He needs to compete and he isn't doing it. Isn't that the story?

Compete for what? He will be the nominee... learn to count, for god's sake.

Nope..that's actually not the story.

He will campaign, you just watch him go..the minute he's the democratic candidate.

Right now, he's well, paying todays bills today.

He and David Axlerod have just pulled off the most beautiful political maneuver in years.

He is a back bench junior Senator from Illinois.

He is black.

And his name sounds like a foreign disease.

He had a few supporters in the main DNC when he started, now he has the majority. He knew that he would lose certain states on name recognition alone. The Clinton years were good years. The Clintons have been the most visible people in the democratic party for the last 16 years.

The larger the state the more name recognition plays a role so the best he could really hope for in Texas, Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, etc, was a close split..no major delegate gain.

He knew he was going to lose certain states based on, let's be honest, race. He was NEVER going to win W.VA or Kentucky..no matter what.

So he absolutely had to find a way to rack up the delegates needed to secure the nomination. Which he has done brilliantly in caucus states, and smaller states all over the country and by running up large margins in big states that favor him demographically.

And he has. But let's, just for a minute remember, that this candidacy of Barack Obama's was always a long shot. It had to be played perfectly..absolutely perfectly in order to even have a chance of working. There has been very little choice for Obama in how he ran this campaign, he absolutely HAD to capture certain key legislative districts within certain states to get the numbers to add up.

Very little drama..very intensely focussed campaigning in certain areas...a lot of number crunching, millions of phone calls to the right area codes.

All for the RIGHT to try and win the presidential election by campaigning everywhere. But if he hadn't played this primary exactly right, in fact exactly as he has, Hillary would have been the one declaring that she had the majority tonight.

I don't believe it, just as I don't believe in magic. He won b/c Clinton failed to compete. She failed to recognize early enough that she had to fight for every single vote and not depend on some sort of 'momentum' to win the nomination. Now she is fighting for every vote and we will see if it gets her anything. It may be too late for her.

Writing off millions of Democratic voters as racist is a losing strategy. It's not going to work, cannot work. It will just alienate millions of working class people who are already highly alienated from the Democratic party. There are just not enough blacks and affluent liberals of the Oregon type to carry a candidate to the presidency. It's a recipe for a McGovern electoral disaster. Obama will be lucky to get 30 percent of the national vote, if this is his stategy.

There is a real class war in this country and it pits working class people against the affluent. And many of Obama's most fervent supporters are among the affluent. Celebrities, media figures, college students, academics, these are highly privileged people in a society where many people feel extremely unprivileged. If you're old, rural, and not making a lot of money, every time you turn on the tv you get a message that you're not wanted. You're not in the desired demographic and everything you see on tv tells you that. You're not urban, young, lefty, or wealthy. And many people highly resent being in that undesired category.

Hence when Obama brings out his celebrity supporters like Oprah or Maria Shiver, that just backfires with a lot of voters. He ends up appealing to a desired demographic, just like the tv does, and if he were selling soap or perfume or something, he'd have it made. And he is in fact raking in a lot of money. But that doesn't mean he's getting votes or will get them.

excellent summation-- the Clintons had the money, the power, the influence, a large chunk of the democratic party in their pocket-- massive brand name recognition and they had the ex-President, the Big Dog himself... and found themselves outmaneuvered by a Jr. Senator with a name that sounded like both big enemies of the american people-- and he's black... WTF?!!! you know, we're just waking up to what as to be the most masterful campaign in recent political history. Now he's running even in the polls with a 30 year Big Name Senator, the presumptive Republican nominee-- and his campaign hasn't even yet turned it's focus to the general election.

This is a guy NOT to be underestimated-- the articles we read about Obama almost read as if he was always a shoe in for the nomination when it was the other way around. Obama has already rewritten the political books on taking down a massive political machine- let's see what he does in the general election.

EXACTLY! Senator Obama's campaign has been nothing short of brilliant. This is something that everyone overlooks and should pay more attention to if they feel Senator Obama has no clue what he is doing. The things he has accomplished are monumental yet not particularly surprising. His campaign has always been very well managed, well funded, well organized and able to withstand intense scrutiny from the Clinton camp (which, by the way, is in debt... and she is still the most qualified? Please.) Senator Obama's campaign is a telling sign of his ability to organize and lead; abilities one often looks for in a President.

Funny, I don't remember any celebrities being dragged out by the Obama campaign recently...

Well does John Edwards count? :-)

'EXACTLY! Senator Obama's campaign has been nothing short of brilliant. This is something that everyone overlooks and should pay more attention to if they feel Senator Obama has no clue what he is doing.'

well, i'd have shortened the two bit slogan from 'change we can believe in' to 'change we can believe' as it is grammatically correct. he gets away with it because he is the affirmative action candidate. i think he learned to speak like that from 20 years of listening to his pajama wearing, america hating, ebonic speaking preacher.

nerdnam -

I don't think the average rural person turns on their tv and finds they are "unwanted" -- I think they turn on their tv and find American Idol, Dancing with the Stars and Iron Chef.

In the nomination process the media whipped up various factors and the HRC campaign whipped up some resentments about her opponent. She took her best shot.

But as far as a political strategy, a campaign that appeals to the entire country, and the leadership necessary to run a successful and sustained run for the Presidency Obama has simply done a better job and offers a better chance for the MAJORITY of Democrats.

Many of HRC's supporters will support his nomination against McCain. Some will remain angry and, not to put too fine a point on it - bitter, and so stay away or vote McCain.

But when the ELECTION process begins - which is NOT what we've been seeing - but the real election process, I think you will be surprised to see that a majority of AMericans will feel very comfortable with the message Obama offers and and will be supportive of his candidacy.

He won the Democratic nomination because of a strong and brilliant campaign. He will win the election on that campaign AND the issues.

McCains obviously stupid or senile. Why? Look at his Foreign Policy advisers. How could any mentally competent person associate himself with these guys (ie, Neocons, PNAC pencilnecks, War Perverts, etc) after they shit the bed in Iraq?

nerdnam:

There is a real class war in this country and it pits working class people against the affluent. And many of Obama's most fervent supporters are among the affluent. Celebrities, media figures, college students, academics, these are highly privileged people in a society where many people feel extremely unprivileged.

Affluent is not the same as educated. On the average, college students are not "affluent". Neither are "academics". A union carpenter with 10 years of experience makes more than the average adjunct professor with similar work experience, and a shitload less student loan debt. Let's not even talk about the state of salaries in public education. There's a world of color out there, please try not to paint people all with the same brushstroke.

'There is a real class war in this country and it pits working class people against the affluent.'

ah! the populist 'two america's' thing. i would say you are correct. there are two america's. but it is not the working class vs the rich. it is the hardworking producers vs the lazy and stupid tit sucking recipients. and we all know who represents who.

The summation of Obama's campaign stated above pretty much nails one side of the affair. The other side is the campaign of his opponent.

The claim that she "didn't campaign" isn't accurate; she did, she just ran an absolutely dysfunctional effort. From her strategically deployed fake Southern drawl and crocodile tears alternating with an unappealing nasal braying to the poorly concealed racism of her trailer-trash husband, to their uncharismatic, snippy daughter, the Clinton effort was doomed: it confirmed the worst suspicions of her as a ruthless infighter who sees sincerity as weakness and loyalty as situationally dependent. Her staff doesn't like her; they're opportunists on the make, and when it became clear she was taking on water, they split. The party establishment, aware of what Clinton revenge can look like, didn't put their shoulders to Obama's wheel until late, after it was clear that they were safely out of the woods and wouldn't be summarily punished for their disloyalty. This fact alone tells one a good bit of what one needs to know about how spiteful, unforgiving, and unlikeable a person Clinton is.

All this talk about her assuming the mantle of the Democratic Party is fine and good; I remember thinking this time last year that she'd likely be the candidate. I also remember thinking what a loathesome, soulless individual she really is, and that her loss of the nomination, if it did occur, would be due entirely to her inability to conceal that inch-deep-mile-wide fraudulence. In 2000, I was in good company thinking--erroneously and sadly, as it turned out--we'd finally seen the backs of the Clinton carnival; her candidacy, for those with short memories, illustrated precisely why we were so glad to see their mendacious, acquisitive clan gone from the White House eight years earlier.

In a sense, her loss is a blessing in disguise for women; she's served as an inspiration for future candidates, and she hasn't won--because her victory would be followed by a vindictive administration that would set that movement back a generation.

Having said all that, as a Republican, it's been a thorough entertainment to watch.

I don't believe it, just as I don't believe in magic. He won b/c Clinton failed to compete. She failed to recognize early enough that she had to fight for every single vote and not depend on some sort of 'momentum' to win the nomination. Now she is fighting for every vote and we will see if it gets her anything. It may be too late for her.

You should believe it, books will end up being written about it. It is a fairly new take on how to exploit the local gerrymandering of state politicians.Obama never claimed not to be a politician. He claimed to be a better and different type of politician. And now he's showing us how to work smarter not harder.

Writing off millions of Democratic voters as racist is a losing strategy. It's not going to work, cannot work. It will just alienate millions of working class people who are already highly alienated from the Democratic party. There are just not enough blacks and affluent liberals of the Oregon type to carry a candidate to the presidency. It's a recipe for a McGovern electoral disaster. Obama will be lucky to get 30 percent of the national vote, if this is his stategy.

First of all, the fact that those people did not vote for him can hardly be called HIM writing them off, quite the reverse actually. Second, he hasn't even considered writing them off, although they seem to be extremely biased against supporting the same candidate as "blacks and affluent liberals of the Oregon type". As if somehow his attracting that demographic is a personal insult to "millions of working class people". You say that they feel unwanted when they turn on the TV..but that may be a media bias, but Obama hasn't said he doesn't want those voters. Heck, he'd love to have them..but what can he DO to get them. Any constructive ideas?

There is a real class war in this country and it pits working class people against the affluent. And many of Obama's most fervent supporters are among the affluent. Celebrities, media figures, college students, academics, these are highly privileged people in a society where many people feel extremely unprivileged. If you're old, rural, and not making a lot of money, every time you turn on the tv you get a message that you're not wanted. You're not in the desired demographic and everything you see on tv tells you that. You're not urban, young, lefty, or wealthy. And many people highly resent being in that undesired category.

I think there is a class war in this country. I really do. And I think unfortunately that has been really pointed out by the media with a distinct bias towards the liberal, urban, left.

Now people will say, yeah, but it's always been there, we're just seeing it now. But what makes this whole thing the fault of a Starbucks barista who makes no more per hour than someone who works in retail in a small town?

One vote is one vote, one human is one human. Why does being poor and rural mean your opinion automatically SHOULD be given more weight than someone else's? Given equal weight, certainly, but more, that's not fair.

Hence when Obama brings out his celebrity supporters like Oprah or Maria Shiver, that just backfires with a lot of voters. He ends up appealing to a desired demographic, just like the tv does, and if he were selling soap or perfume or something, he'd have it made. And he is in fact raking in a lot of money. But that doesn't mean he's getting votes or will get them.

And when Hillary Clinton holds fundraisers with Elton John.. Clint Eastwood..and Paul Newman, that's different, exactly how?? Are poorer, rural American workers enamored of Elton John??

All candidates have famous supporters, and all of those famous supporters get a lot of press..for being famous. But their vote still only counts for one vote, and all politicians know that.

As far as being elitist, which is what in a round-about way, you're saying. He's not. Seriously. he's the poorest by far of all the candidates, always has been.