April 24, 2007

Hillary Losing Critical Constituency

During the first quarter of this extended presidential primary season, people discounted Barack Obama's candidacy for a number of reasons, but one related to his supposed lack of resonance in the African-American community. The New York Times reported in early February that Obama was not considered "black enough" by activists within the African-American community. Now, less than three months later, the Gray Lady reports that they have discovered that Hillary looks a lot more pale in comparison:

Only a few months ago, the vast majority of black elected officials in New York were expected to support the presidential candidacy of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton. But no longer.

In a series of interviews, a significant number of those officials now say they are undecided about whether to back Mrs. Clinton or one of her main rivals for the Democratic nomination, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois, the only black politician in the race.

The officials described themselves as impressed with the strength of Mr. Obama’s campaign in recent weeks, saying it reflected a grass-roots enthusiasm for Mr. Obama that many noticed among black voters in their own districts. And that could signal trouble for Mrs. Clinton, forcing her to devote precious attention to her home state, where blacks made up 20 percent of the Democratic primary vote in 2004, just as she has had to scramble to keep black support nationwide.

As I wrote at the time, the notion that black voters would snub Obama for Hillary was ludicrous. Those who believe in identity politics would not prefer a Caucasian woman to a man of African descent, regardless of whether he had American slavery as part of his family history or not. Those who claimed that Obama would drag down the national ticket because of the color of his skin aligned themselves with Hillary for profit. Serious people never took those claims for anything other than fringe rhetoric or self-interested argument.

No the Times seems to have caught onto Hillary's dilemma. Not only has she lost the hard Left in the primaries, but now she's poised to lose a constituency that her husband had cemented for her. In her own backyard, Harlem Congressman Adam Clayton Powell has switched to neutral, impressed with the Obama campaign's staying power and fundraising. Rep. Nick Perry of Brooklyn says that Obama has a much more realistic chance than Jesse Jackson, who won his constituents when he supported someone else in 1988.

Charles Rangel is still working hard for Hillary, and that's not nothing. He has lots of connections, both national and local, and his efforts will keep some of her support structure in line. However, it has become clear from Obama's fundraising that his candidacy has found resonance in liberal circles regardless of race, and also within the community that Hillary needs to win the primaries. She cannot rely on friendly media playing up the silly notion that Obama isn't black enough for black voters, but somehow she is.


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Hillary Losing Critical Constituency:

» More Ties Between Barack Obama and Indicted Fundraiser Revealed from Webloggin
Obama is in spotlight again as well. The last thing this country needs is a President defending himself from scandals of a corrupt businessman at a time when we really need someone to lead us into the future and defend us from the perils of the world. ... [Read More]

Comments (14)

Posted by Fight4TheRight [TypeKey Profile Page] | April 24, 2007 9:38 AM

Great insight, Cap'n. And I must say I am a bit surprised at Obama's staying power to this point - just saw one general poll with him tied with Clinton.

However, I've mentioned it before that the Clinton machine has not even geared up yet. With Obama's inexperience in a national campaign and the eventual onslaught of the Clinton "operatives", the guy is doomed.

I think the saving grace for some of us is this - this will end up doing two things: 1) this will get awfully bloody and 2) while Mrs. Clinton will rise from the ashes, the American people will see what she really is minus the pants suit and "y'alls."

My other prediction has been....that once the dust has settled and the cut men in both of their corners have run out of stitches and anti-coagulants....the DNC will look at overall polling figures and will send up the SOS smoke signal: "Al Gore, We Need You!"

Posted by unclesmrgol [TypeKey Profile Page] | April 24, 2007 9:42 AM

Adam Clayton Powell supported the separatist policies of Malcolm X. Given the choice between a white woman and a black man (we're not talking homosexuality here), his choice is obvious.

Posted by GarandFan [TypeKey Profile Page] | April 24, 2007 10:43 AM

Wonder what Rangel has been promised by Ms Clinton? Loyalty doesn't come cheap in D.C.


I also expect that the Goracle is waiting in the wings, to be summoned forth. The Alpha Male has visions of riding into Washington on inaugural day, dressed in white and riding on the back of an ass.

Posted by fdcol63 [TypeKey Profile Page] | April 24, 2007 10:59 AM

GarandFan said:

"The Alpha Male has visions of riding into Washington on inaugural day, dressed in white and riding on the back of an ass."

It'll be hard to tell which is which. LOL

Posted by docjim505 [TypeKey Profile Page] | April 24, 2007 11:42 AM

Only a few months ago, the vast majority of black elected officials in New York were expected to support the presidential candidacy of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton. But no longer.

Maybe they are getting just a little sick of her clumsy and condescending attempts to demonstrate how "black" she is with her phony-baloney accent, quoting Negro spirituals, and using the pronouns "we" and "us". Slick Willie could pull it off; she can't.

Posted by The Fop [TypeKey Profile Page] | April 24, 2007 12:30 PM

As a Jewish Republican, there's nothing that I'd like to see more than the Democrat's phony support of Israel exposed for what it is.

Finally, we have a potential scenario for that to happen. Obama has stated that one of the major inspirations in his life is the pastor of his Black Church in Chicago. This pastor is a good friend of Farrakhan and has a long history of being anti-Israel.

If Obama starts doing well in the early primaries, Hillary will have no choice but to try to exploit this issue in order to shore up the Jewish vote and promote herself as the pro-Israel candidate.

Angry left wingers and Blacks will respond by saying things like "screw Hillary, screw Israel, how many more years are we Democrats going to have to keep kissing the damned Jew's butts?".

It's time that pro-Israel Jewish Democrats got a better look at fellow Democrats like these people......


Posted by Adjoran [TypeKey Profile Page] | April 24, 2007 12:33 PM

There is a rather stark divide, I think. Blacks in the south still prefer Hillary. They are mistrustful of Obama and Edwards. Blacks in the northeast and west coast are moving strongly towards Obama - for the exact reason Ed mentions: identity politics.

The slavery connection means more in the south, too. Many see Obama as "just an o'fey with a tan," while some even say he should "go back to Halfrica." The fact that he grew up as a pampered upper-middle class kid contributes to that social disconnect.

Obama is still enjoying a free ride. It probably suits Hillary to keep him going a while longer - all that money and staff is tied up and unavailable for Gore or some other late entry. The young man has a great future, but lacks the experience to be a serious candidate for President yet. His strong showing lets everyone feel good for a while - be it "black pride" or whites pointing out how big it is of them to support a black candidate - but, like all fantasies, the curtain must fall sooner or later.

Posted by Carol_Herman [TypeKey Profile Page] | April 24, 2007 2:07 PM

It's all a game.

Let me show you HOW the donks are better at politics than the GOP'sters.

Start with this. Hillary is ambitious. The donks don't want to lose their constituency, ya know! But Hillary's not appealing to them! It's like the hollywood types, who took 8-losing lessons to learn you DON'T OPEN A MOVIE starring Jennifer Anison.

Since I don't go to the movies much. (In ten years the last film I saw was BORAT). You know, I picked up the lesson on the foolishness of handing Anison the leading roles in movies that lose money; is none other than Drudge. On Sunday nights. He talks about this stuff. Very off the cuff. Also, very amusing.

So, here we have Hillary. With deep insider connections to the money machine that politicians tap into when they run.

It's one of the many levers they have to touch to win.

While, folks, on the other side of this example, sits two lemmings. Both named Bush. Both, who got into the White House, without having much charm. Or talent. JUST CONNECTIONS.

So, the right went and licked their lips at this flying pig, PIAPS. The birdy who'd give them a "sure thang" if she gets the nomination. Coming 2008.

So far? I don't think the donks have exposed their front runner. But we could probably bet now, who it won't be.

It won't be Hillary. It won't be pelosi. It won't be Fat Albert Gore (because he can't lose enough weight, in time. And, because his friendships are limited to a few rows of houses, in hollywood.) Oh, he's big in europe. SO, too, is Kerry. Both will be no-shows.

Obama? You're kidding me? He's getting the top notch role in the next GODFATHER movie? He's going to the "White House?" REALLY? From a 12% section of the guaranteed base of the donkey party ... you will not even get a go-cart out of the garage. To carry Osama even close to the nomination. But, sure. He'll be on stage. And, he'll be shaking hands. If Jimmy Carter's on that stage, getting crowded now; Jimmy will be running around, using a walker. Trying to get a hand-shake out of Teddy Kennedy. Kennedy won't let go of the bottle. And, it will look as funny in 2008, as it did in 2004.

But, yes, the chorus line for the donks has new faces.

What about the GOP? Are ya gonna be thrilled to see the to Bush lemmings standing together? Surely, you jest.

Hillary can't run. But not for want of trying. She just can't bring the crowds into the house, with her. And, unlike C-Span; where congress critters spoke directly into the cameras ... But then Tip O'Neill got furious with Newt Gingrich ... so in the 1980's. With the donks in control of those cameras. They'd pan the HOUSE. And, no one seat was occupied.

Sure did make it look like the GOP "talkers" were just practicing.

By now they should have better routines. But they don't.

While the donks aren't afraid to let Hillary suck up some limelight juice.

IF the donks can keep the country divided, enough, that we're not willing to boost either "moderate" GOPsters (like the Bush's. Who represent LEMMING-HOOD far better than flying pigs, let me tell ya.) Or the right wing. Since, the right wing lost the debate on "smaller government.": And, fiscal constraints. YOU might like that subject. But the "special people" who actually get elected are not about to shut down their cash cows!) Foolish of you to think you've even got a topic to toss, over there.

ANd, the donks? Doesn't matter if they get into the White House, again. Or not. They know how to reduce a president so he looks even smaller than Nixon, and Jimmy Carter. The Bush's have provided FOOT STOOLS for seating in the Oval Office.

ANd, when you hear "Hillary" you just about go "deranged." Where's the class in that?

There's meanwhile a lot of "globalists" who do not want to waste their cash on Hillary. Who is still connected to Bill. Where Bill is the love object. And, she's just the broad he brought into the room.

It's not so much of a free ride. As the world of entertainment.

With, in my view, on Guiliani a good enough manager to bring change. Everything else? From the GOP's side it's like watching kids learning to bicycle ride; with training wheels.

I'd get out of the name-calling business, ya know?

If you want the business of politics to change, then it has to grow these changes by encouraging the mainstreamers to participate. Less name-calling. Less dependence on the right wing agenda passing "because God says so." Most people aren't getting the words of God, from the horses' mouth.

And, pulpit spitters are just the talk that comes out of the other side of the animal.

So? What's to be gained by showing you Hillary? Seems the GOP falls over themselves in fits of panic. While they haven't shown you the guy who is gonna run. And, he's gonna DASH RIGHT DOWN THE MIDDLE.

Tom DeLay, in his book, talks about how the GOP in Congress, starting in 1994, forced Clinton to run more in the middle, than not.

He did this by participating in the GOP congress that began interpreting MIDDLE for Clinton, by purposely going RIGHT. That meant in the world of COMPROMISE, the middle ground was found.

It's fast in the middle. Just like the mighty Mississippi. Yeah. The wonderful river meanders some. But she's torn the bottom to bottomless, on her currents. And, to captain it takes skill.

Why not? Boating is fun for the passengers. But the captain looks out, and instead of seeing sunny days, looks to see what appears to be trouble, ahead. Sometimes, you can tell this by the whirling pools of debris collecting to the sides of your ship.

And, the only way to learn? Per Mark Twain. (Life on the MIssissippi). Is to know sunny days are no guarantee that the weather is your friend. You can only do this by becoming aware, yourself. You can't depend on what you're told.

As a matter of fact, in the chapter where I read Mark Twain's advice? It's the only time mark "twain" shows up in his writings. To tell ya, and to fool you, that the bottomless Mississippi; can be treacherous ONLY IF YOU BELIEVE THE SET UP. The captain did this. To teach Mark Twain a lesson.

Good lessons need repeating, often enough.

Posted by Carol_Herman [TypeKey Profile Page] | April 24, 2007 2:42 PM

Buy a clue.

Because I think the donks can set the "standards" for debate. They do their thing, and you're COUNTERING THIS?

Excuse me. The winners SET THE TERMS.

So coming up to 2008, for some reason, the GOP manages to look at the track. And, then decides it can run for defeat; by starting LAME.

Real winners have agendas!

Real winners STATE THEM OUT LOUD. And, clearly.


Lincoln rebutted the charge that he was an abolitionist, That's an example for you to use, here.

To be something MOST VOTERS DON'T WANT, is to lose.

What's equal to the charge of "abolitionist" today? Go choose your own no-no. But chances are you'll find they have to do with views held by "special interests."

And, ya know what? With Bush having MORE AFFIRMATIVE ACTION FACES right up front with the AMerican public; you're going off on an Obama tangent?

Do you feel your pockets being picked, when your pockets are not only picked, the material is now inside out and flapping in the breeze.

Affirmative action is a dog of an issue.

And, the donks are fooling you!

Well, if you want to lose races, keep doing whatever it is you do. And, learn NOTHING.

How do you change this debate?

YOU IGNORE THE SCHTICK. Treat Obama as if he's on the vaudeville stage.

Vaudeville. DIED. Because? The audiences stopped coming.

Yet, if you go back in history, vaudeville worked on Broadway! Men stood. And, spit. And, behaved like they were at dog shows. And, the women on stage, which provided something of a barrier; stripped down naked.

The men "saw" more than they ever saw of their wives.

Heck, I can remember my dad saying, about the women in the 1940's; who took to hollywood's habit of shaving off eyebrows. That there were men out there who never saw their wives real faces. Until the women went into labor with their first child.

If you don't understand this reference? Well, labor sweats it all off. Women suddenly appear as is.

Unless, like my mom, they never wore makeup, anyway.

Since, so far, the electorate looks like it's capable of keeping up the divisions; sending congress-critters into Congress, from a very divided public selection process. It's as if all you've got in DC, are lots of people with their feet on the brakes. And, their mouths on the lobbyists tits. Fed and satisfied. They ain't going anywhere.

And, you're being asked to pick and choose.

By the way, things change all the time.

Even the fads come and go. Women today still wear makeup. But don't shave off their eyebrows.

They don't wear hats, either. Nor do they cover their hands in gloves. Eleanor Roosevelt, by example, never went outside without a hat on. A strong, long coat. And, gloved hands. Just wasn't done.

Even Hillary, who would mimic her, if she could, still isn't going about in the clothes Eleanor wore. Nor does she have the clout, inside the democrapic party, that Eleanor once had.

Accept life. Reality then pulls up the rear. And, you won't make so many mistakes.

What does the world need, now?

A way better definition of what being in the GOP means; than the country sees reflected in Dubya. Or even from only one side of marginalized special interest politics.

It needs a message that sets the agenda.

Another lesson: REAGAN DID THIS! Back when the GOP decided he was too old; and too conservative. So an idiot was given the nomination in 1976;

What followed was Jimmy Carter.

You want to compare Carter to either of the Bush's? Okey dokey. Both lemmings aren't as mean as carter. But carter failed to use the military. ANd, both Bush's used them in ways that didn't progress an Amerian agenda. Clinton, too. Mistakes made with NATO. Are on the same scale.

You ain't gonna name-call this away, either.

Maybe, the Internet can turn out to help?

How so?

By trying to pull together not an old agenda. But developing a new, new one. Taking into consideration that the party inside the White House; if they're be-fouling the place; makes it harder for the party to make inroads.

The GOP needs more inroads.

The donks?

Oh, boy. Do they know how to survive, now.

And, the funniest thing? Here, they're setting the agenda.

A little bit less on the freak show; more on the circus.

I know. I know. When I was young I wasn't allowed to see the freaks. But my mom told me, that oddly enough, for Barnum. The freaks raised the prices paid for admission. Including that it cost you a dime to see the egress.

Be nice, if the GOP really wants to have power, though. That they develop the speakers who SET AGENDAS. Not by pipe dreaming. But by grasping that the audience share depends on mainstream customers. Always did, ya know.

The donks thrive only if you keep things split 50/50.

Posted by GarandFan [TypeKey Profile Page] | April 24, 2007 2:42 PM

Moving right along........oh! look! A rabbit!

Posted by Del Dolemonte [TypeKey Profile Page] | April 24, 2007 3:51 PM

unclesmrgol sez:

"Adam Clayton Powell supported the separatist policies of Malcolm X. Given the choice between a white woman and a black man (we're not talking homosexuality here), his choice is obvious."

You're confusing the son with the father. The "Adam Clayton Powell" quoted here is Adam Clayton Powell IV. His father died 35 years ago.

Posted by qwerty182764 [TypeKey Profile Page] | April 24, 2007 7:52 PM

Habitable planet alert - Gliese 581 has a (probably) rocky planet orbiting within it's green zone.

Posted by jr565 [TypeKey Profile Page] | April 24, 2007 8:11 PM

I'm kind of surprised that Clinton isn't doing even better than she is in the black community. After all, she is married to the first black president (http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200110/NAT20011001e.html).

Posted by Carol_Herman [TypeKey Profile Page] | April 24, 2007 9:03 PM

jr565, IF hillary is married to the first black president, how come it's so obvious she's not getting any marital sex?

I think the black man saga does not fit the bent one to a T. Not at all.

I also think the whole discussion of whose TV production misses the point.

IF you could win the presidency because you had tip-top television techniques; Oprah would be president. And, then?

You think Oprah would bring a black man in with her? DIdn't she just say? (Well, I was listening to this schtick last Sunday, on Drudge) ... that she hasn't even hired black women to help her clean her house! (She said she wants to prove to her mom she amounted to something better than being a cleaning lady.)

On the other hand? Pelosi, who seems rather short on talent for a woman who birthed five or six kids; still had not trouble, picking up a rag. And, waving it about.

That rag is still clean, too!

Campaign pledges are useless.

If you want to believe that stuff, though, see if I care?

We're getting a media show. Because the GOP has no footing to CREATE anything for the mainstream PUBLIC. Without acting like copy cats of the donks.

And, the donks? They very well know they don't have popular support. They're barely holding on. But when they get an edge. Just a 1% boost in the polls. They act like 500 pounders who lost a pound.

And, you're then supposed to adopt their diet.

Nope. They know all about HARD BALL.

Even though the game is barely tolerated by the public.

Too bad there's no great insights on the right, though. Where they'd go invent their own media messages. (And, not phony ones, either. That phony crap, like "cleaning the house in 100 days," that pelosi just pulled?) Doesn't work for people who aren't brain damaged.

And, if you want a religious experience, you still have to go to church.

Politics is a different ball game. You'd be surprised what the public doesn't want to give you.

Also. Adam Clayton Powell, a HOUSE representative to DC, from Harlem. Back in the days of LBJ. Did absolutely NOTHING for his people! But, sure. He could get his name in the press. HE'S DEAD, NOW. There are even more outrageous examples of incompetents who keep returning to DC. Since the voters are already used to getting nothing for their votes. Votes are free. It doesn't cost you anything. So NADA comes back.

While in the White House, you've got a problem.