Re: Hillary Clinton, circulating Obama's pictures to woo anti-muslim feelings
I agree they will keep bringing these things up just like the idea that Obama is a secret Muslim, or Obama isn't patriotic and they will try to use his admission of past drug use against him (note that Mccains wife was addicted to prescription drugs a few years back) and we know they are going to go for the fear factor again just like Bush did but the game is a lot easier when you know what pitches are being thrown and you've got an allstar at bat.
All these allegations have been around for months and it hasn't slowed him down one bit, the more he's around the more people like him. People voted for Kerry because they hated Bush, people vote for Obama because they see him as a good leader.
Mirch bro calm down. So far Obama's ratings have not dipped on account of his picture in turban. Ordinary Democrats both white and non-white are still voting for him.
So now it has come to a point where a picture of Obama wearing a white turban and a white robe will swing the voters. Really ?
Are American voters so mis informed , ignorant and racists ? Or the campaign managers or whoever did this so mis informed , ignorant, racists and wicked ?
Is it a point where Muslims should fear the American public ? Why not ?
Does it not mean that any kind of association with Muslims seems to be very , very bad thing ?
If an American Presidential candidate can loose his/her campaign if he/she is seen in Muslim dress is it not time for Muslims to start packing their luggage and go back to where they came from ?
Please tell the Obama campaign managers the ways in which they can use this to their advantage instead of being fearful of it.
Also please tell the Muslim advocacy groups to wake up and tell every one that an American Presidential Candidate wearing a Muslim dress is not a bad thing. Is it ?
In Ohio, Obama is trailing Clinton by at least 10 points. Texas is neck and neck. Even if 2% rednecks get impacted by these kinds of nasty tricks, it can mean the difference between winning and losing. Clinton campaign has pretty much nothing to lose right now. They are throwing in the whole kitchen sink and see what sticks.
In Ohio, Obama is trailing Clinton by at least 10 points. Texas is neck and neck. Even if 2% rednecks get impacted by these kinds of nasty tricks, it can mean the difference between winning and losing. Clinton campaign has pretty much nothing to lose right now. They are throwing in the whole kitchen sink and see what sticks.
Yes may be! However we must realize that Clinton machine has focused solely on big states for a while now. If Obama loses, it will be a lot less due to the pic, and a much more due to his plans, spending, and the Ohio's Democratic party's setup for such large states.
As far as Texas and Ohio goes, as time goes on the polls go more and more in Obama's favor. Tonight is that last debate before the March 4th vote. The Clinton camp said they are going to drive home the fact that Obama doesn't have the experience that Hillary has. This is going to be the issue the Republicans use against Obama as well, so how it sticks will be interesting.
The fact is Obama has more experience in public office than Hillary and serves on 3 of the 4 committees dealing with foreign policy, more than any other senator. His experience led him to be against the Iraq war, Hillary's and McCain's experience led them to be for it. It's true both Hillary and McCain have more experience working in the flawed political system that is Washington D.C., experience working in it, not experience fixing it. The truth is none of these candidates have had any experience with being President.
So while the Hillary and McCain camp tries to claim that Obama doesn't have the experience to be President I think it's important to remind everyone that the last guy to be elected President with experience was George W. Bush, and that didn't work out so well, so how far can anyone really run on this 'experience' card?
One correction though, Clinton is now trying to portray that Obama is like Bush Jr (in 2000). Inexperienced in foreign policy. And look where it got US. A disastrous foreign policy. So her claim is that experience matters.
I think Obama's rebuttal is, that while he is himself marginally experienced in foreign policy, he displays better judgement. About the only thing he can point out, though, is that he opposed invasion of Iraq from the beginning. Is there any thing else to back up the 'judgement' claim?
Well I suppose Hillary has the experience of seeing the Somalia disaster a bit closer than Obama as well as the the Bush 1/Reagan Afghanistan toxic stew that continued to cook during the 90's under an experienced president.
I'd like think both Obama and Hillary have learned from these past mistakes. And seeing what Obama has done through hardwork and networking I have to think he has the nessassary judgement to select a qualified team to handle foreign policy and give him the feedback he needs to make decisions.