How to beat Obama - a British answer

People scream. They actually scream. And they cheer when he blows his nose. How do you beat a man like that? Is it possible? Can Barack Obama be beaten?

Dick Morris, Bill's former strategist, believes it is too late for Hillary. Even if he is right, the question still holds. If Hillary can't beat him, can McCain?

Michelle Obama's comments (that now was the first time she could love America) have suggested to some that the problem with Hillary has been that she has given the wrong answer to the Obama question.

She has chosen to assert that Obama stands for nothing. But Obama's real weakness is that this isn't true. Gerry Baker argues that Obama left liberalism is his true Achilles heel. And Peggy Noonan suggests his problem may be that he could be portrayed as a liberal elitist.

Both really great pieces.

But switching to this characterisation of Obama, while it may be truer and more effective, is not a winner. It won't take you all the way to the White House.

Why?

Because of a lesson from British politics.

Over here campaigns generally take an age selecting a way of characterising their opponents. And the time is all wasted (I know because as a senior campaign staffer in two elections I have wasted quite a bit of it).

In the end it is the behaviour of your opponent that determines how he is seen and you can't do much about it. All you can do is adjust how you are seen.

The critical point is this - what you say about your opponent mainly reflects upon you rather than upon them.

Voters watch your negative messages and instead of listening and taking them on board they think about the messenger. Are they nice? Are they reasonable? Are they preoccupied with the right things?

Now the traditional view is that while this may be true in Britain it isn't true in America. Americans can use TV advertising after all. But I wonder. I think in tight races, where money is reasonably even, I think the rule holds even in the US.

What does it mean for fighting Obama?

It means, effectively that you don't fight him. You accept his rock star status. You grit your teeth through the windy speeches. You let the plagiarism go. And you make a virtue of doing so.

You make yourself look good by acting well towards Obama. You score points by showing that you get it. You look reasonable, calm, a person who gets things in proportion.

And then you concentrate on building your own profile.

I believe the problem Hillary is facing is because she has so far proven a weak candidate herself. Where was the fabulous Clinton message machine? If she was strong she could have swept Obama aside. It is the failure to get the positive side, the positive messages right, that has dogged her, not the failure to get the negative side right.

And if Obama encounters someone along the rest of the route to the White House who gets this, he can still be beaten. 

Comments

[RobC]

I disagree and here's why. It's not how you define Obama, it's the opponent. McCain is flailing around in the same garbage that turned people off to Hillary, war, corruption and disingenuous demeanor. Fresh sells in the US, why do you think Edwards fell on his face? He had a good message but Americans already see him as a failure due to the last election. No one wants the runner up. Hillary is done after this as well, senator will be her 'glass ceiling'.

[scousekraut]

Obama is all Hat and no Cattle as they say in Texas.

His team consists of the same old faces and they are going to change absolutely nothing because they are working for the same people as all the others.

[Janey]

I believe Michelle Obama's actual words were about the first time she had felt "really proud" of the US -- a crucial difference.

[marlene]

I agree with Janey. I am not in the level of Mr. Obama. However, when I studied at one of your top universities, my tutor introduced me to her colleague as "come and meet my American student." I have never been introduced in such then or now. I did feel proud for the first time as I am usually described as Asian, Black, etc., and never American.

[David]

Obama isn't left liberal, he's further right than Hillary. Left liberal is Kucinich, Gravel, etc.

Point taken about playing to your own strengths. Hillary has taken some poor advice in that regard.

However, too much Pollyanna can be a bad thing.

[Scott]

The problem is, McCain is liberal too. When a liberal calls another liberal a liberal, it turns folks off to both of them.

Either way, there are 3 contenders left, and they are all liberal.

[Luke]

I think Daniel is quite right, Hillary should have swept Obama aside.

She had become a stong politician in her own right, securing her path to senator, and raising her own international profile, where Obama seems to have popped up with the success and fury of someone winning X-Factor, and is actually giving this woman problems.

I am surprised she did not employ the strategem (or something simular) that Daniel suggested, but on saying that, she may have just been traped within the 'historical methods' of American politics, 'Chracter Assisination'.

As explained above, this clearly doesn't always work, and is a very risky business indeed.

It's a shame that this 'oversight' could cost Hilary her campaign.

If it does, the experience will provide the next contender with an insight into the mistakes that cost her a potential presidency, small consolation.

If any at all.

[Alex]

Why are the Times' articles always on the Democrats?

Seems like the Times has also made up its' mind who they are supporting in the US election.

It may be that Obamas spending promises could be his undoing. If Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) Could Enact All Of His Campaign Proposals, Taxpayers Would Be Faced With Financing $874.35 Billion In New Spending Over One White House Term

[Steve]

The American people are easily duped into believing in Obama in much the same way they were scammed into voting for Bush twice.

[Jo]

The game will be played out within America. As a first class newspaper, tell us what HAS happened and tell us about EVENTS! Our eyes and ears please!

[Rhys Jaggar]

1. Should we really want Obama to lose? If so, why? I've read nothing to date which gives a coherent explanation of why he would be:
a. Dangerous
b. Ignorant
c. Having poor judgement

I'm not saying I'd vote for him even if I had a vote, but I don't believe in 'Stop XXX' campaigns without cogently explaining why.

2. Even if you do want to beat him, sell yourself. If you can't do that and win, then you're not the best candidate. And for the good of the country, the best candidate, in the views of the electorate, should win.

3. If you believe in winning for winning's sake, through negative campaigning, then far from being a leader you are a parasite looking to screw the country for your own benefit.

4. Start providing cogent, researched, believable, justifiable and people-based explanations for his unsuitability and maybe I'll start to read what you write with more respect.

Sir.

[gordo]

Janey--

You're right about the Obama quote. Also, she has since clarified what she meant by her words, something that Daniel Finkelstein 'forgets' to mention.

I guess this is the sort of 'journalism' that Times readers have gotten used to in the Murdoch era. It certainly has been a long downward slide for a once-great newspaper.

[Disabled, kicked to curb]

I'm a bit bemused by Scott's statement, "The problem is, McCain is liberal too." Is he referring to the same McCain who is pushing for the US to stay in Iraq indefinitely? Who supports repealing Roe v. Wade? Who voted NO on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes and on prohibiting job discrimination by sexual orientation, but voted YES on loosening restrictions on cell phone wiretapping? Who supports the death penalty, and voted YES on limiting death penalty appeals? Who believes that teaching creationism in science class should be decided by local school districts? The same McCain who opposes restrictions on assault weapons and ammunition types, and voted NO on background checks at gun shows?

If Scott thinks "McCain is liberal", who would he describe as a true 'conservative'? Neither Genghis Khan nor Attila the Hun are running for President this year, due to their not meeting the residency requirements, and being currently dead.

[Christopher Hobe Morrison]

The reason that all the attacks against Obama don't stick is that they are all pathetic bullshit and people can see through them.

[Tweety]

Pretty poor and biased article.

[Frank Scudder]

The evidence from th4 past history of US Presidents is that the power lies with the cabinet.I am astonished that in all the reports and interviews that I've seen this point has never been put to Obama. The only potent name that I've seen is Breszinsky. But in face of Obama's promises the crucial one is Treasury.

Why don't interviewers make this their top priority?

[Nick]

Could someone please explain why the Sunday Times has taken such a clear anti Obama stance?

[Rajah]

while i agree that such a strategy may have been the best one for Clinton to have taken, i'm far from sure you can take that to be some golden rule of elections - that opposing candidates cannot characterise each other.

Surely the attack tactics of Bush/Rove on Gore and particularly Kerry (e.g. 'flip-flopper' & the character assassination groups cleary aligned to the Bush cause('Vietnam Gun-Boaters for Truth' etc)) prove otherwise?

That was a tight race with relatively even fundraising.

[joe reilly]

You know the answer to your own question as you work for Murdoch's right wing neo-con empire. It involves a four letter word beginning with L and ending with S.

[John Chuckman, Toronto, Canada]

I just don't think you could be more wrong.

The trouble with analyses like yours is that they look at candidates almost as interchangable pieces who only have to hit on the right message or technique.

There is some truth in this for the so-so run of candidates.

Much as with the average run of so-so products and their marketing campaigns.

But it is completely wrong for a special class of candidates, people with exceptional empathy and intelligence, just what we have in Obama.

This is the case of a product so clearly superior that word-of-mouth alone is adequate to get sales roaring.

It will be Obama by a wide margin.

[Cllr Ken Tiwari (Independent)]

George Bush Jr. Done his best to eradicate terrorism from our world,
may be he have'nt gone far-enough;
but the murderers have been at they're games for hundereds of years
and no one noticed-untill september11th 2001, but now the next
president of USA-must tackle the Poverty in America, i know the selfish one like Barak Obama given
the left-tag by evil media, just to
see Barak Obama gets the Democrates-
nomination,thinking that Barak Obama
will not win and Republican will return, Barak Obama Knows that! Sadly Mr Obama is so mean he couldnt
care damn for any American-or-anyone
in the world; It's very sad!
Cllr Ken Tiwari (Oxford UK)

[John Chuckman, Toronto, Canada]

Well, maybe, Cllr Ken Tiwari could translate his posting.

I'm sorry, it's a hopeless jumble.

But I think it isn't just the language, the confusion does appear to be in the thinking.

[Mary Russell]

I am not certain Obama will beat McCain. Many US media outlets are relying on polls showing Obama ahead of McCain. First of all, it is way too early for that sort of predicting. Polls can easily be manipulated and many times faulty. Also, in the US Presidential race you have to win the electoral college, which I am not sure Obama can do. In order to achieve a somewhat accurate poll, one would have to poll all 50 states and then add up the numbers, which would produce faulty results. The US news are far to influenced by polling, it is digusting.

[Frank]

Mr the editor, I'm sorry, your article reflects your hateful motives. You just hate Senator Barack Obama (whom grand-father you Brits' colonized back in Kenya)

I tell you what? your assertion that some how Obama can be beaten won't stand because we, the American People have decided to stand for change, same as our founders did to resist your ancestors.

Tell all your greedy financiers in London to back off; Giuliani got only (1) one delegate after coming to London and promising you lies.

Also you misquoted Michelle Obama suggesting that she said:"...that now was the first time she could love America."

Please use good judgement and journalistic ethics for heavens' sake! If not, than SHUT UP, please...

[Rosie Powell]

Why do you think it is imperative that Obama is beaten? Why is it so important to you?

[NIcholas]

Who wants a British solution to American issues? Isn't that why the Boston tea party was thrown in the first place?
And as for the American Revolution... thank God that happened, for just imagine how awful the world would be if Britain still ruled America. You can picture Gordon Brown triumphantly strutting the world stage with America in his pocket.
Its too dreadful to contemplate.
Barack Obama represents a new beginning not just for the USA but for the World.

[Manuel Cardoso]

Let me tell you folks one thing that we are in the world that if you isolate the rogue states is not the solution for stoping global treats so l buy the idea of obama meeting those enemies and friends of america so that the heat could be put on them while behave civicly

[Kacey]

Let's see, could it be that Obama is dusting Hillary because he is actually a better candidate than she is? Or it could be because he has chosen to focus on what Americans really want to talk about like our economy, healthcare, and the war in Iraq? We are so tired of politics as usual. We are sick of the smear tactics, the negative characterizations, the mud-slinging. And McCain has already started the negative campaigning. Once again politics as usual. Obama has chosen not to run the usual campaign. That's why he'll win. If you want to beat him, stick to the issues, instead of leaking photographs of him dressed as a Somali elder or taking his wife's comments about being a proud American out of context and dogging her out. That's why Americans have fallen in love with him. He is a breath of fresh air.

[Mary]

I'm truly happy that the author of this article is not able to vote in America. Obama is not just full of rhetoric or style. The man stands for substance of change in America. I've noticed that on this site there are no stories supporting him, only how can be beaten. Journalism is not supposed to biased, but fair to each candidate. If you would like to educate yourself on Barack platform check out his website http://www.barackobama.com/learn/meet_barack.php

[Phlegma Yabosi]

We Yanks will have a tough go for the next 4 years regardless of who is elected.

"Bareback" Obama has never held a job other than practicing a little law for wealthy friends and filing some civil rights lawsuits. He will tax the middle class out of existence if he's elected and spend the money on more useless bureaucracy. If "Bareback" wins we'll need a Republican Congress to keep him in check.

"Swillary" Clinton is a foul hag who is in the race for no reason other than to satisfy her own ego. Her healthcare initiative from the 1990's served no purpose other than to enrich her donors. Luckily it was defeated. Despite this, she is likely to do less damage than "Bareback".

"Huckleberry" Huckabee is a fundamentalist Christian who appears to believe that the Earth is around 7,000 years old. "Huckleberry" is the worst choice, as electing him is a step towards the U.S. becoming a Christian version if Iran.

"Old Johnny Boy" McCain is a has-been whose time is passed. All he can do anymore is wave the flag, but he'll likely do less damage to the U.S. than any of the other candidates. If "Old Johnny Boy" wins, then we'll need to keep our Democrat-controlled in place to keep his plans for a long-term presence in Iraq in check.

[Elizabeth Bari]

I have not researched John McCain's US Senate voting record and positions supported. Now, I'm interested in doing so after reading the eloquent comments made by "gordo" above re: McCain's conservative stances. All I know, is that he is hung up on perpetuating his Pro-Iraq involvement stance rather than coming up with plausible arguments of his "experience" in mediating a sustainable peace and protecting soldiers rather than running solely on being a War hero, which he is. He seems tired and repetitive and unaware of what are his Campaign's finances and sources of financing. I am not a McCain supporter and am a self-proclaimed Democrat. I've supported Obama, however I am troubled by the Rezko affiliation and potential Campaign donations. I guess I am a Reagan Democrat.

However, I will support anyone other than McCain. Even though I consider myself somewhat liberal, I trust Huckabee more than McCain, and I truly think his religion is personal as JFK's was (not that he practiced sound moral behavior) and that Huckabee would not legislate based on his religious beliefs. However, everyone thinks I'm crazy when I say this. I would just trust him to dive in to a running river and save me over most of the other candidates. He seems most similar to Obama in charm and inspiration not to mention charisma.

i want to beable to sleep at night knowing there is a man deciding for us when it comes to war not a women Hillary knows nothing about War we have made remarks about other presedents who have never served what makes her thibk she would beabLe to handel anything like 911 im a WOMEN I WANT TO SLEEP AT NIGHT

[Larry Sherwin]

In any sucessful campaign, the
candidates must speak to the
problems facing the electorate at
the time they are seeking election.
Simply stating what they would do
if elected to solve those problems
with a clear course of attainable
action is sufficient to gain the
confidence of the voter. Character
assassination does not warrant any
place in American politics. Our most
respected past presidents gave the
American people hope for a better
future by what they outlined in
their four to eight year agenda.
The ability to use sound judgement
and surround oneself with knowledgeable advisors is without
recourse from even the harshest
critics. Of all the contenders, who
do you think has the most experience
and the best choices for advisors to
lead this country through the next
four to eight years ? Make your own
decision and then vote, that is the
American way.

[Ron]

As an American citizen what's of most concern to me is how Obama is raising funds at such an incredible pace. In the last 30 days, his fund raising has outdone Hillary Clinton's by almost 3-to-1. And, he has well more than doubled the funds raised by Clinton and McCain combined. His fundraising has been described as unprecedented. I think it's really important to know how and where this money is coming from? What's expected in return and by whom? Is there some sort of unofficial or unorganized special interest group at play here? For all the ideas about messages and strategies his opponents might, could or should have used. It could come down to the fact it's all a moot point, because he could very well simply buy this election away.

[Jacob]

Ok, I've lived in the UK, and I'm an American, so let me see if i can join these two perspectives rationally. First, I am for Obama. In my view, one politician is about as good as the next, but i'd rather have a leader that actually seems intelligent and has morals. Obama is very very popular among many voters attending University, and among some of the most educated people in America. He has gained momentum through simple statements of his position and letting attacks come at him. I do not believe that if Clinton emulated his style, as the author suggests, she would have done any better than she is doing now. McCain will definately win if Clinton is the nominee because the republicans would rather see McCain in power than Clinton to such a degree that they will put aside their dislike for McCain just to trample Clinton's bid. McCain and Obama are close enough to the "Center" or moderate area of US politics that much of their support base is side by side with few independents in between. All they have to do is court the members on the extreme sides of their parties. This is where McCain will have a harder time than Obama, because unlike McCain, the democrats will almost totally support Obama if he wins the nomination. McCain will have many very very conservative christian groups that will not be willing to support either and so will vote for neither. Regardless of how McCain or Clinton paint Obama from here on out they will have a difficult time displacing him.

On the subject of Obama's politics, with the English NHS in debt and struggling for funds, I wouldn't be complaining about the US trying to find a way to create Universal Health Care and its costs on society. Obama has said he wishes to fund much of his projects by decreasing oil dependency and taking back the Tax cuts for the wealthy, and increasing taxes on them and companies outsourcing jobs, which is a substantial amount of money.

This is the atleast just my view and the view of many university students in America, which are largely underrepresented in polls and can make up 10-20% of US elections, so only time will tell how things pan out.

[IRVING REID , EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ,THE SIR GEORGE CHARLES FOUNDATION]

so some you readers think that the Sunday Times is an anti-Obama, right wing,Murdoch-bullied vessel? How about reading the three-page special report of January 06, 2008

[Mark Hightower]

I haven't a clue what Cllr "whatever" is saying, but it's all garbage. Bush is a war criminal, and how can you call someone "so mean" if you haven't met, spoken with, or conversed with that person? Insane!!!!

[julian riano]

My vote in Texas is best put to work in support of Hillary Clinton. Too much rhetoric and propaganda have hurt my opinion of the Obama campaign. Oprah's marketing machine surely hasn't swept America's minds empty. But I find the Teamsters endorsement, Nation of Islam, and the Rezko fundraising scandal the most unappealing.

[Daniel Johnson]

Obama is a once in a generation phenomenon. His image is pure, his heritage is middle America Kansas. His grandfather fought with General Patton. His father from Kenya was not in his life. He is the American of the future. He has a basic liberal Democrat agenda similar to Clinton's but without the past of legal troubles, firings of staff, suicides of aides and a sexual pandering husband. Obama can communicate eloquently and with so much passion that women have been passing out(Beatle like) at his appearances. The most effective leaders of all time were effective speakers. Clinton needs to stand aside. Then Bill will be able to date again.

[John Machamer]

I am still wondering why HRC even bothered to acknowledge Obama and to attack and give him all that wonderful free publicity.
What happened to the Clnton from Hope, AK.? The one with the positive spin? The positive message? Have you not yet realized Obama has plagerized your husband with his message of "Change"
Sad thing is I think the republicans will have a field day. Sad, but anyway in the spirit of an American, may the best man or woman win! VOTE or Shut-Up.

[Joan]

I don't believe you get it, Mr. Finkelstein!
Hillary has been too nice to Obama, and has not called him on his dirt, until now. I pray it is not too late.
The media for the sake of selling more papers, since the internet has taken over, are desperate to boost Obama.
It's about the bottom line for them.
I fear for this country if Obama wins.

[Obadiah Sang]

Cllr Ken Tewari (Oxford UK) and John Chuckman (Toronto Canada), seem want to comment about American Politics of which they don't understand, Cllr Tewari, Bush is the worst president in American history, and John Chuckman, Mccain is engulf in Bush politics. Obama is the voice of American common men who upto this moment are paying the cost of war of which were mislead, Hillary represent the Voice of Washington, she is engulf in the old politics. Maccain is dry and num, Obama will out campaign and out debate him. Welcome to american politic watch before you comment

[Joan]

I have been following Hillary's political career since the early 90's, and she has always inspired me. I remember telling everyone back then, that I believed Hillary could actually be the first female president if she ever decided to run, and most people thought that I was crazy. A woman president? I was interested in the Universal Health Care Plan she had created back in 1993, but it was brought down by the Insurance Industry and small businesses who did not want to cover their employees. She has a great deal of experience. Her attendance record is great, and she has done really well in the senate.
I see the position of Commander and Chief as a job. A huge job, and I know that whenever you apply for a job, the person with the most experience, and the best track record usually gets the job. This country is in a complete mess and cannot afford for someone to learn on the job. We are at war and our economy is on the brink of recession. The foreclosure situation is terrible.
On the other hand, Barack Hussein Obama, is a newcomer, with very little experience, and a horrible attendance record. I think the whole media secrecy surrounding Barack Obama and his radical muslim and anti-American ties is pretty scary.
One of Senator Obama's books "The Audacity of Hope" is based on the preaching of his pastor, Jeremiah Wright, whose close ties with Louis Farrakhan, whom he honored as a "Great Man" is unnerving. He had a 17 year relationship with Tony Rezko, a Syrian slumlord (now in jail), who caused poor people to live in squalor on the south side of Chicago, without heat in the dead of winter. Then there is the campaign funding he received and ties to Nadhmi Auchi, a billionaire Iraqi terrorist funder and Rashid Khalid, a Pakistani terrorist, and the Kenyan terrorist, Raila Odinga. I also don't want to leave out the Weathermen, William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. Were they Timothy McVey's inspiration?
One of Obama's most aggressive and involved supporter is Oprah. Who has at least one school in Africa. Obamba, who's father, and his father's family is from Kenya, both have such strong ties to that part of the World. Has anyone elese been reading the World News? Everyday in the News, we read about the unrest and all the problems that are going on in Kenya. How do we know that we won't end up in the middle of that mess, having to send troops in there, or that we won't end up in another war, This time in Africa. This feels like another bush situation..........and thought is very scary!
Then there is the Exelon Corporation nuclear plant in Illinois that had not disclosed radioactive leaks that contaminated the drinking water at one of their plants. Senator Obama lied about how he did something about preventing this situation from happening again.
Now down to his Elmer Gantry character.
He is not truthful, and he tells the American people just what they want to hear, but he doesn't really say anything about how he will "Change" things. I watched the debate, and the hard questions were asked of Hillary first, then his answer would be "I agree". Hillary really did shine in the end.
Saturday Night Live really did a good impression of the whole Obamamania thing.
PT Barnum said it best "You will never go broke underestimating the American Public." It seems that Senator Obama is bulletproof from the media really revealing any of his dirt. But then again the media does not care about anything but their bottom line I also believe is a Republican ploy, in part, to gain a running mate for McCain. They knew that McCain was in the bag, in the primaries, so why not vote for his running mate? The question will come down to the general election, and who will come out to vote, and for whom.
In the end, who really knows what will happen?
I hope this explains why I support Hillary, and why I think it would be in the best interest of this country for her to win. If she doesn't win the nomination, then who else is there to vote for? Ralph Nader?

http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=50264

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzFOOcEQtP0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHq3avztIFg

Elmer Gantry

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMXR2wBcLIM

[Ian Plase]

No, we Americans aren't interested in a British opinion on our politics. People on your side of the pond haven't been able to control your politics for a while now. If it wasn't for the USA, you wouldn't even have a country now. You guys are still believing in Kings and Queens, & now you want to participate in our issues, come on? Tony Blair lied for years about what your country was doing in Iraq and about many other issues, & your response was to keep him in office for years to come. Your commonwealth is all but gone. You depend on us to protect you & others resources to supply you. Go watch your coverage of the Beckhams or something. I am still waiting for Brits to understand that tea with milk is simply nasty.

[Jean]

If Obama gets the Democratic nomination, for the first time since registering to vote in the 1970s, I will cross party lines. Obama reminds me of used car saleman with a silver tongue. He and his supporters are on the opposite political spectrum of the neo cons. America needs common sense and moderate leadership; not radicals running the country.

[Keight]

In short I am in agreement that Hillary needs to cut out the negative comments, as she is making herself look like a jealous competitor. I also lost respect for Hillary when she faulted Obama for plagiarism and then stated she had no comment on the McCain adultery issue, as he was a friend and colleague. I guess she doesn't see him as a threat, therefore she will play nice with him. Overall the issues discussed are what matter, and I feel that will be apparent in this election. Many Americans are sick of the trash talking from the Washington elite and feel it plays no role in this election. Get to the issues, America does not have the patience for anymore mud slinging on immaterial and inappropriate accusations.

[Crystal]

It would be nice if Hillary was able to take the high road, but it does not work that way in the US, she has tried. She has had to fight the sexist star struck media of CNN, MSNBC, Extra (who want to know who OBAMA want to play him in a movie about his life).My country such as it is, does not want to compare resumes, they don't want to know that Obama has laundered money through foreign interest, or that Obama is likely of interest to the FBI in this matter regarding his home purchase and current friend and "former" client.They don't want to know that in general blacks have showed they are prejudiced and will vote for anyone as long as their the right race, even if it means being stood up at the big dance "State of the Black Union" in New Orleans.Obama kicked his Louisiana supporters out of his bed like a cheap date. He used them and he was gone. He did it to them, he did it to Southern Illinois and he will do it to the USA.

[JRMReyes]

the reason why obama is winning is because he is not acting like a black man trying to get a piece of the action or a piece of goodies for his narrow sector.

rather, he is acting the way an american president should -- looking at the big picture while not also neglecting to give attention to various details.

[Gail]

Get a grip on reality. Hillary has been deluged by a tsunami of negative media coverage 24/7 and Obama has been given a free pass. This is the Bush II vs Gore election all over again. And we will learn to regret it just as much. Obama is going to need training wheels for the first three years in the oval office and he is going to learn the hard way until he gets the hang of it. Unfortunately, the country will suffer as a result of his lack of qualifications for the job.

[Sean]

A black US President? A female US President who demonstrates the moral firmness of a high end real estate agent? It's no black hole between California and New York....in fact the space is full of conservative US voters. Welcome to another Republican President.

[Pithy]

I thought it was great when all the under-30's were getting involved in the election process. But, time after time not a single one of them seems able to answer anything about him or his beliefs and policies. All you hear is change and he makes them "feel good". Well cookies and milk make me feel good too. I'm thinking these kids should go back to the books and forget about the latest "fad" ...the way of the hoola-hoop, yoyo, and all other washed-up yesterdays.

[Jan]

I think most American's are not ready for a woman to be president. The media has not been very fair to Hilary either, they have been bashing her from day one. This country isn't ready for Universal Health Care either which is too bad, having lived in Canada (I am American born) I had excellent health care which only cost me $11.00 a month and I could go to any kind of Doctor. Why for the life of me would the majority of Americans not want to pay that price, why pay more to the insurance companys? Which by the way aren't paying much anymore. Our country should wake up.

[SSONKO George Wilson]

Please let us keep ourselves focusced on the real issues. It becomes demeaning for a world super power to reduce their political issues to mud throwing. Let us keep the focus on the war in Iraq, the economy, eradicating poverty in USA & the world, and improving the US - World Relations.

SSONKO George Wilson
Uganda, East Africa

[Awele Odigo]

If the truth is to be said, majority of all the American people adore Obama even with all the mud being thrown at him by the opposition. America and the world clamour for change;one we can believe in. We all have to break away from the politics of the past that creates more problems than solutions. Barack Obama is a humble, charismatic and globally acceptable candidate. Voters have proven this in the U.S and even abroad . Why not we all rally round Obama and give him the much needed support to HEAL the world?

[VJ]

After reading the comments about Clinton and Obama and the Briish viewpoint I do feel that Hillary is a nice candidate but is not able to hold her frustration which actually makes her kind of snobbish. Her personality and words seem to show the hardness and bias which is deep inside. She can do better if she is not under pressure but who can deny that a Presidential election has no pressure.
My argument is one who is losing to an inexperienced person, a battle for with groundwork of 2+ years does not qualify either. Why? When you cannot run a campaign and captivate your own (democratic) crowds how on earth will you be able to manage a whole country and as mentioned earlier a person who breaks down, a person who loses his/her temper and points accusing fingers is again not ready for the barrage which is going to pound once the general election campaigning starts. We all know how nasty things can be. My humble prediction is McCain will finally take the White House

[Abel Sidhoum]

He is already the 44th President of America. He is doing well, very well. He is the man of the new frontiers; the world are thankful towards the Americain people.

[Can Catan]

I'm Turkish, but if Obama becomes president.
I will plant the American flag in my garden. I admire America.

[John Lewis]

Ian Plase (26 Feb) clearly does not know enough about the relationship between the UK and USA. He says if it was not for the USA we British " would not be here now". In fact, if we had not stood up to Hitler`s bombing in 1940, with help from Australia, New Zealand, Canada, India and South African, the USA might not be here now. Hitler declared war on US in 1941 which brought US to its senses. As for us believing in kings and queens, we are lucky to have a brilliant head of state since 1952. 70 % of Americans still believe in tooth fairies and God.

[Canucks love America]

I agree with most if the responders on this blog.
I have been watching a lot of US politics ( as I always have). I am a politically junkie!!
Obviously we all can agree the race is exciting.
The entire world is watching. America! the entire world is watching you.
Will this be the same America who wants to "go into" other peoples countries to "liberate" them, to tell them how to live, to spread democracy, to free them but cannot actually cannot come to grips with it's own Racial Divide.
It will be interesting to see if Hilary gets handed the nomination in some backroom deal. It will also be interesting to see whether the potentially first black president of "the greatest country on earth" gets denied because (1) he is black and (2) his heritage is Muslim ... keep in mind we don't have control over how our parents named us or where our parents came from.
We are only responsible for what we have control over and from all accounts this man his declared he is a Christian.
Watching Hilary Clinton's of late, I have become somewhat embarrassed by her desperation.
At least John Edwards exited gratefully, but Hillary would want us to believe that SHE is the only one who can save us.
I am now convinced that the Clinton's are self-serving, narcisistic and power mongers.
I still admire you Hilary - you are bright, intelligent and personally I think you could make a okay president, but listen to the people - they are saying " you are okay Hillary, but not right now!"
That is also a key componenet of a good leader - Listen!

[John Chuckman, Toronto, Canada]

The importance of U.S. politics to Britain and others is not for techniques or learning about democratic practices.

The truth is America is and always has been a marginally democratic country.

It not only has always displayed a certain flirting with fascism, it has supported countless such people abroad, and the truth is that its 18th century Constitution is heavily laced with anti-democratic features, favoring stability and property over all else.

Those who doubt this last, owing to the Bill of Rights, will need a hard course in America history to understand how meaningless the American system has rendered the Bill over much of the country’s history, and I’m not referring to the obvious example of slavery.
The Bill of Rights over much of the country’s history was not in any way enforced since states said the national court cannot enforce it. Even today, we feel ripples of this in matters like it’s okay to hold people illegally and torture them just offshore or the Supreme Court effectively appointing a president.

Why Britains and others need to be aware of American politics is simply to be aware of what is coming next from the bloated imperial power.

America's population is several percent of the world's. America's politically active (only just over half of those eligible vote in presidential elections, and the money funding the elections comes from a tiny slice of 1%) is on the order of 1 to 2% of the world.

This makes them, de facto, an aristocracy, whether or not they regard themselves as such. Their percent of politically active out of the world's people is about equal to the percent of China in the Communist Party or, for that matter, the percent of Britains who could vote in 1776. And that’s more less what it was in the early colonies.

This wouldn't matter if they didn't interfere in everyone's business, but they do, constantly. They more than interfere, they bully, bribe, and bomb.

So, effectively, the world has just what America whined about in 1776, taxation without representation. Don’t be surprised one day to see a tax bill from Washington for services rendered.

[To SSONKO George Wilson]

To : SSONKO George Wilson Barack "Obama is a humble, charismatic and globally acceptable candidate. Voters have proven this in the U.S and even abroad"

Not so fast. We dont consider much of Obama in Singapore, we dont even know him. Our Minister Mr Lee Kuan Yew said in an interview 2 weeks back he would prefer CLinton over Obama. Dont mouth around things like Obama does. YOu can vouch for yourself, but dont speak for others pls. Thank you.

[Gina]

It seems Obama has had better campaign advisers than Clinton, it’s that simple.
Hillary Clinton has been ill-advised, changing her strategy. Belittling Obama, calling him inexperienced brings an altogether negative message across, portryaing her as hard-nosed and Obama as the victim of her ‘smear campaign’ (see the latest You Tube video – who says an Obama supporter hasn’t posted it there?)
Obama’s campaign has been going from strength to strength, his well rehearsed ‘speeches’ (never mind if they’re not his own) draw the crowds. Why? Because his message is always a positive one, never negative. Does this make him a good president or is it simply the result of clever campaigning?
Hillary Clinton should not have attacked him for his ‘speeches’, or accused him of plagiarism. With these tactics she’s handing Obama the candidacy on a plate.
So wake up Hillary – I still think you’re the better candidate. Tell us what you can do, not what Obama can’t do.

[Ahmed]

Hmmmm American politics is once again interesting........ I am a Syrian and I can say for the rest of my brothers and sisters here in the Middle east , that we will welcome any change to the current American (BUSH) Gov't. I am convinced and can assure you Americans and the rest of the world that, only BARAK OBAMA seems to understand how to approach the Middle East Affair. We all understand that it will take time to repair the damage already done by both the West and East, but for PEACE sake, I think the next American president should be someone the World understands, unlike the present - BUSH and his NEOS. Please I beg you Americans, to give BARAK OBAMA the support and encouragement to become your future president, come November 08. Before Bush became your president, Americans where greatly respected here in the Middle East, despite the Isreali - Palestinian Affair and other factors......... But the time has come for CHANGE, CHANGE, CHANGE !!!!!! BIG TIME CHANGE FROM BAD POLITICS / POLICIES AND FOR PEACE. The Middle Esat and the rest of the World will accept this change, we can wait - its just common sense, which is really not common. ALLAH BLESS YOU AMERICANS !!!! MAY HE GUIDE YOU ALL THROUGH THIS DIRECTION FOR CHANGE. And we pray to follow that same example, in creating democracy in parts of the Middle East, starting with the STATE OF SYRIA.........ISHAALLAH. I promise just like my Turkish brother wrote earlier, to plant the FLAG of the United States America in front of my building here in SYRIA, if BARAK OBAMA becomes president of your country.

[Darryl M]

All of you: Ralph Nader is running. So it's over for both Obama and Clinton. So you can now get your tea and rest your weary heads: you've won.

[Alan]

We have to understand that we are voting for an image created by the media, not a real person. The number of people in this country that personally know Obama or Clinton is very limited (you can argue that they are very influential).

A "rock star" type is very easy for the media to create a frenzy, and generate readership/viewership and make money. So Obama is really a good candidate for them.

The problem is when we are all brain washed by the media to believe in a super star, we suddenly realized we don't really know anything about him and we are going to give him the power of destroy this world (not necessarily directly by bomb us all out, but simply mishandle world conflict like or exact opposite what Bush did).

While the election is run by the media as an audition, after all we are not giving the candidate a chance to entertain us, we are giving the control of our life and our future.

One previous comment said "nothing to date which gives a coherent explanation of why he would be:
a. Dangerous
b. Ignorant
c. Having poor judgement"

You can say the same thing about me or any one of the millions of Americans. That's not enough to justify a rock star to be our president.

Be responsible to our own life and future, is the key. When you go into a poll and think "screw you all politicians" at the end, one politician is laughing, and the ones who really get screwed is you and me.

[Eva]

Originally my hatred for Hillary far outweighed any interest I had in Obama. She is the epitome of all things caustic and spiteful. She is fiercely aggressive and vitriolic, always on the attack against any one and any thing that does not support her own self-promotion and need for power and glory. Everything is about her. She is spiteful and could never hide that side of herself, no matter how hard her PR team worked to gloss it over.

I think Obama is different. I hope he is anyway. Everything about him is fresh and new and deserving of a chance. I couldn’t care less that he is black; but it would be great to finally break the color barrier so that color is not an issue at all.

I would love to break down the barrier to women as well, however not with Hillary, she gives women a bad name and would ruin it for all future woman trying to get elected. I know more people that hate Hillary, both Democrats, Republicans and Independents, than I know who support any other candidate.

Eva - American abroad

[Eric]

I have read all of the comments written above. I think we are in a critical time in America. Additionally, an exciting time. I have never seen so many people go to the polls with the belief that their votes count. I am happy people across this country are getting politically active again. As far as who wins or loses, the election process once completed will determine that.

[Right Coast Mike]

George H. W. Bush proved you can't win by being nice. Here, a true war hero was defeated by a draft dodger who "loathed the military".
To win, you MUST highlight the differences between yourself and your oponenet - in policy position, in character, qualifications & experience, and most importantly, your vision. America under Obama vs America under McCain. Fascialism (dems' blend of fascism & socialism) vs. Freedom & Capitalism. - No Contest!

[giovanni]

Though I see the republicans coming back to the whitehouse with Mc Cain,besides,Iam worried that if Obama gets the nomination,some adamant white democrats may not give him the vote.Some might sit and not vote in protest while some might vote otherwise.Other wise,time will tell

[Anna]

The facts seem to come out in time, so it would seem that Americans will be more informed of the facts before the Democratic Convention. Therefore, it would appear time is on her side. It will also depend on whether the baby boomers decide to once get involved again ( since McGovern) and help her.

[william]

You what, times suprise me. Even the phrasing of your article headlines tells that you are an't Obama. You seem to have something that tells you u to report only on the negative side of obama. Why have you not put two dabase lines. " Can Clinton loose." or other that suggest u are not biased??

[Ka Han chan]

Mr. Obama has insisted that he did not vote for the Iraq war, question is how could he vote? he was not even a senator then.....

[Gena]

Why he gets the endorsements of OLD echelon of Washington?

He likes them or dislikes them , or hi does not give a sh.. about people, just his ambitions or he is the nest PUPPET!!!???

Friends, lets chose that at we know. The country need time to recover.

Remember , we know Gore we did not know Bush!!!

[Charlie Sim]

I think you're dead-on, but my question is, how is this not apparent to anyone else? Obama's liberal track record is a bullseye, an easy target. Shoot it down and you bring down the big O, and Oprah too.

[Bonnie]

Have Americans become so celebrity crazed that they think selecting a president is the same as going to a rock concert? Sure it's fine to go to a rock concert, cry, swoon, and faint over the star, but after the concert fans go home and back to the lives they had before. The only consequence is that their wallets may be lighter for a bit. In contrast, if voters in the throes of Obamamania don't get a grip, there's going to be a rude awakening when reality hits. Just as with Bush, there are plenty of
obvious dots waiting to be connected that should send off alarm bells at the prospect of an Obama win in 2008. The Republicans are banking on enough people waking up to give a Republican win in November. It seems that has been the plan all along. The majority of the conglomerate controlled media has played right along with its gushing, hands-off treatment of Obama and its venomous and constant attacks against Hillary Clinton. That's too bad. The Republicans were furious when they lost the White House to Bill Clinton. Their attack machine started immediately. When Clinton won the second time, they were even more angry and thus the continued and more viscious attacks. When I've asked Clinton haters if they know why they dislike Hillary Clinton, the vast majority of the time they don't know. My guess is that they've swallowed what the Republican controlled media has told them they should believe. And that's too bad. The Supreme Court gave George Bush his first win. Are we going to be lemmings and allow the media to manipulate the presidental outcome in 2008? It will be a tragedy if the public allows itself to be duped again. This country, as well as others around the world, has suffered greatly because of the Bush mistake. Our grandchildren will be paying both the financial and political consequences. We need to start looking for substance rather star quality. The country is in a mess. We can't afford another four years of a mistake. Americans need to get past our current insistance on whatever feels good at the moment. We need to focus on the future and who has the strength, experience, and knowledge to pull us out of this mess. Hillary Clinton is clearly the better choice in this troubled climate.

[Mac]

Obama is a product of the Chicago political machine. He may very well bring "change," but it's not the kind of change the rest of the country should be seeking. Just take a look at Chicago and Illinois politics and his record there and you will see exactly what I am talking about. Obama is a product.

[Tertium Quid]

The 16-year itch for change is an American habit. It produced the presidencies of John F. Kennedy, whose legend resulted from his tragic death more than his achievements, Jimmy Carter, whose legend is in his own mind and in Iran, and Bill Clinton, who did nothing in eight years but make impossible for small children to watch the news and now wants a second residency in the White House through his wife.

Kennedy was the better choice over Nixon, but I'll take Gerald Ford over Carter and Bush, Sr. and Bob Dole over Clinton. In a world full of nuclear weapons, a boring U.S. president is preferable to a rock star.

[Mike]

From an American point of view:
I think Obama will win the Democratic nomination. However, from there I think you will see his star diminish. Why? Like some have posited here, we American's like fresh, new things (see Ross Perot). But the newness wears off after a short time. It's at that point that we American's will start thinking with our brains rather than allowing ourselves to be blinded by the stars in our eyes. It's at this point that Obama will either show substance that we can grab on to or he will crash and burn ala Gore & Kerry. If he can show substance and make us believe he can be a true leader, he may very well be our next President. Right now, it's out of McCain's hands. Right now we can do nothing but wait until the Conventions are over with. Then it will be put up or shut up time... for Obama AND McCain. May the best man win.

[Conor O'Brien]

The first commentor said: "why do you think Edwards fell on his face? He had a good message but Americans already see him as a failure due to the last election."

Ha, hardly. Edwards message might sound good to Europeans, who practice politics based largely on envy and redistribution of income, but that message falls flat with most Americans. Obama's far left voting record will be his biggest stumbling block on the road to the White House.

[Mike]

LOL, Charlie Sim. I was with you until the very last line of your diatribe. I can tell you exactly why I don't want Clinton to be our next President, as can most of my Republican AND Democratic friends. You, sir, no not what you're talking about.

[GEORGE DIAZ]

OBAMA IS A POPULIST AS MANY OF THE LEADERS IN SOUTH AMERICA OVER THE PAST 50 YEARS, IE CHAVEZ,LULA AND PERON OF ARGENTINA. HE IS NOT ALL TALK. HE SOES HAVE AN AGENDA THAT IS CALLED CLASS WARFARE. HE BELIEVES THE UPPER MIDDLE CLASS AND RICH SHOULD SUPPORT THE RST OF SOCIETY..HE WILL SOON SEE THIS WILL TAKE AWAY ALL INCENTIVES AND POISON THE ECONOMY TO A STATE OF ENTITLEMENTS. FOR GOOD EXAMPLES JUST LOOK AT FRANCE, OTALY AND ENGLAND. THEY HAVE BEEN DOWN THIS ROAD AND PAI THE PRICE. VENEZUELA AND MEXICO ARE HEADING DOWN THIS ROAD AND THEIR ECONOMIES WILL SOON COLLAPSE WHEN OIL PRICES DIP IN THE NEAR FUTURE. IF YOU WANT A COUNTRY WHERE THE GOVERNMENT CONTROLS YOUR ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL LIFE THEN VOTE FOR OBAMA OTHERWISE PICK MCAIN, THE LESSER OF 2 EVILS. IF OBAMA WINS I AM HEADING TO SPAIN..A SEMI SOCIALIST COUNTRY BUT HEY BETTER FOOD..SO BETTER TO SUFFER THERE THAN HERE

[RM]

Hilary should realize that in this era winning an election of this magnitude is not just about skin color, having a "campaign machine" and some status. I think it's a combination of a number of things, among them; vision, compassion and the political will to deliver. Obama seems to posses all that. From the begining, Hilary was too confident of beating Obama that she neglected the basics. Now she is so desperate trying to use everything to win. Tears, emotions and even anger to gain public sympathy.
It's too late baby!!

[H Scott, Texas, USA]

People supporting negative campaigning and mud-slinging here need to realize that it does not work. Hillary Clinton's campaign has been doing just that and losing the edge in Ohio and Texas polls. The Obama campaign does not. As we know, the Clinton's (BOTH) of them have many skeletons that Obama could easily exploit if he chose to run that sort of campaign. Now, who's been been on a winning streak and who is losing support of stronghold state voters and endorsements from long-term Clinton colleagues? You do the math. It hasn't been working for her before she lost her top campaign staff and she hasn't learned from that and has not instructed her new staff to refrain from such distasteful behavior.

I voted today for someone positive. Both McCain and Obama are running positive campaigns and are not engaged in underhanded, slimy political tactics and get our minds off the issues. That is very outdated in American politics and the Clinton campaign needs to realize that.

It's getting so bad here that in Texas republicans are using a strategy. They know that McCain has the nomination so they're actually voting for Obama to knock Hillary out. As we will have an open ballot in November, party affiliation in the primaries doesn't matter. That's a sad state of affairs for Hillary, but we're tired of the sleaze her people keep putting out there. Maybe that's why the media doesn't like her either.

[oldasiahand]

Obama seems to be riding a generational change in which both McCain and Hilary are 'too old'. It reminds me of JFK in 1960 replacing Ike who was 30 years his senior.

It is also time for one of those great US presidential cycles that seem to occur at roughly 36 years intervals: 1896, 1932 and 1968 being the last three great turning points.

If true that means an America more concerned with issues at home such as healthcare and the falling standard of living for blue collar and, increasingly, the middle classes. That spealls change ahead for the global economy as America becomes more inwardly looking.

[JohnQ]

"The critical point is this - what you say about your opponent mainly reflects upon you rather than upon them." Your assertion attributes significant wisdom and maturity to American voters.

Perhaps more American voters have tired of predictable speeches pushing their buttons of fear, hate, and greed. Just maybe the key to Obama's appeal is his apparent authenticity and humanity. Many politician can spout cleverly constructed words and divisive attacks. Few can ooze congruence a la JFK.

[John James]

Seriously - What choice do opponents have? Those who urged America to vote Bush now seek to rubbish Obama's presidential qualities??? That would be comedians' nirvana and play into his hands.

[debra]

i think that people is afraid of change and that hillary needs to wake up and smell the coffee. attacking obama and letting people know that she is so experienced in the white house is not so true. the only experience i see her in the white house is as the first lady. what experience is that. she needs to get out because she is beginning to make herself look bad. face it we are going to have a african american president whether he wear clothes from kenya or not. jesus wore the clothes that he had when he talked to his disciples. stop being afraid of change hillary, because you say you are democrate, well then step down, stop being so tuff and let barack obama win over these republicans.

[ADP]

This is the new John Fitzgerald Kennedy, an inexperienced little known man, probably left of Stahlin. McCain, a bitter old relic who does not belong anywhere but a retirement home is the throw away candidate just like Ford in 76, Mondale in 84 and Dole in 92. I encourage Republican readers in Ohio and Texas to cross over and vote for Clinton so the fight goes on longer on that side, McCain has a prayer against her, but he's already had a Mike Dukakis tank moment today when he actually apologized for someone else calling Obama by his given name, which means he's gonna continue this compassionate conservative Bull***t which the worst president since Carter implemented.

The real question is why did Bush not have Cheney step down and appoint a reasonable VP to replace him? Then McCain would be playing a game of Rummy at the local barbershop watching the election on TV where he belongs.

The real blame for this whole situation lies squarely on the shoulders of the compassionate with your money guy in Africa giving away 30 billion dollars of your money while the economy flounders and an unknown alderman from Chicago gets elected to the highest office.

[shaun]

Obama has not been subject to negative campaigning. He has attacked Hillary when a right wing blogger posted a picture of him in his native (father's side) dress or anyone dared utter his middle name. Relentless focus on his father and grandfather's muslim polygamist lifestyle during the general election will sink his soft cult-like support. And all the Republicans who voted for him to get at Hillary in the open Dem caucuses will return to fold. Opening the nomination to those not committed to the Democratic party (<50% Democrats voted in some of the red state primaries and caucuses) will cost tham an election they had in the bag.

[shaun]

PT Barnum once said: "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people."
Barrack Obama has been paying attention.

[Rudolph]

Why is Obama constantly referred to as “first BLACK President” when he is half WHITE? Should it not be “first half-white President? If one of a future presidential nominee’s parents happened to be Chinese would he be classified as “first Chinese President”?

Barak comes across as not just a brilliant statesman but also super-intelligent so why should ‘experience’ be a factor when he would undoubtedly select to surround himself with and tap into the expertise of Military geniuses for advice and not just recklessly ‘pre-emptively’ declare war on some nation purely on speculation about non-existing WMD’s without first carefully discussing EVERY possible consequence --- including future disengagement.

Now imagine Hillary as “commander –in-Chief”.

If a future terrorist attack occurs on American soil, would she just purse her lips in disapproval, be reduced to tears again, or would she be capable of handling the situation better than her current mishandling of electoral funding?

If she was incapable of keeping her philandering husband’s zipper in check in the past, how can she be trusted with keeping her tears from short-circuiting the nuclear button?

Funny scenario --- but scary!

.

[David]

Hillary failed to use her unique feminine quality to her advantage; this race pitted a unique individual representing inspiration and freshness in American politics, whose apt theme is "Change" verses a strong and brilliant woman. They are so evenly balanced that Hillary's handlers needed therefore needed to find something uniquely differentiating; the only difference is her obvious feminine advantage - America has had 42(?) men as presidents and look where America is today - in the bush. Isn't it obvious that like Great Britain, Dominica, Germany and now Argentina, America try a woman and a strong one to boot?

[Americans Laugh At Canucks]

"So, effectively, the world has just what America whined about in 1776, taxation without representation. Don’t be surprised one day to see a tax bill from Washington for services rendered."

Perhaps, but Canada will still be an empty arctic multilingual disunited backwater falling apart at the seams, whose primary industries will be selling oil and basic manufactured goods to the Americans. So their commentary on the Americans is, to be frank, grown out of the resentment that comes from dependency.

Should the American empire collapse in a heap, one of the countries that would be most effected is Canada. That non-viable entity would quickly be carved up by viable world powers like China and Russia to gain access to its oil and other natural resources. How ironic that the very thing that allows it to hobble along, pretending to be a real country, is the American power it so despises!

[J.]

Obama talks of CHANGE! What CHANGE is he talking about? As the Senator of Illinois he has done absolutely nothing for the people of that state. Most of his senate votes on important issues are logged as PRESENT. He doesn't have the courage or conviction to even vote YES or NO. Is that the kind of change we want for a leader? The liberal media in the US is afraid to question his campaign because they are afraid to be branded as racists and the young generation, like mindless zombies, brainwashed in the US educational system controlled by radical, left wing professors have fallen for Obama's message of CHANGE.
CHANGE to what?

[Mac]

I am not pleased with my fellow Americans coming onto a British site, their home turf, and insulting irrelevant things like method of taking one's tea, and consistently waving WW2 around like some kind of trump card, like we were the only ones in it. (Yes, there would be a Britain without the US, but would there be a US without Britain? Come on now. Manners.) It is painfully embarrassing, and there is enough to argue about on the actual issue.

That said, I do find the Times coverage very strangely and consistently anti-Obama, which makes me wonder what exactly it is they see as so crucial in Hillary? (You guys remember she voted FOR the Iraq invasion, right?) I see that both candidates might pose problems, and it's true that for the moment, America is the 800 pound elephant that nobody can really safely ignore, but I'm not sure about the reasoning behind this pro-Clinton stance.

(I am personally despairing as I think they are all either horrible or ineffective.)

[Lorin Alan Weiss]

If the new breath of fresh air is to survive Obama will need to give the American voters more that inspiring rhetoric or McCain will win. American get excited, but after a while turn more conservative as the election date get closer.

[Martin]

Many of the comments here show a complete lack of understanding or comprehension of the sea change that is now occurring in American politics.

Obama represents a departure from the petty politics, mudslinging and smear tactics of old--whether by the Clinton machine or the same old Republican operatives. Did you notice how he took the high road in the last debate, not stooping to Clinton's attack tactics?

There is also a profound desire for change in U.S. policy--domestic and foreign--that Obama has tapped with the U.S. electorate. Obama understands this, and his superb oratory only enhances his message. That is why Obama receives thunderous ovations and huge crowds everywhere he goes. It's not because Americans are star struck, they actually agree with what he has to say. And he has pulled more votes in the primaries than the entire field of Republican candidates.

Hillary has insisted she is a fighter, which would once again be her undoing. People don't want divisive politics--my way or the highway--they are looking for someone who can build coalitions and bridges between the parties,

Obama's base of support is very broad and considerable, and includes highly educated and non-educated, rich and poor, black, white, hispanic, male and female alike. Corporate patrons or special interests? No. His financial support comes from individuals. he has attracted ndependents as well as Republicans.

Obama is focused on the real issues that affect Americans--not some fantasyland neoconservative notion of what America represents--which is pretty much the platform of every Republican candidate up to this point.

Obama is a man of substance, integrity and hard work. During the 110th Congress (only), Obama has been responsible for sposonsoring 113 bills. During the 109th, he sponsored 152 bills. (And these exclude the bills he cosponsored.)

This man can and will make a difference. He already has.

[truth machine]

"Michelle Obama's comments (that now was the first time she could love America)"

Are people being stupid, or dishonest, or both when they misquote and mischaracterize what she said? One can love without being proud of, and one can be proud of without being /really/ (as in "very") proud of, specifically in the context of massive electoral involvement.

[Bob]

I think Obama is actually less "liberal" than Hillary or most Democratic "party regulars." He seems liberal to many because he is a law professor who is very pro-civil-rights, and he advocates programs that help ordinary people. But civil rights are important to libertarians, as well, and libertarians are usually lumped in with conservatives. Obama is less ideologically driven than Hillary. Perhaps because she voted for the Iraq war, she advocates an immediate withdrawal -- and this is leftist orthodoxy in the United States. Obama's line on this is, "We should be as careful getting out as we were careless going in." Obama thus promises more flexibility, and centrists voters are likely to view this as more realistic. It may also be a better approach for the average Iraqi. Finally, Obama's promise to work with Republicans is, in essence, a promise to find common ground and to be willing to address the interests of those who do not fully agree with him. This is not a classically leftist approach but is, instead, more centrist. Thus, Obama appears to be a centrist who is significantly oriented toward the left of center, but he does not appear to be leftist in an ideological sense. There may be people who disagree with me, but it does not sound like a bad idea to elect a U.S. president who is less ideological and who seeks policies based on broad agreement (if not necessarily consensus). I suspect there are a lot of people, both inside and outside the United States, who would be willing to give that a try.

[Bob]

J Do you want to know WHAT change Obama represents? Just check his voting record. In the votes that he did cast, he played party loyalist and voted with the democrat senate in 96% of his votes. It shows how simple minded Americans are. He puts on an advertising blitz using the word "change" in every other sentence, and the dim whits go around repeating it. The facts are there, and they are clear. The election will show how many people are able to check out the information vs. how many just parrot what they hear.

[Jaime]

I think the media made Obama a rock star. Hillary was the person to vote for ( and still is ) untill about Dece,ber when the media in the US, in an unprofessional and biased manner, decided to "create" a nemesis for the democtratic race, in order to create "drama" and instill "competitiveness" in a sure but unchallenged Hillary Clinton's race to the White House.
The US media, as biased and , above it all, revenue seeking and ethicLESS as it is, created, inflated, promoted and advertised Obama day in and day out.
At the same time, they criticised and diatribed against Hillary in a callous and mean manner.
I believe they realised what they did too late, and instead of ammending their mistake, arrogantly the media has decided that by andorsing Obama ( allready done ) , if he becomes president, thie president will adore the media that brought him to power.

The worse part, in this "drama" created by the US media, is the constituent. The american constituent has proven to be a shallow, uneducated and boorish voter. They did it with Goerge W Bush, with Arnold Swatzenneger, and now, with Obama. The US voter is within reach of the most uneducated extremist voters of the planet, who vote for groups of interest or power, and never vote based on real substance programs.

[Jaime]

If the US media/journalist would had kept unbiased and if they would had informed the public about the issues, instead of talking and talking about Obama, the results would had been different.

If Obama beats ( if the US media beats, that is reality !!! ) Hillary , the next president will be a republican, because Obama will crumble against the republican diatribe, and the republicans will prove how little experience he has.

Ask any Obama follower, WHY is he voting for him????
It is funny to see the countenance of ignorance and the embarrassment expression of people that are simply "cattle" following the masses like zombies.
How sad, that is the US voter's mind, shallow, empty, ignorant.

[dave]

the US Associated Press recently ran a poll indicating that Obama would defeat McCain by approx. 6 percentage points, 46-40. this poll interviewed approx. 800 democrats and 700 republicans... however the major flaw is that it did not interview independent or nonpartisan voters, who in the past several years have become the largest voting bloc in the US (at about 30-40 percent of all US voters being independent, not Demo or Repub)...by failing to account for that, the poll survey was fatally flawed... so keep an eye on how the pollsters arrive at their conclusions; especially if they are not including the big bloc of nonpartisan voters....

[dave]

forgot to mention one other item...which is a potential McCain Vice Pres. in Ms. Condi Rice....
an intellectual black female from Alabama, her fellow schoolmates died in the KKK bombing of their church-school in the early 60s...poor Hillary could not properly pronounce Mr. Medvedev in Russia, and all Obama could mouth was some bland platitude about human rights in Russia, which shows he is not up to snuff on dealing with the Kremlin.....while Ms. Rice speaks Russian and knows the Kremlin likes nobody's beeswax....a black woman running with McCain would give the Demos their worst
nightmare....dave

[charles wren]

Several ppl on this blog have stated "Obama is not a liberal..." and I presume those posters are not from the USA. Obama's conservative rating is a 9, the most liberal of any US senator. To contrast, McCain's conservative rating is an 82. Personally I think all that is needed to sweep McCain into the white house is a major attack on a US embassy, or, a minor terrorist attack on US soil. Suddenly, the son of a Navy Admiral would be very appealing....

[Ken Clement]

In response to scousekraut who pointed out that Michelle said "really proud" and not simply "proud", she actually spoke her remark each way during that now-infamous address. She said it twice, so apparently it was an important point to her. Given that it was unlikely that she was attempting to make two separate points, I think it can be safely deduced that the difference is not existent let alone critical.

[kathy Jenkintown, Pa]

Oh come on, this is so exciting, the level of attention and participation paid by the electorate is a reawakening of democracy in America. We can't lose , all the candidates will do a good job, ethical, morally, intelligently. Go, Hillary. to the history buff, England stood alone, we did not rescue them. They carried us for two years till we got up to speed in WWII. Get it right, we rescued France.

[Jaime]

How funny, the american media, driven by revenue and income ( not by ethics and social responsability ) can make a cow president.
Ophra W and the media mass marketed Obama , and at the same time attacked Hillary Clinton directly and vicariously with innuendos and intimations that ended up in a no body running for president.
That power the media exercises, has to be coupled up to ignorant and shallow constituents , in order to work. The US is exactly that, a nation that combines purchasing power with ignorance and shallowness. Culture and education are far behind trucks and fast food.

[TOJU KD]

It sickens me to think that a MAJOR TOPIC OF DISCUSSION APPEARS TO BE ALONG THE LINES OF HOW CAN OBAMA BE BEATEN? Why the hell was that not the case when that clown of a president WW Bush was being sworn in! this increasingly reinforces the popular perception that only one race should be allowed to rule the modern world. Americans particularly ethnic americans that donot vote Obama are being short sited and proving to be the most stupid people on the planet. ALL this talk about where Obama's origins are from and whether he is muslim or not are of absolutely no significance what so ever. This election is now a world election not just an american one and its a race and ethnic issue as well no question! and to deny that would be to call a spade a spoon. AMERICANS MUST SEE THAT PERCEPTION IS EVERYTHING AND NO AMOUNT OF MONEY OR AMMUNITION CAN PROVIDE THEM OR THE WORLD WITH AS MUCH SECURITY AS AN AMERICAN PRESIDENT PERCIEVED TO BE SYMPATHETIC TO THE MIDDLE EASTERN WORLD! THAT REGION NEEDS A MAN THEY FEEL THEY CAN RELATE TO. THE MIDDLE EAST IS NOT PREPARED TO ACCEPT A WOMAN THUS MAKING OBAMA THE IDEA CHOICE. WHY? COS HE WOULD STILL BE AN AMERICAN PRESIDENT STUPID! AND IS THUS ALWAYS GOING TO BE PREDISPOSED TO SERVE THE BEST INTEREST OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE BUT AT THE SAME TIME BE DEEMED TO HAVE A FAIR AND OBJECTIVE AGENDA. THIS IS SADLY AN IMPRESSION THAT AS BEEN ABSENT IN AMERICAN LEADERSHIP FOR THE LAST DECADE. stop the rot AND STOP IT now!!

[Ken Clement]

TOJU KD, please...

The reason that the topic of this discussion is "How Obama can be beaten" is because that was the title of the article that started this thread.

As for your comment about George W. Bush, the topic you propose would be silly for a person about to be sworn in. An already-elected person cannot be "beaten" at least not until the next election.

And finally, IT IS RUDE AND MAKES YOU LOOK IMMATURE TO TYPE PARTS OF YOUR MISSIVE IN ALL CAPITAL LETTERS.

See what I mean.

[Dwight Pierson]

I just hope everyone finds good in their lives.