his golden voice and boyish smile and pretty little speeches? He cannot.

Sure, he will try, but so too will John McCain; and that's the key to this presidential race. Obama's supporters are mostly hysterics enjoying an uplifting quasi-religious experience and wallowing in 'feel good' politics, as is their right. Mainstream democrats, however, don't do that. They are for the most part very practical people much more concerned with economic realities than pie-in-the-sky rhetoric and airy promises.

Oooops! Right over there with his big smile and steady manner is big bad John McCain himself, a legitimate war hero and someone with an unshakable and proven record of reaching across Party ideologies in order to achieve compromises; the guy that is so moderate that the conservative corp of his party despises him.

John McCain is going to aggressively reach out for these angry or these unimpressed [unimpressed by Obama] democrats and begin sweet-talking them like nobody's business.

So we go for a guaranteed win for the presidency had it been Hillary Clinton to a nearly guaranteed win for John McCain if it is Obama.

Obamacrats are figuring on McCain playing the race card, failing to understand that Obama's background is so filled with negatives that McCain doesn't have to play the race card. All he has to do is say to unhappy democrats, "That's what the national press and DNC conspired to ram down your throats when they could have played it fair and square in the nomination process and let you have Hillary Clinton. Well I haven't done you dirty. My record proves that I am dedicated to working with all sides in order to achieve the best possible results. I won't treat you like your own Party leadership has just treated you. Vote for me."

John McCain is going to walk away with this presidential election. Obama will be a political has-been and the Democratic Party will be finished . . . or at the least will be forced by enraged voters to completely rework its arcane nomination process rules.

Obama will try to woo the rest of the Democratic Party and he will fail. John McCain will try and he will succeed. Meanwhile in order to prevent what they would consider an absolute horror, racist conservative republicans will overcome their reluctance to vote for the moderate John McCain and turn out to vote for him on election day in massive numbers.

If the veteran and canny politician, John McCain, can just apply no-brainer level political techniques to this race then he can walk away with it in the bag. I think he can do that. It's not rocket science.

miz_perfect wrote: (Please, no rants, rhetoric or ideology.)

Your entire post is a rant, poor rhetoric and skewed ideology.

You write: "The entire Democratic Party was prepared to vote for Hillary [already knowing precisely her good and bad points] before Obama got into the race"

BULLSHIT!

(sorry miz_perfect, I really was trying to abide by your request)

contains many of the argument points with which Hillary is attempting to convince the corrupt DNC [that is already in-the-bag for Obama] with and woo super delegates and, in turn, these are the argument points with which Obamacrats are going to begin using, starting today, to paint Hillary as a racist hate-monger.

For all their faults, the Clintons are not racists. To paint them as racists in order to make political points is an obscenity. Obamacrat's, however, are so wedded to their hysteria and to their fantasies that they are gleefully taking it in that direction. Thus they blissfully conduct their own Swift Boating of Hillary.

This will also cost them with mainstream democrats down the road. One cannot reason with hysterics, however; and so it goes.

rage and hatred. Enjoy.

I didn't respond with rage or hatred, I responded with truth.

It is bullshit to say that "the entire Democratic Party" was for Hillary until Obama joined the race.

You forget about Edwards, RIchardson, Biden, Kucinich and the fact that many, many Democrats were totally open-minded at the beginning of this primary.

MILLIONS and MILLIONS of people were thrilled to have a real race, true contenders in the Democratic Party who were bringing sound and substance to our voices which have been virtually silenced under GWB.

Stop framing every post as if you know the minds of ALL Democrats and that whatever story you're telling yourself to feel better is, in fact, fact.

I don't hate you, Gatewood, I don't hate you and I don't rage against you. But I do get a bit tired of your ever evolving revisionist history.

Beside what is said in this thread. The whole media and the blinded by the rhetoric followers should also pay attention to this.

Here is what appeared today in the "NewsMax" about the "New Pastor" of Barack Obama. Please click the link provided with the article, view and listen to this "religious" man who Barack Obama calls a "Wonderful Young Pastor". The rest goes without comments.

<link>

<link>

Regards,

Najam, NJ