The View from Pennsylvania Team Clinton: Going Down Ugly

[Better Believe It]

Counterpunch
May 9, 2008
The View from Pennsylvania
Team Clinton: Going Down Ugly
By DAVE LINDORFF

Clinton, the private-schooled, Wellesley and Yale-educated millionaire lawyer from Chicago, first tried to present herself as a White House veteran, and then, in recent weeks, as a NASCAR mom on Food Stamps, and in Pennsylvania resorted to cheap race-baiting and red-baiting in an effort to derail her opponent, has failed. Barack Obama, another private-schooled Harvard and Yale-educated lawyer, but one who actually did have to work his way up the economic ladder, won decisively in North Carolina, even drawing a significant number of working-class white voters in a state where white voters have not traditionally voted for candidates with dark skin.

In the end, the Clinton end-game strategy of using the race card, and of trying to recast herself, absurdly, as a working-class hero, may end up being all to the good for Obama. Clearly it forced him to move away from his empty “change” and “hope” slogans and to address the issues of ordinary working-class Americans—something he had largely avoided doing earlier in the campaign. It also put the issue of race—which the Republicans can be expected to use even more blatantly in the general election—out front and center, where it could be exposed to the light of day.

What seems to be happening is that racist Democrats, those who cannot vote for a black candidate, are rejecting Obama, and will probably either skip voting in November, or swing over to McCain, just as they swung over to Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon before, on different but related issues. The difference is that Obama seems to be able to reach independent white voters and even liberal and libertarian Republican voters who are turned off by the Republicans’ overt racism, as well as by many of the Republicans’ so-called “social policy” positions, such as abortion bans, opposition to gay rights, denial of global warming, etc.

From here in Pennsylvania, I’d say the outlook for the fall is likely to be a strong win for Obama in a McCain/Obama match-up. In a funny way, he will have Pennsylvania, and Hillary’s sewer campaign, to thank.

Please read the entire article at:
http://www.counterpunch.org/lindorff05092008.html

[Cha]

1. Yeah, we owe hilary's

staggering lack of a moral compass..a LOT and that she's so willing to display, for the whole world to see, how low she'll stoop.

[Peace Patriot]

3. No, I think this guy is right. We had a good, old-fashioned, dirty, political,

democratic fight--which was mainly about who controls the party, the grass roots or the fatcats--and the grass roots won. Go back in history, and study the foul things that Thomas Jefferson had to endure in campaigns, or Abe Lincoln, or FDR, or JFK (I can remember the filthy anti-Catholic pamphlets that were circulated about him). It's par for the course in a democracy. Ugly politics will happen. And look at the result. We have a fully vetted, fully tested, well-prepared candidate, who has weathered quite a storm, and whose best qualities emerged and shone. And what do the Pukes have? A tired old man, who got crowned as their nominee with no contest and no vetting, and who has the Bush-Cheney albatross round his neck.

I agree with the writer. Obama will win in a landslide--although I doubt that the Bushite corporations who own and control the 'TRADE SECRET' code by which all our votes are now 'counted' will permit him to have his full mandate for change. It will be a landslide in reality, and 50/50-ish in the "official" numbers, with Obama winning.

I think that the global corporate predators who run things have realized that they must back off a bit. One of the reasons is South America, where their bludgeon tactics--coups, black ops, psyops, dirty tricks, slaughtering union leaders and leftists in Colombia, larding the Colombian fascists with $5.5 BILLION in military aid, trying to start an oil war, etc.--just aren't working. South America has gone overwhelmingly democratic and leftist, and is gathering steam on self-determination, and even a South American "Common Market" that doesn't include the U.S. The Corporates need a peace initiative there, to create a better business climate. Also, in the Middle East, of course. (After a certain point, war becomes bad for business--they've milked that one to the point of no return.) An independent South America, and its example as to what transparent vote counting can accomplish for the benefit of the people, has them very worried, indeed, both as to corporate profiteering, and as to its impact on us, eventually. They've tried every way they can to keep it from us, but eventually it's going to dawn on North Americans that South America is now democratic--really democratic--and now has leaders who serve the people--really serve the people.

I won't go into it all, but I follow South American politics pretty closely, and I believe that Obama has already sent a peace mission to the South American left, and I think this is partly due to his own beliefs and instincts about the situation, and it also has the approval of some corporate interests. The Obama ambassador was Bill Richardson. First he visited the Medellin Cartel (now Bush Cartel) fascist Uribe, in Colombia, on Richardson's stated mission of getting three American hostages released by the leftist guerrilla group in Colombia, the FARC. I believe that Uribe rebuffed him, would give him no help. Then he visited Hugo Chavez, and together they announced that Chavez would do everything he could. He met with Chavez for an hour and a half. This very interesting and surprising Richardson mission went almost unreported here. It occurred just after his surprising endorsement of Obama. (Richardson had been a Clinton man.)

There is also Jimmy Carter's mission to the Middle East--with less obvious ties to Obama, but very much in tune with Obama policy ("we must talk to our enemies"). Carter visited with Hamas leaders--to the Bushites' great consternation.

To me, these things strongly signal that the corporate rulers will not deprive Obama of a win in November, although they still have the capability to do so--the easy capability--and they can most certainly artificially limit his mandate for reform (both by shaving his numbers, and by shaping a Congress that will resist reform). Also, the people are getting onto this rigged voting machine thing, so they have to be careful, in order to retain their long term power over election results. If they cheat Obama out of a win, they may find all their voting machines dumped into 'Boston Harbor' (so to speak).

[Poll_Blind]

6. I love your enthusiasm but don't let your guard down. It ain't over till we're watching him...

...take the oath on that podium!

  Great commentary, btw!

PB

[moc]

9. Very very interesting. Have you made an OP of this?

I was unaware of these South American activities. Thanks for the education.

[speedoo]

2. K&R, and bookmarked.

Thanks for posting.

[Arugula Latte]

4. An example of why Obama can win states like Ohio:

Democratic turnout was more than double Republican turnout. If Obama gets virtually all the votes from those who voted for him in the primary plus even a small percentage of former Hillary votes, he will still smack McCain down handily.

[FrenchieCat]

5. I'm in agreement with what is said in the parts that you have posted.

When I have time, I'll read the rest.

[GetTheRightVote]

7. Yes, as another posting stated HRC may actually be helping Obama win

Go Obama Go !!!

[Skip Intro]

8. Oh God, the whining will never stop, will it? If it's bad, blame it on Hillary.

Obama can't win - Hillary's fault.

That mean woman.

waaaah waaaah waaaah

:eyes: