DISQUS

HoosierDaddy · 2 years ago

I think Obama's campaign is doing exceptionally well. He is matching or even exceeding the fundraising of the "establishment" candidate. Although national polls show him down by double digits, this is mostly as a result of name recognition for HRC. His negatives are nowhere near hers. Her negatives are stratospheric. Although "national" polls show Obama down, these are essentially meaningless. There is no national primary. The primary will be driven by momentum from IA, SC, and NH. The only one of those states in which HRC is leading is NH. (Source Real Clear Politics).

Anon · 2 years ago

I think its going great and I base that on his fundraising. He has outraised all of his competition (dems and reps) and has done so with a record number of donors. This demonstrates to me that he inspires people to the point that a non-traditional donor is sending in a check for $20.

That means a lot. When a person contributes, they are involved at a different level. I believe that Obama is the hope of many to turn this country around and reestablish the U.S. as a respected nation throughout the world.

so-called "Austin Mayor" · 2 years ago

Obama has raised over $58 million in two quarters from an astounding 258,000 donors.

I'd say he's doing alright.

He's certainly a more successful candidate than Kirk Dillard's other presidential candidate, John "The Wheels Have Come of the Express" McCain.

-- SCAM

Louis G Atsaves · 2 years ago

Drove through Iowa a few days back. Tons of radio ads for Clinton, Obama, Romney. The Clinton ads sounded superior to Obama's. More substance, better music, better buzzwords.

Time will tell.

Louis G. Atsaves

So Ill · 2 years ago

Personally, I think he's doing fair. But I wonder if he's losing more ground than he wants to in Illinois. I keep hearing people wonder when he's going to remember what state he represents in Congress. A four-city fly-by (Springfield, Marion, Quad Cities, Metro) might be a good use of an 'easy' campaign day.

DeKalbCountyDem · 2 years ago

I don't see how it could go any better...wouldn't want to be leading the "poll" pack at this point....no where to go but down...but leading the "money" pack is right where you'd want to be. Disagree with So Ill, respectfully. We had a grassroots fundraiser here in DeKalb County and raised good money and many enthusiastic volunteers, most of them not the usual suspects...farmers to professors. All recognized the need to go to Iowa and tell the story there, not here.

Name/Nickname/Anon · 2 years ago

He's an effective fund-raiser which is more of a statement on the unpopularity of Bush and the Iraq War than on credentials and qualifications. He is currently portraying himself as a big-ideas, all-inclusive moderate (a so-called uniter) but analysis of his VERY sparse voting record reveals something quite different.

The major problem I have with Obama is that he seems to have little grasp of the nuts and bolts details of virtually every important issue. His debates have largely landed with a thud when compared to some of the other Democratic candidates....this is true even though the debates up to this point have been heavily scripted Democratic friendly talking points that he should have excelled in. As an example, look at his almost embarrassingly mediocre performance on the civil-rights debate - one that he was widely touted to shine in. Every time Obama opens his mouth and speaks to issues we see a tremendous lack of gravitas. Unless the voting criterion you use is 'Anybody But Bush' it does not appear that Obama has the experience to lead the country. Just saying that 'Americans deserve more' or other such sound bytes does not a good leader make.

I see Obama as little more than a glamor flake for a party that finds itself with a difficult candidate; a candidate that will be the most divisive person to run for president in recently memory. The disdain of Hillary Clinton is so thick and palpable that many people are desperate for another choice. Obama is that choice; it's just a choice of symbolism over substance.

All this being said, the next-to-last thing I would ever want to do is turn control of the country over to Chicago Democrats. After all - it is working so well here in Illinois. The only thing I can think of that would be worse is giving control back to Hillary. Eight years of her meddling was plenty.

Team Sleep · 2 years ago

Obamaramaslamalamadingdong is doing quite well. If he can use his massive campaign stash to make himself look good and get his message out - while not just crowing about how much money he has - he can win the nomination. Hillary is a manufactured candidate who is riding the coattails of her hubby and is reliant upon the Dem base voting for the status quo. For the country's sake, I hope Barack is the nominee. And if the U.S. elects a Dem prez, I would much rather have Barack than Hillary.

So Ill · 2 years ago

DKCD, your point is taken. Folks here aren't as forgiving, not that it matters all that much.

I think it was telling that when Obama had his big door-to-door Walk For Change, the only southern Illinois event was in the Metro East -- and to my knowledge that was barely attended. (I'm going off the map his campaign had provided...but a google search for "Obama Walk For Change Southern Illinois" backs me up).

Ron Burgundy · 2 years ago

I also think he has to come up with some concrete steps to fix a lot of the problems going on with the country, i.e. Iraq and the Middle East, healthcare, the environment, and spending.

He can't get by on always saying, "We need to end the partisanship in this country...yada yada yada"

ISUDEM · 2 years ago

So ILL- The walk for change was meant to take place in areas that the voters will have a huge impact on the nomination process. The campaign was calling around in IL, I received a letter and a phone call to follow up on the e-mail I received, to get people to Iowa for the walk for change. And I know for a fact that there is money and staff committed to IL in a way that no other campaign for president has ever done. His support in IL is solid, he's got over a 70% approval rating, and we need to make sure that we swallow our pride and help him campaign in a whole COUNTRY and not be selfish in wanting him at our county central committee meetings like he was when he was running for Senate. Think big picture people!

ZC · 2 years ago

If anybody wants to read another anonymous political insider survey, National Journal just released another one about the Dems at http://nationaljournal.com/insiders.pdf . Obama continues to place a strong #2 after Hillary, as he has for a long time.

One thing that occurs to me is that whether or not Obama wins this thing (and not saying he can't), his incredible donor base has got to have the Hillary-ites talking about the VP nod. If he can bring his 250,000 donors to the general campaign ticket in 2008, it could be lights out Republicans.

So no matter what happens next January, Obama has to be feeling pretty good. Not bad for a man who's been serving in D.C. all of 2 1/2 years.

Steve - O · 2 years ago

At this point, unless you are incumbent President, the fund raising numbers aren't exactly that telling. Look at Howard Dean versus John Kerry in 2003 at this time, Ronald Reagan was third in his totals in the second quarter in 1979, etc. I have many involved friends in Iowa and can tell you that many people have been very dissappointed after seing him in person - he's a good speaker, but not that charismatic or funny. Not someone very many people want to campaign and work hard for over there. Plus, he has not really done anything as a Senator - I'm not sure he will win a single primary.

Jechislo · 2 years ago

He has very strong appeal to a large percentage of the 42% of the population that are strong liberals/Democrats. But, he doesn't have what it takes to draw enough of the other 58% to get elected.

ISUDEM · 2 years ago

So IL- If you really do have a friend in the campaign I'm sure you could ask them what the campaign's plan regarding Missouri since it is a Feb. 5th. We've got to get through Iowa first before we can think of doing anything big in IL or any other state. Obama has a lot of supporters in Metro East and S. IL that will head across the river. And along the lines of events in So. IL I know for a fact that there were house parties in Carbondale and Alton since I had roommates at both of them, so the campaign is down there.

Overall I think Obama is sitting pretty. Everyone has to remember that this guy was unknown two years ago nationally and to be a constant second in the polls really does say something when you're going up against someone who's been around for two decades on the national scene.

So Ill · 2 years ago

What interests me about the campaign, and what you touched on indirectly during your SECOND campaign ad, ISU, is the 'new' voters Obama brings to the polls. People who have voted for years want to know what their vote in '04 has bought them. People who didn't, or weren't able to, seem to be the most avid Obama supporters.

I'm also adding 'inability to listen' to my stereotype of rabid Obamites. Want to throw another freaking campaign ad out?

Esteban · 2 years ago

Despite all of the good headlines about his
fund-raising successes, his poll numbers
don't seem to be moving upward, despite all
of the Clinton backage. Ominous?

Sango Dem · 2 years ago

Things are good. His fund raising is excellent. His Chicago headquarters staff is getting too large though. Keep your staff out in the states where they can do some good and not waste time on petty internal squabbles.

ISUDEM · 2 years ago

SO IL, what exactly is the campaign ad you speak of? I'm offering my views and for some reason you dismiss them as campaign fodder. I'm adding "typical SO. IL whining" in my notes about those that can't seem to see the trees in the forest so to speak. He's got a whole country to run in and people in IL have to understand that. Hopefully you will get over it in time.

Esteban, I'd say that six months out the fact that he's consistently a second to HRC and almost always ahead of Edwards who has near universal name rec. from his last run says a lot.

Anonymoose · 2 years ago

Two words: Tony Rezko.

Ghost · 2 years ago

I think Obama campaign is doing better then many realize. The sheer number of supporters and contributions suggest he has an actual grass roots movement that most canidates just dream about. The poll numbers indicate tey are of likely registered voters, but the ones I have seen leave out age infromation on those interviewed, and one other key fact. That they were willing to take the poll (and were not on a do not call list).

Obama is appealing to folks who have not had strong voter turnout (young people). Thus, these polls fail to reflect the grass roots apathetic voters who are being engaged by the process for the first time and are not only giving mone but will show up and vote.

I would say that Obama embiggens the small people who have felt left behind and not previously been engaged by the political process. 31 Million in small amounts speaks to this effect.

Impossibly Exceeding Expectati · 2 years ago

The campaign is going well, but it's difficult to tell. The Obama campaign is measured against it's own yardstick. From the ground, I've never seen so many people so charged up about a campaign so early on.

To respond to So Ill: I was in Iowa during the walk for change, and there were at least 15 people who had made the drive four hours from Metro East to canvass for the day in a small town, so I would say that's some measure of success.

Wumpus · 2 years ago

For not saying much, he sure is raising tons of money and people seem to worship the diety. The media has not been at all critical, save some Rezko crap.

Gore Obama 08. I can't imagine that there are people willing to vote for Gore.

Anon · 2 years ago

Place Rezko in the context of:
Whitewater, Keating 5, ex-wives, etc.

It will be an annoyance, but not stick.

Alas, it will likely be something stupid like one overheard off-color joke that will make or break candidates.

Squideshi · 2 years ago

I can tell you that Obama isn't doing well amongst Greens. He's taking the same type of corporate campaign cash that perpetuates business as usual.

In addition, he hasn't really TRIED to appeal to Green voters. I haven't heard him say ANYTHING about what reforms he might support in order to lower the barriers for new political parties.

I think that the easiest thing that he could do would be to come out strongly in public support of Instant Runoff Voting for federal elections. That would cost him little, if any, political capital; and it would show some good faith on his part.

If Obama wanted to be a little more ambitious, he would pledge to appoint a few Greens--there are plenty of suitable posts for such a gesture.

decaturboy · 2 years ago

To anomonymoose remember Whitewater and legal billing that are the Clinton problems along with pardons and more,
Obama needs to hit a home run in one of these candidate debates and outshine the field.
When you look at the field he is the new voice and we really need change not more years of what seems like the Bush-clinton-Bush era.

amy · 2 years ago

well, I guess for someone who has been running
for president since 2004 he's doing ok. but it's still all a bit puffy and presumptuous----that
Ill. poll should give them great pause. Obama
has no Senate record not because of his short
time in office....it's because he really has
not been functioning as a Senator. and, the
Ill. poll may reflect what the nation will
learn soon....Illinois and Cook County are no
example to lend to the nation!

Rezko is just a good one word way of describing
the negative ball that Obama has to go along
with the big wet puppy puffball of Obama book
club goo that they think will get the buyers.
oops I mean voters!

the Patriot · 2 years ago

He is ok, but the campaign needs legs. The internet fundraising will dry up in Jan 08 and he needs the deep pockets to make it to next summer.

He also has shown he is smart, but who is he going to rely on. It takes more then one person to run this country. Bill Clinton did not delegate enough, Bush delegated too much and to the wrong people, who is going to help him. Hillary has Bill and 8 years in the White House. To get the nod, he needs to get deep pockets and fill the experience gap.

Rich Miller · 2 years ago

Not criticizing, Patriot, but why do you think the internet money will dry up in January?

L.S. · 2 years ago

Obama is in a pretty good position right now. His numbers could be a little closer to Clinton but overall he is in good shape. His fundrasing has been impressive and he will have a lot of ammo to do slick TV ads in preperation of Sunami Tuesday. The importance of Iowa and New Hampsire have been diluted due to so many states moving their primary up. Look for Edwards to do well and maybe even win Iowa but peak there. If Hillary and Barack dry up the rest of the money it will come down to a two person race as the remanider of the field falls out. IN a head to head, Barack can calim electibility and a new face that people are starving for.

I will say this, outside the political geeks like us that focus on this stuff all the time, the general public is only somewhat paying attention to the field right now. The poll numbers do not move noticiably these days. Obama has to hit another big shot a la Audacity of Hope, and he needs to time it right. If he can dazzle the crowd on a big stage in the late debates he will walk away with it.

So Ill · 2 years ago

ISU, a tip. Take "We" out of your posts when discussing the topic. Use "The campaign" instead. It dials down your rhetoric two notches.

I'll go on the record and say this: Obama hasn't done his job in Illinois. I don't doubt that he CAN -- I voted for him and am proud to say it -- but he hasn't, and he isn't, and while he has a "whole country to run in", he has a state to help run.

Didn't a poll come out recently that had Hillary polling at a greater percentage in NY than Obama was in IL? That should be of some concern. Fact is, you have to defend your home base. He's not doing it, not well. He hasn't been anywhere in Illinois, outside of Chicago, in months.

It's still early in the campaign, and I agree that Iowa is of primary importance since its primary is early. All I'm saying is either the campaign or the Senate office hasn't given people in my area much of a reason to vote for Obama in recent months, and that's what I'm hearing from others in southern Illinois as well.

Jeff Trigg · 2 years ago

Barack Obama has made some critical mistakes. One last week probably took him out it. Obama made the huge mistake of telling the teachers unions that he isn't opposed to merit based pay for teachers, something he was never in favor of in Illinois. Those government teachers HATE being graded and don't want their pay to have anything to do with whether or not they are any good at their jobs. He can't win without the corrupt, greedy teachers unions money and resources behind him.

Rich Miller · 2 years ago

Trigg, you're entitled to your opinion, but how, exactly, are the teachers unions "corrupt"?

Captain America · 2 years ago

Hilary Clinton is really looking tough in all the state-by-state polls. She appears to be the much stronger candidate in Democratic primaries, given her establishment connections and her obvious qualifications. However, she is potentially much weaker than Obama in a general election, given her extremely high negative ratings in the general electorate (I've seen negative ratings recently as high as 46%.)

Larry Sabato, an objective analyst, sent out a newsletter about two weeks ago, specifically disussing Clnoton's high negatives and pointing out that she would be a very polarizing candidate and President, if elected, simply because so many people dsilike her so ntensely. My personal opinion is that if she gets the nomination she will be elected Presdient, but it will be a much closer election. The only reason she is electable is becasue the Bush adminstration/Republican rule has been so dismal the last 8 years.Do we really want four more years of polarization after 16 years of the Clinton and Bush administrations???

Obama is the much stronger candidate in a general election because he is genuinely likeable and a Teflon candidate. He has far more appeal to independents and even some crossover appeal to Republicans. I read an article in the current issue of the American Specator telling conservatives to be very afraid if Obama is the nominee. The author suggested that Obama could do for liberalism what Reagan did for conservatism.

Obama's fundaraisng results are nothing less than phenomenal.He has more youth appeal than any candidate since Eugene McCarthy and Bobby Kennedy. He seems to learn form his mistakes - his perfomrance before a civil reights crowd at Howard University was eclipsed by Hilary Clinton, but he did a much better job at the NAACP convention.

He is far better intellectully and experientially qualfied to be President than George Bush was when he was elected. (Bush was created and elected by Karl Rove despite his many characterological and intellectual flaws.)

Obama seems to be well-positioned if Hilary Clinton stumbles, I think he has much greater potential for growth in the polls. I believe that many African-American voters will eventually switch from Hilary to Obama in the primaries after Iowa and New Hampshire.

If I were betting at this point, I see Hilary as the Presidential nominee and Obama as the VP nominee. I've read where Hilary will never pick Obama for VP. If she doesn't it's a significant mistake on her part. He is the exception to the general rule that a VP candidate can not help a ticket, only hurt it. Obama creates genuine exciteemnt wherever he goes because of his charismatic appeal.

I could envision a scneario where Obama fights Clinton to a draw, and Gore emerges as the Presediential nominee in a brokered convention. Obama will defintely be the VP nominee if Gore somehow secures the presidintial nomination.

Win-or-lose, VP or not, I see great things for Obama in the future. For me,it's a win-win situation. I'm supporting Obama, but I like Clinton. My only reservations about Hilary Clinton are her very high negatives in every poll I have ever seen.

Chris · 2 years ago

Interesting article/analysis on RealClear Politics today, entiteled "Obama's 'Anyone But Hillary' Strategy" - the quote below to me reveals the flaw in Obama's campaign - HE'S NOT QUALIFIED! No matter how much money you raise, or what type of PR or branding strategy the best paid team comes up with, this guy has accomplished little in legislative victories, has no executive experience, and will continue to come off as a lightweight on the issues during debates against the likes of Clinton and Biden, not because he hasn't got the marketing team behind him, but because he is a lightweight and out of his league. It is only a matter of time till he goes the way of Dean.

"Things look worse for Obama when one starts digging into those very same polls to see how Democratic voters are breaking down. In a June 4 Washington Post/ABC News poll, asked to name which candidate was the strongest leader, 50% said Clinton, 26% said Obama; asked who would best handle a major crisis, 47% said Clinton, 24% Obama; and, finally, asked who had the best experience to be president, 66% said Clinton, while just 9% said Obama. No matter which party one is talking about, those three criteria - strength, good judgment and experience - are how Americans choose presidents."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/...

True Observer · 2 years ago

Obama's congressional endorsements include:

1. Most of Illinois delegation - naturally, they still need him for their projects.

2. Many out of state blacks - naturally, they want to stay good with their black constituents.

3. Odd balls: Abercrombie, Wexler. Need one say more.

4. Russ Carnahan from neighboring Missouri. Helps him on future joint state projects.

Doesn't look like congressmen and senators think much of his chances.

Anonymous · 2 years ago

CA

Good analysis. I think you hit the points well - HRC is just not a likable candidate and Obama is. We went through this is the 80 election cycle. A likable candidate against one with high negatives. Little was factored in as to ability to be Pres.

Also I am old enough to remember the 1960 election cycle and experience was an issue - A sitting VP against a junior senator. One had the resume but was not likable but the winning candidate had curb appeal.

Between experience and high negatives and in experience and good appeal, I will bet on to latter as a successful candidate. Agreed if the dems will nominate Obama he will be the strongest candidate.

p.s. I am a true independent - no party preference but look at the candidate for each office.

Jeff Trigg · 2 years ago

Follow the money, Rich, follow the money. Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Tutoring cottage industries, buying votes, using government resources to campaign for their causes, refusal of accountability, and on average less than 3 government teachers are fired in Illinois each year due to poor performance. Reprehensible is corrupt enough for me, even if not indictable.

railsplitter_68 · 2 years ago

Obama's campaign is progressing as expected in that he is a permanent second place status, which reflects his inexperience and lack of substance. I predicted that the day he entered the race. For the record, I have no interest in HRC. I support Rudy.

That being said here are 2 facts on Obama which underscore his mediocrity as a pres. candidate:

1. He promised to serve out his term and has not kept his word.
2. In his 2 years as Senator, he has done absolutely nothing tangible for the people of Illinois, that I can see. Even his staff seems to have other priorities, as "routine" constituent service is ignored.

In my opinion, Obama needs to do the job he was elected to do instead of gallevanting around the country pursuing his dreams and fantasies. The people of Illinois are entitled to 2 full-time Senators and we deserve someone who is up to the job.

This 2nd place cloud has a "silver lining" in that it suggests that Barack is being humbled and that Democrats are finally taking him off the pedestal. Maybe it will make him a better senator.

A Citizen · 2 years ago

There is a very strong undercurrent of a perception of his lack of experience and seasoned veteran gaining traction. Numerous articles recently have focussed on the campaign's inability to shake off that perception and image. If he can't get passed that serious problem he is in trouble.

Rich Miller · 2 years ago

buying votes?

Ghost · 2 years ago

What experience does Hillary Clinton have? This inexperience thing baffles me. What experience do we desire for a president?

Hillary has done nothing to work with or bring the parties together to try and create meaningful legislation. She is a divider. Is this the expereince we treasure for mending problems with other countries?

Obama's lacks what? the ability to negotiate with both sides? he has that. He has experience living and working in a multinational school. Clinton started pushing her healthcare ideas when Bill was president. She had his eight year plus her current term. She failed to get any support. She totes that same goal now...but her experience on this point is that she has no ability to garner sufficient support, with over a deacde of trying! thats not experience, thats a failure of leadership.

VanillaMan · 2 years ago

Obama is a perennial number two. Nice, but no cigar. For him to wait until Clinton implodes isn't much of a game plan, but right now it definately appears that the Democratic Party will choose the former president's wife as their standard bearer in 2008.

There are more precidents favoring the former First Lady than it does the freshman senator. Clinton has been planning to run for office since she graduated from Wellsley. Obama has been planning on running only since Yale. Clinton married the most charming politician in the US since Reagan, Obama didn't. Clinton was propelled to her prominence based on being married to the right guy - the President of the United States. Obama hasn't. Clinton has been working the Democratic party since 1990 - Obama hasn't.

Except for his Howard Dean-like Internet hauls, Obama has little to show for his effort so far. The polls are not encouraging at all.

Even in his home state - he is in a statistical tie with Clinton. There are no polls showing Obama leading Clinton in any states, let alone states with primaries coming up within the next six months. He is not only behind - he is behind by double digits.

The Democratic Party has been comfortably establishment-minded concerning presidential candidates since McGovern and Carter. No one can say that any Democratic candidate since 1976 could be considered charismatic or cutting-edge. In 1992, the only time the Democrats elected one of their own, you saw Clinton running as the most conservative Democratic since Cleveland in 1892 and he still was not fully embraced by the Party until he received the nomination and Perot self destructing that summer.

Mondale, Dukakis, and Kerry were chosen by Party regulars. Although everyone knew each of these guys were toast even before they got the nomination, the Party chose them as the safest picks.

In 2008, the safe pick for Democrats is Clinton's wife who has the name recognition, money, connections and Bill Clinton's magic on her side.

What Obama has safely done so far is establish himself for future runs in 2012 and beyond. He could easily wait if for some fluke, the former First Lady gets elected in November 2008 and hangs in there for two terms.

For those who believe that Democrats will win with Hillary in 2008, they had a good shot had the election been held last November. Since gaining the majority in Congress, the Democrats have responsibility for the situations we now deal with, and as polls clearly show, are not handling their tasks in a manner that shows they had a plan for 2008 and beyond. Whatever crap floats down the pike at us will end up on their laps too. This makes 2008 much less of a shoe-in as some partisans hope.

Obama - so far, close, but as John Edwards discovered in 2004, being a perennial number two doesn't get you the nomination. He will have to wait until Bill Clinton's wife self-destructs, and we all know how UNlikely that will be.

railsplitter_68 · 2 years ago

Ghost, well said! I totally agree with your take on it. The Democratic Party, (even moreseo than the GOP) are notorious for going with the "safe" , most risk-free, establishment-backed candidate. Let's call this creature "Kerrygore Monkakis" (Yawn) or some latter day incarnation of Grover Cleveland whom you mention. I love it when posters actually know some history.

As far as 1992, and I was there, Bill Clinton was pretty much "annointed" by the time of the Illinois primary, and was the machine's candidate by default. He was made for tv and wasn't saying anything of substances outside the DNC's comfort zone. The other candidates in '92, Brown was too cutting edge and Tsongas was too colorless for even for party regulars to embrace.
HRC is going to be the nominee, like her or not. Time for Obama to stop pharting around and return to the job he was elected to do.

Bill S. Preston, Esq. · 2 years ago

I'm a little disappointed with the campaign so far. He hasn't had very many 'gotcha' moments that make you think he's really on top of his game. Both Senators Obama and Edwards seem to be nodding their heads while Senator Clinton does the real talking. I will still vote for him because Edwards has no chance of beating a Republican and the thought of a Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton dynasty repulses me, but I feel like his staff should let the leash out a little and let him be himself.

Furthermore, I'd be curious to see how successful his direct mail fundraising has been. I gave a measly amount online 3 months ago and have received no fewer than 6 direct mail attempts to get me to donate again. Usually included is a long-winded, dull, ineffective letter from David Plouffe. The sheer waste of paper annoys me. If I donate online, I'll probably donate online again. Save the expense!

Repubactuallyconsideringtheguy · 2 years ago

Any of us who have actually lobbied Obama in Springfield know him as a very careful politician. He seems to be running his campaign the same way while Hillary alternates between appearing "canned" or shrill. His platform planks, including health care, seem studied and reasonable. His only mistake here in Illinois was allowing SEIU to get to close to him. People need to remember that when he first arrived in the Illinois State Senate he was a sensation - among the Republican members. I recall the late Aldo DeAngelis dragging him over to the other side of the aisle telling his colleagues "hey, you HAVE to meet this guy". If he survives the Democratic primary he will excite moderate Republicans and independents more than you might expect.

Bridget Dooley · 2 years ago

It seems to be going well. The fundraising is obviously going exceptionally well and I don't think there's any reason to think that it will slow down. People are pretty excited to get involved, many of whom have not been involved in campaigns in the past.

The Resko business is annoying, but I don't think it will be an issue. I have to wonder why Obama's communications staff didn't just come out with every interaction Obama ever had with Resko all at once. It would have been a 2 day news story at best.

I am glad that Obama isn't busy slinging one-liners and completely dominating the press at this time. That should come much later. There's no reason to peak in the press right now only to be yesterday's news story when it counts.

Squideshi · 2 years ago

"Those government teachers HATE being graded and don’t want their pay to have anything to do with whether or not they are any good at their jobs."

How would you propose that teachers be graded, recognizing that students inherently perform at different levels, regardless of the teacher's efforts or expertise? A student's parents play a large part in the performance of a student, and the teacher has absolutely no control over that.

Mac McIntyre · 2 years ago

Maybe if the lesser campaigns of candidates, like John Edwards, were eliminated so the Dems were able to choose between Barrack and Hillary then Obama would win. The multitude favors Clinton.

Barrack is doing very well with his campaign in this pre-election season. He is the candidate promoting change. His challenge comes when the voting booths replace the polls as indicators. Sound bites for change must evolve to HOW he will institute change. If he does that he will be the next President.

Clara "The Clairvoyant" · 2 years ago

Actually, speaking as a Republican, Barack has been doing quite well. On the national scene, his personal ties to several characters such as Tony Rezko, the Stroger Dynasty, Emil Jones Dynasty, etc. has not even made a blip on the national political radar screen. He may not beat Hillary but he certainly has forced her to keep looking over her shoulder to see how close he is behind her.

The up-coming presidential election will turn out to have been just a warm-up session for Barack. His "moment in the sun" will be the following presidential elections.