Obama showed in the Jan. 5 debate that he does NOT understand enemy attacks!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on January 7, 2008 - 4:32am.
Rapid Response
Hello Everyone:
Barack Obama showed again in the debate on Saturday, January 5 that he does NOT understand the nature of the threat that the other side and the Neocon GOP attack machine will be to him by negatively defining him as a candidate in the general election IF he is the nominee which should be very alarming to all Democratic primary voters right now in my opinion!
Obama is wrongly "betting" that people will just not listen to what the other side will negatively say about him in the general election which is a very dangerous thing:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/05/us/politics/05text-ddebate.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin
Transcript
The Democratic Debate in New Hampshire
Published: January 5, 2008
MR. SPRADLING: "Senator Thompson referred to your support as endorsement by some of the most liberal groups in the nation, trying to paint a picture that you would be way left of center.
SEN. OBAMA: Of course, but Scott, that's what they're going to do to any Democrat. I mean, we -- you know, we've seen this movie before. We know the Republican playbook. Here's what I'm betting on, though, is that regardless of what the Republican candidates are talking about, I think there are a whole host of Republicans and certainly Independents who have lost trust in their government, who don't believe anybody is listening to them, who are staggering under rising costs of health care, college education, don't believe what politicians say, and we can draw those Independents and some Republicans into a working coalition, a working majority for change."
This is definitely not the first time that Obama has shown that he does NOT understand this key concept:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13894
ANALYSIS: Statements from Obama that show his lack of electability if nominated!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on November 14, 2007 - 10:46am.
Here is credible documentation to specifically show why Barack Obama is dead wrong about what he said and to show why he is probably NOT electable in the general election because he does not understand this very important concept:
1) Authors Mark Halperin and John F. Harris explain very well in their excellent book titled "The Way to Win: Taking the White House in 2008" what Obama does NOT understand about the other side and the ability of the GOP attack machine to negatively define him as a candidate in 2008 just like how they did to John Kerry in 2004:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/03/AR2006100301030_pf.html
The Way to Win: Taking the White House in 2008
Chapter 1: The Way to Lose
By Mark Halperin and John F. Harris
Tuesday, October 3, 2006; 6:08 PM
"The bottom line was that the Bush campaign and its allies did a better job than the Kerry campaign and its allies in using the Freak Show -- its magnification of the personal and negative -- to define the opposing candidate. But the story as told in this chapter is a tactical one. What is more important for the next presidential election is the strategic reality that the Freak Show does not affect both parties equally.
The dynamic in 2008 will be the same as it was in 2004. There are structural issues in politics and media that now favor Republicans over Democrats. Freak Show politics will represent only a moderate threat to Republicans and give them a major advantage as they try to define the opposition on unfavorable terms. On the other side, Freak Show politics offers virtually no advantages for Democrats, but will again present a huge threat to any politician hoping to keep control of the narrative of his -- or her -- life story..."
I articulated further about that book in this post:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/8841
ANALYSIS: A great Washington Post article about how the media affects Democrats!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on October 5, 2006 - 2:03pm.
2) Campbell Brown of CNN explained very clearly in this documentary why Obama is dead wrong about his "betting" that people will not listen to what the other side negatively says about him by using as examples John Kerry's Communications Director Stephanie Cutter who also mistakenly thought that people would not listen to the swiftboat attacks on Kerry and Michael Dukakis:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/14284#comment-264999
Obama needs to understand the main point brought up in this CNN documentary about responding quickly and fighting back against enemy attacks to negatively define you as a candidate!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on January 2, 2008 - 6:43am.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0711/28/se.02.html
CNN LIVE EVENT/SPECIAL
Campaign Killers: Why Do Negative Ads Work?
Aired November 28, 2007 - 23:00 ET
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: "John Kerry lied.
CAMPBELL BROWN, HOST: The attack didn't come from a campaign but rather a group of Vietnam vets attacking the candidate who had billed himself as a war hero.
STEPHANIE CUTTER, KERRY '04 COMMUNICATIONS DIR.: When I first saw the ads, I thought, this is crazy. There's no way that these accusations are going to hold up.
BROWN: Stephanie Cutter was John Kerry's communications director...
BROWN: "Yet the swift boat ad may well have been the lethal blow to Kerry's campaign. The attack has even added a new term to the political lexicon, swift-boating a candidate. It also demonstrated the power of independent groups, the damage they can do while allowing the candidate they support to claim innocence...
BROWN: Experts say Dukakis ignored the basic rules of campaign combat. When attacked, attack back. Don't let them turn a positive, for example, his environmental record, into a negative. And always, always remember any picture can come back to haunt you. Tried and true strategies that have been used for centuries..."
3) Barack Obama does NOT understand how powerful that Rush Limbaugh really is and how that his massive talk radio media empire defines much of what is talked about in the news right now:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13578
ANALYSIS: Why Rush Limbaugh is so powerful & what many media pundits do not get!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on October 10, 2007 - 1:47am.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,184342,00.html
Transcript: Rush Limbaugh on 'Your World'
Thursday, February 09, 2006
LIMBAUGH: "Neil, there is a new media out there today that doesn't let the left get away with defining the news, defining the circumstances, defining personalities and so forth.
And they haven't learned how to deal with it. They haven't learned how to deal with people like me, the problems they think FOX News causes, and everybody else. They are still in their 30-year-old playbook, in which they think they still — all they have to do is, you know, portray somebody they want to portray them, and the American people will see it, swallow it, and like it..."
4) Barack Obama will not be able to cry foul to any kind of referee during the general election if he is the nominee and if he cannot handle swiftboat attacks. Obama also cannot just ask the other side to be nice because THEY WILL NOT DO IT. If Obama tries to do that like how Elizabeth Edwards did when she asked Ann Coulter to be nice, then he will get the same "No" answer that Coulter gave to Edwards:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/12576
ANALYSIS: John & Elizabeth Edwards did NOT "fight back" against Ann Coulter!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on July 5, 2007 - 2:45am.
This is exactly why Hillary Clinton's high negative numbers are just an illusion compared to Barack Obama or to any other Democrat right now. Obama's negative numbers will shoot right up through the roof when he is negatively defined by the other side as a candidate and when he does not understand how to fight back against that IF he is the nominee:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13992
Hillary's high negatives are an illusion compared to Obama or any other Democrat
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on November 28, 2007 - 4:49pm.
For more information and documentation about why Barack Obama is probably NOT electable because he does NOT understand how the other side has the power to negatively define him as a candidate, please check out these posts:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/14284
Obama predicts a landslide win in 11/08 when evidence shows he is NOT electable!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on January 2, 2008 - 6:34am.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/14201
ANALYSIS: What about Kerrey's, Shaheen's, and Penn's alleged attacks on Obama?
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on December 21, 2007 - 7:40pm.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13894
ANALYSIS: Statements from Obama that show his lack of electability if nominated!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on November 14, 2007 - 10:46am.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13782
Barack Obama will be swiftboated & will get eaten up alive if he is the nominee!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on November 1, 2007 - 3:49am.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13433
ANALYSIS: Why I think that Obama would be a very weak general election candidate
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on September 24, 2007 - 9:01am.
Right below is an article titled "Republicans turn fire on Obama" dated January 6, 2008 which shows just the tip of the iceberg of the kind of attacks that Obama will face in the general election IF he is the nominee and which we need a much better answer from Obama other than "Here's what I'm betting on, though, is that regardless of what the Republican candidates are talking about, I think there are a whole host of Republicans and certainly Independents who have lost trust in their government, who don't believe anybody is listening to them..."
Barack Obama is probably a very sincere person as well as being a good Senator for Illinois BUT he is in way over his head running for President right now in my opinion because he has NOT shown that he has any understanding yet that in addition to the GOP nominee he will also be up against Rush Limbaugh, his huge extreme right wing talk radio media empire, Drudge, FOX News, NewsBusters, and the very well organized extreme right wing Neocon GOP blogosphere in the 2008 general election!
I hope that all Democratic primary voters will very seriously think over and consider this important information before they vote!
Mitch Dworkin
http://www.securingamerica.com/
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/10756
StopIranWar.com: "War is not the answer"
Submitted by Wes Clark on February 21, 2007 - 11:40am.
http://www.securingamerica.com/ccn/node/7191
Listen to Gen. Wes Clark fight for Dems on Sean Hannity's radio program: An excellent example for all of us to follow and what we all need to be doing to help fight back against extreme right wing Neocon smear propaganda!
--------------------
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/world/view_article.php?article_id=110686
Republicans turn fire on Obama
Agence France-Presse
First Posted 10:39am (Mla time) 01/06/2008
MANCHESTER, New Hampshire--Republican presidential hopefuls on Saturday gave Democrat Barack Obama an early taste of the attacks he can expect if he emerges as his party's 2008 presidential nominee.
The Republican candidates, who have spent months attacking Hillary Clinton, took the chance to turn their fire on the freshman Illinois senator during a presidential debate three days before the New Hampshire primary.
Senator John McCain, who once famously clashed with Obama in the Senate on ethics reform, said though he respected him, the surging Democrat who won Thursday's Iowa caucuses was too green to be US commander in chief.
"Senator Obama does not have the national security experience and background to lead this nation," McCain said.
"It requires a lot of knowledge, and a lot of experience, and a lot of background to have the judgement to address the challenges that our nation faces in the 21st century," McCain said, in remarks likely to be welcomed by Obama's rival Hillary Clinton, who has taken a similar stand.
Former New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani said that Obama was not ready to be president due to a lack of executive experience.
"He has never run a city, he has never run a state, never run a business" said Giuliani.
For former screen star and senator Fred Thompson said Obama's political philosophy was at fault.
"Senator Obama has adopted the position of every liberal interest group in the country," said Thompson.
Mike Huckabee, who swept to victory in the Iowa caucuses on Thursday, as Obama seized the Democratic contest, also criticized the Illinois senator, but he said he had tapped a desire for political change among Americans.
"I think we ought also to recognize that what Senator Obama has done is to touch at the core of something Americans want.
"He has excited a lot of voters, let's pay respect for that.
"He is a likeable person who has excited people about wanting to vote who have not wanted to vote in the past," said Huckabee, who is also standing as a "change" candidate and might have been describing himself, as his campaign would like him to be seen.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/14337#comment-267724
Bill & Hillary know how to deal with enemy swiftboat attacks:
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on January 7, 2008 - 4:50am.
I fully stand behind everything that I have said in this post. If you think that I am wrong about any point regarding Obama, then please tell me specifically what it is and I will be glad to discuss it with you.
but you're a negative campaigner, and it's not actually helpful.
Now, you might want to do some research on how quickly and effectively Obama's response team has effectively countered attacks from both left and right to date.
You might want to think about how effectively he has turned negative attacks into positives in his back and forths with Hillary Clinton's campaign, because these are precisely why he is crushing them in the voting booth.
you conclusion is my read on collective culture response as well;
synthetic environment Americans deserve what the rest of civilized world has affordable guaranteed single-payer healthcare.
all that I am doing is making what I believe are valid points that I can back up with credible documentation!
I am taking a great deal of my time to warn people right now that Obama is probably NOT electable and will probably lose in the general election if he is the nominee unless he gets some kind of a lucky break that happens in his favor such as the GOP nominee making a huge mistake or Bush messing up so badly that it rubs off on the GOP nominee.
I will also NOT put my credibility on the line to try and defend what I do not believe can be defended. Obama in my opinion cannot be defended!
How in the world will he credibly defend himself when the other side brings up his saying "Probably the strongest experience I have in foreign relations is the fact that I spent four years living overseas when I was a child in Asia—Southeast Asia" in a post-9/11 world?
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13948
Obama said strongest foreign relations experience was living overseas as a child
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on November 21, 2007 - 9:17am.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/11/20/clinton-hits-obama-on-foreign-relations-experience/
November 20, 2007
Clinton hits Obama on foreign relations experience
"On Monday, Obama told an Iowa audience, "Probably the strongest experience I have in foreign relations is the fact that I spent four years living overseas when I was a child in Asia—Southeast Asia."
According to the campaign, Obama was six years old when he moved to Indonesia in 1967, and stayed until he was 10.
Obama said his time there and the fact that his father is from Kenya gives him the knowledge "of how ordinary people in these other countries live..."
How would you suggest that Obama defend himself when this comes up because I cannot think of anything and I will not say something stupid trying to defend this because I value my credibility as a writer and researcher!
I have no confidence in Obama that he is ready to inherit and fix the huge mess that Bush will leave behind on 1/20/09. He has done nothing to show me that he is ready to do that right now while I know that Bill and Hillary will have reliable people around them like Gen. Clark and Madeliene Albright who I know can handle that huge mess!
A doctor is not being negative when he tells someone what is wrong and what they need to do to fix it and I am not being negative by credibly documenting what I know will come up in the general election if Obama is the nominee.
I watch what our side is saying, what the other side is saying, what the media is saying, and then I cut through all of the spin and BS on all sides and present a well thought out conclusion calling things how I honestly see them right down the middle based on credible evidence and documenation.
If anyone disagrees with me, then I have absolutely no problem with that at all. I am always glad to listen to other opinions, look at any other documentation I have not seen yet, and then have an honest discussion like how we are doing right now with an open mind. But I am definitely NOT "a negative campaigner."
You've posted nonstop from Rush Limbaugh's web site, and most of your sourcing are from the like. Credible source Rush Limbaugh.
You've posted the Dumbo picture countless times and also the "Breck Girl" image, and hey I'm no Edwards advocate, but you've posted nothing about what we should be expecting with regard to Hillary Clinton.
Take a great deal of your time to post what Rush Limbaugh and friends are saying about Hillary Clinton, with the characatures of her on their web sites, and I might believe a word you say for your defense of these hit jobs.
Until then, you're only aiding and abetting Rush Limbaugh and friends, and propagating smears in the name of "Oppo research"
Nothing personal, not from me at least, but these things are part of the reason that Hillary Clinton is getting creamed, and are going to be part of the reason that the GOP gets creamed in November.. By Barack Obama.
people who helped Bush to beat Kerry in 2004. Do you want the same thing to happen again in 2008?
Even Laura Ingraham, who is a top Neocon extreme right wing talk radio show host, seriously fears what Hillary Clinton will do to extreme right wing Neocon talk radio if she is elected President and knows that "If we didn’t have talk radio in the last election, John Kerry would be president:"
http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/threats_to_talk_radio/2007/09/13/32450.html
Laura Ingraham: Threats to Talk Radio Real
Thursday, September 13, 2007 5:25 PM
By: Phil Brennan
"If Hillary Clinton wins the presidency she’ll launch an all-out attack on conservative talk radio, top commentator Laura Ingraham warns...
NewsMax: Do you think the threat to revive the Fairness Doctrine is a serious one?
Ingraham: I do think it’s serious. I think that if Hillary Clinton becomes president, we’re going to see all sorts of moves to regulate political talk radio in a manner that would ultimately drive a lot of [talk] shows off the air because of the push to make individual stations “fair...”
If we didn’t have talk radio in the last election, John Kerry would be president..."
Rush Limbaugh is the undisputed king of this very powerful media empire:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13578
ANALYSIS: Why Rush Limbaugh is so powerful & what many media pundits do not get!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on October 10, 2007 - 1:47am.
Bill and Hillary Clinton have already proven that they have the strength and toughness that it takes to fight back against enemy swiftboat attacks and they will not put up with any crap from the other side to negatively define them. This is exactly what happened to John Kerry in 2004 which helped to cost him that election:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/8655
Keith Olbermann comments on Bill Clinton's Fox News interview with my analysis!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on September 26, 2006 - 1:47am.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13880
Hillary started a new rapid response website to fight back against enemy attacks
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on November 12, 2007 - 8:42am.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/8841
ANALYSIS: A great Washington Post article about how the media affects Democrats!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on October 5, 2006 - 2:03pm.
John Kerry clearly did not know how to deal with this in March of 2005 shortly after he lost the 2004 election just like how Barack Obama does not understand this concept right now:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/350fnrnt.asp?pg=1
Kerry Loves the Mainstream Media
From the March 21, 2005 issue: . . . And has contempt for the American people.
by P.J. O'Rourke
03/21/2005, Volume 010, Issue 25
Kerry was led back to the main point by a question from the audience: "How [do we] stop the media from creating and perpetuating the divisive red state/blue state situation?"
Kerry looked sympathetically at Oliphant--a representative of the mainstream media--and answered as if Oliphant himself had asked the question. "Tom, I swear I don't have the answer to that. And I'm looking for it just like everybody else is..."
Day after day I read that those who are not a supporter of Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign have been "Brainwashed" and have fallen for the right wing talking points.
How do you square the Clintons unquestionable ability to respond to the Right wingers with the notion that non-supporters have been so effectively drawn in by these attacks?
who are not a supporter of Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign have been "Brainwashed" and have fallen for the right wing talking points."
Is there a link to document that because I have not seen that from any credible source?
That may be someone's personal opinion on some blog somewhere BUT I have not seen it come from any official Clinton campaign source and I do NOT believe that myself.
When it comes to "non-supporters have been so effectively drawn in by these attacks," what do you think that a lot of people are going to believe when the Clintons have been on the receiving end of many swiftboat attacks since about 1991 or 1992?
They have been able to stand up to it after all that time while John Kerry could not stand up to it for less than the year that he ran in 2004!
Obama also does not understand how to deal with it either which I documented in this post. That shows to me that Obama will get in 2008 just what Kerry got in 2004 if he is the nominee!
Barack Obama's multimillion dollar team has no clue how do counter stock political campaign tactics that have gone on since the 1800's, but Mitch Dworkin DOES understand, and the Clintons also do.
Just making sure I got the assertion correctly.
I honestly see it right down the middle based on all of the evidence that I have seen so far.
Bill and Hillary Clinton have shown that they can deal with enemy attacks while John Kerry in 2004, just like Obama right now, have not shown that they have the ability to deal with them!
John Kerry's multimillion dollar team of Bob Schrum and company also had "no clue how do counter stock political campaign tactics that have gone on since the 1800's" in 2004 and I along with a lot of other Clarkies very clearly saw what they were doing wrong!
have:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/14338
A good question inspired by PAforClark: "Tell me why I should vote FOR Clinton?"
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on January 7, 2008 - 6:10am.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/14328
ANALYSIS: Why are Rush Limbaugh & Karl Rove so eager to give Obama their advice?
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on January 6, 2008 - 2:15am.
Could it be that they want to run against him?
It was nearly identical to the questions posed by Gordon when he wondered why so many Republican leaders were boosting Hillary Clinton's campaign so many months ago, and it was quickly shot down. Go find that one and link it in your next post about Hillary Clinton. Ooops, I keep forgetting, you don't post hit jobs on Hillary Clinton.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13356
ANALYSIS: Why I agree with Gen. Clark's decision to endorse Hillary!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on September 17, 2007 - 9:09am.
I appreciate all your work. I understand that you are compiling these posts to be sure that we're prepared for the Right Wing Attack machine, however, you've failed to post anything that would help us understand the upcoming attacks on Hillary Clinton if she is to be the nominee. These post would clearly be considered "Concern trolling" and smear propagation by any disinterested observer.
Also, you are devaluing the exclamation point, a critical punctuation mark in my opinion!