<p>gadad, that’s right up there with the theory that she gave up her high-profile job and moved to Hope, Arkansas with Bill because she looked into her crystal ball and saw that he would some day be President and that that would lead to her becoming a senator and so forth.</p>
<p>There’s a simpler explanation: she wants the nomination, she thinks she can win in the general election, and she thinks that if she points out Obama’s weaknesses to the Democratic faithful that she might develop enough of a groundswell to convince the superdelegates to give her the nod. Whether you like her or not, you have to admit that she’s a fighter and she’s tenacious.</p>
<p>What Obama needs to do at this point, IMHO, is largely ignore her and start running against McCain, while letting his surrogates keep the superdelegates in line behind the scenes. Obama only wins when he sticks to his message of prophetic transformation and stays on the high road. If he looks and acts convincingly Presidential–and if he is seen as connecting to a broad base of voters–he has nothing to worry about from her.</p>
<p>“I live close to harlem, and harlem has a reputation of being a bad place to live some time ago. … Harlem still needs some work, but it is a much better place to live than before.”</p>
<p>Funny you should mention that, because while the South Side of Chicago still needs some work, it is a much better place to live than it was before.</p>
<p>Both my parents grew up in Obama’s district; we’ve been there for over 60 years. I am shocked to this day when I drive past some streets; 20 years ago I couldn’t possibly imagine new townhouses springing up on some of those lots.</p>
<p>Hanna, just recently, I read in one of the papers (I think it was the NYT) that, there has been an increase in the shootings of kids walking to school in the south side, and some of the parents and community activists have formed a group to give protection to the kids. I think this is unacceptable, kids should be able to go to school without worrying about being shot at.</p>
<p>I am also glad that there have been improvements, but we still have more to do. </p>
<p>I think I have been too harsh on Obama. From now on, I will probably just adopt a wait and see attitute. Maybe he will turn out to be a terrific president.</p>
<p>That’s not in our district. But anyway, I don’t think it’s very controversial to oppose shooting at schoolchildren. Most people find that unacceptable.</p>
<p>What’s changed is that when I was a teenager (20 years ago), shootings like that happened every week. The South Side has not become Highland Park, and it never will.</p>
<p>tega: Nice idea. I think it is time for everyone to cool off. </p>
<p>Harlem has a special affinity for the Clintons and rightly so. I admire the Clintons too. Unfortunately Hillary gets lumped in with Bill and so she becomes the candidate of “the past”. And this year is all about the future.</p>
<p>The South Side always had a black middle class core that the much more depressed West Side lacks. Once they removed some of the worst public housing it took off. Also lots of nice homes near the lake that just needed rehabbing plus the UC anchor. The SS was the first home to Chicago’s wealthy.</p>
<p>Bill Clinton foundation has helped raise money for a lot of causes in Harlem. Most of the black politicians have done little. Harlem has a lot of community activists who are very vocal in the community, and these groups have done more for the community than the politicians. </p>
<p>I think it is absurd to brand the Clintons as racists, if you know their record from Yale Law, Arkansas, and the White House, they have consistently been at the right side of the civil rights movement. </p>
<p>It was on the news recently that, some politicans are renting cars (I think one was renting a Cadillac) for about $800 a month at the tax payers expense while schools need supplies. This just makes me so angry. We need all the money we can get to fix the schools, and give kids the opportunity to be able to climb up the social ladder. What about an after school program to teach kids how to dance, play chess, play an instrument etc. </p>
<p>A lot of the politicians are just in it for themselves, they don’t care about the people</p>
<p>You can’t be raised as a white boy if you’re not. I don’t care what kind of family you have or neighborhood you live in. And white people can’t possibly understand that.</p>
<p>“I am not racist, but there are a lot of racist white people in the country and they will not vote for Obama”.</p>
<p>Actually, it seemed to me that she was saying that Obama carried a huge proportion of the black vote in the primaries, which contributed greatly (in many cases, it probably was the deciding factor) to him beating her, but that winning the black vote by such a huge amount wouldn’t be as effective in the general. Which is true, is it not?</p>
<p>"Obama was an organizer on the South Side <em>before</em> going to law school. (Or perhaps my memory is faulty.) "</p>
<p>It actually was after he went to law school, which shows a big commitment to helping people who are underserved. After all, as president of Harvard Law Review, he could have gone to any high paying corporate law job in the country. Instead, he chose to be a community organizer – a low paying, low visibility job that doesn’t get lots of respect from people who graduate from places like Harvard Law.</p>
<p>1of42: It is like saying that “he only wins because of all the blacks”. </p>
<p>He may also win in November “because of all the blacks” who will turn out to vote this time, as opposed to prior years when the turnout is low.</p>
<p>Obama is not a very “black” guy, in my book. He’s really mixed up- part black, part white, part native son, part expat, almost an immigrant. He is really the face of today’s America.</p>
<p>Tega, I watched the above linked Michele Obama interview twice and listened very carefully. What exactly did she say that offended you so? I have my own take on what I think she was trying to say, but I’d appreciate hearing your take before I respond.</p>
<p>I don’t think Hillary was being racist or even “playing the race card”. What she was doing was pointing out Obama’s very real weakness, concerning voter demographics in certain states. I agree with her statement that, “These are the people you have to win if you’re a Democrat in sufficient numbers to actually win the election.” It’s a valid point.</p>
<p>What she fails to do, however, is acknowledge her own very real electability weaknesses. Neither does she acknowledge that Obama’s current demographic weaknesses can be overcome. Once there’s just a single Democrat running against McCain, all bets are off. Anything can happen between now and November.</p>
<p>I agree. Carrying the black vote in the primary campaign is uncorrelated with success in the general election (it might even be negatively correlated!). Democrats always win 90% of the black vote in the general campaign, they don’t need to fight for the vote (this is obvious from the data). They also do not need to fight for the liberal votes, as Democrats always dominate the liberal vote compared to Republicans. They do need to fight for the white independent middle class vote. Having the candidate which can best win that vote virtually guarantees an election win.</p>
<p>The only convincing argument for Obama is that he can counteract the loss in white middle class votes by bringing in new voters (younger ones, specifically).</p>
<p>This is based on the current race today and should not be viewed as a prediction for the next few months. Obama might convince White Middle Class America that he actually is the candidate for them (he’s not doing that currently).</p>
<p>3bm103, don’t go there. White people can quite easily understand it. Yes, Obama was raised by his white family, but every stranger who looked at him saw a black person. (It reminds me of what someone–Cornell West, I think?–said about how the cab drivers who wouldn’t pick him up on rainy nights in Manhattan didn’t see a professor in a suit, they saw a black man.)</p>
<p>I don’t know what your race or gender is, but I hope you aren’t totally defined by them and I hope you aren’t so lacking in empathy and imagination that you can’t imagine what it is like to be something else.</p>
<p>You’re right, that’s exactly what it’s like saying. However, it’s true - Obama does win because of the black vote. Don’t know if he “only” wins because of that, but it’s certainly a huge contributing factor.</p>
<p>Now, you may be right in your latter point, and he may win in November for the same reason. But that is a valid counter-argument to bring up on that point - calling Hillary racist for bringing up the really valid demographic question is not.</p>
<p>I’m sorry to rain on the victory parade here, but these demographic and electability questions are very valid. I don’t know what the answers are, and it may be that Obama could sweep the election and carry much of the white middle class vote, but in a nomination contest as incredibly close as this, it is not “racist” or “desperate” to bring the questions up - it is pragmatic and necessary.</p>
<p>“The only convincing argument for Obama is that he can counteract the loss in white middle class votes by bringing in new voters (younger ones, specifically).”</p>
<p>The only one? Another convincing argument for Obama is that a lot of white working people don’t vote in Democratic primaries, and within that group, there are literally millions of voters who hate Hillary with a white-hot passion. It doesn’t really matter whether that hatred is justified or not. They’ll pay money, ring doorbells, and practically walk over broken glass to vote for her opponent in November. Obama has a chance with these voters, who may give him a genuine listen. They’ve made up their minds about Hillary, and they will not even listen to her pitch.</p>
<p>For some strange reason this election has turned many of us H haters around on her. Compared to BO she seems far less smug and more likable. I can’t really explain it but I used to detest her–now I don’t.</p>
<p>barrons, I tend to agree. I think it might be the underdog factor. It used to be that the press was solidly in the Hillary camp and they have now turned on her and fallen at the feet of Obama. While part of me sees this as poetic justice for the Clintons to get a dose of their own medicine, the part of me that empathises with the person vilified by the media (which is usual the one with the “R” behind their name), makes me want to root for her.</p>