Barack Obama Townhall In Las Vegas

Yesterday I drove from LA to Vegas and due to a car fire on the 15, I arrived at Obama's townhall meeting an hour and a half after doors were scheduled to open. I knew I wasn't late, though, when I saw the enormous lines of people waiting to get in; the phrase "around the block" doesn't really begin to describe it.

Like the New Hampshire Obama events I attended, this was held in a high school gym with an overflow room to accommodate the masses of people there to see the senator. A couple of differences: this event was a townhall where he took questions from the audience and the racial make-up of the crowd was closer to 50-60% white (if that) vs. the near 100% white crowds of New Hampshire.

Another observation about the crowd: it wasn't nearly as young as the crowds in New Hampshire were and the generation gap, if you can call it that, was evident in the questions that were asked. Two young people (i.e. under 25) who asked questions made a point to thank Barack, one for "restoring her faith in the American dream" and one for giving her "hope again." They were very touching and sincere and typified, I think, the reason young people are so drawn to him. Their entire political life, George Bush has been president and the congress has either been an arm of the Bush regime or ineffective at curbing it. They're not convinced Washington can work, so Obama's sort of vague promises to "change Washington" are very appealing. The older people in the crowd, with more life experience and having lived through more presidents, had really practical bread and butter questions, whether about making joining a union easier, Yucca Mountain, health care and immigration reform. It was a striking difference.

There were more differences between the Vegas crowd and the New Hampshire crowds I saw. This time, when Obama said as a rotating part of his stump speech, "this year, George Bush will not be on the ballot" the place erupted, not only cheering, but clapping and stomping their feet. I was taken aback because the crowds in NH never reacted to this line this way. Chris Bowers wrote about how Obama lost the "angry-with-Bush-vote" in New Hampshire.

However, among the 62% of participants in the Democratic primary who described themselves as "angry" with the Bush administration, Clinton won 39%-34%. And thus, we have Clinton's 2.6% margin of victory almost precisely.

If we assume from the reaction I witnessed that the anger with Bush in Las Vegas is actually more intense than in New Hampshire, it's still unclear whether Clinton has a leg up here or merely that those who are angry are more likely to support Obama. I will say though that Obama seemed to be criticizing Bush more yesterday than I've seen him before.

Also, immigration, as you might expect, is going to be a big issue in Nevada, as it was not in NH. New Mexico Governor Janet Napolitano introduced Barack and sat on stage throughout his entire townhall, silent but a presence all the same.  When the immigration issue came up (twice) he referred to Napolitano's leadership on the issue, as if to say, "she's vouching for me." There were two distinct schools of thought represented in the audience, a nativist demo and an immigrant demo and Barack threaded the needle quite ably when he said he supports a path to citizenship but that it's not fair to give them special priveleges, the undocumented population must pay a fine and "must learn English!" That last one got a huge reaction. He also insisted that we must crack down on employers who hire them as well as engage with Mexico and Central America to encourage them to develop policies so people aren't so desperate to flee their countries for opportunities.

A couple final notes on the townhall. The first speaker was a gentleman who was an Obama volunteer who made a point of revealing that he had formerly been a Clinton supporter. The place let out a loud "boo!" which the speaker did nothing to discourage. There was a real anti-Clinton vibe in that room last night, which surprised me. Sure, most of these folks are Obama supporters (which, in the race for the nomination is essentially anti-Clinton by definition) but I found the level of contempt for her surprising. I'll also say this was a far more African-American crowd than a hispanic crowd, which no doubt speaks both to the make-up of Obama's support as well as Las Vegas's racial demographics. Clinton has always polled especially strongly among hispanic voters and if last night is any indication, there is no exodus toward Obama among that community.

Tags: 2008 Presidential election, Barack Obama, Democratic Primary (all tags)

Comments

72 Comments

Re: Barack Obama Townhall In Las Vegas

Did they cheer when he told them he supports drivers licenses for illegal immigrants?

by hwc 2008-01-12 09:14AM | 0 recs
My theory

A lot of Obama supporters were in diapers, or riding training wheels when Bill Clinton was President and he and his wife were the only thing standing between us and a rigthwing dominated political scene.  

Before Bill came to office only one Democrat had held the White House since LBJ left it, and that was for one term.  The Democratic Party had been eroding since 1970, as the GOP grew in power and size.  

Obama supporters know nothing about this.  They also probably don't care.  Bill and Hillary are just "old" to them now.  

Plus, for all their talk of change ands hope, blah blah blah, these younger voters identidfy with Republicans more than they know.  This clear winners & clear losers, and us vs. them, has been the style of politics they came of age with.  

In short Obama supporters have no respect for history, the Party, or the Clintons.

Obama plays to all of this when he says he doesn't want to refight the battles of the 60s, and says we don't want to return to the 90s.  Thats all old people stuff - boring history.  

by dpANDREWS 2008-01-12 09:29AM | 0 recs
Which is why

Obama underperforms among registered Democrats.

by dpANDREWS 2008-01-12 09:30AM | 0 recs
Re: My theory

au contraire.  i was 18 in 1992 and Bill Clinton was my very first vote.

The main reason I am with Obama is that I look back and those eight years of Bill did nothing to change the country PERMANENTLY for the better.  Yes, good economy, blah blah blah.

Economies come and go.  But Bush has permanently damaged our country and accomplished TEN times as much bad as Clinton did good, even thought they both had/have eight-year presidencies.

I don't want a return to a do-nothing-permanent 1990s.  And before you attack and cite all the things Clinton did, remember I said the word, "permanent."

The only major things Clinton did good that lasted was his two Supreme Court picks.  And those picks were too old.  We need to appoint liberals in their forties to the Court.  Not over-the-hill folks who, while great progressives, won't be on the Court for very long and would be replaced by rightwing jurists.

by jgarcia 2008-01-12 09:48AM | 0 recs
well...

i've always thought of bill clinton as the first post-cold war president (not that his foreign policy adjusted to that fact).  as such, i don't think politics or government had the impact on our daily lives like it seemed to during the cold war.

that's one reason why i think barack's inspiration-driven message of change is important.  he doesn't just ask us to expect more from our government, but to expect more from ourselves in the bargain.  we don't gain much if we just sit back and let government do it (which is, it seems, hillary's position).  corporations have figured out how to circumvent government "interference" and i believe that the political and economic realms are only able to impose their will on the other if they have the people unified in that purpose.

other than that quibble, i agree!

by bored now 2008-01-12 10:07AM | 0 recs
Wow! you sure don't know much

I first voted during Nixon-McGovern.  I do not support Clinton because I saw what I wanted to see of Clintonism during 1992-2000. It sucked then, and the redo will suck even more.

We don't need "more and better Bill".

by dataguy 2008-01-12 09:58AM | 0 recs
If someone is 20 years old today .. or 25

How old where they when Clinton first beat Bush?

by dpANDREWS 2008-01-12 10:02AM | 0 recs
experience i don't need to relive...

is what i call it...

by bored now 2008-01-12 10:07AM | 0 recs
Your theory is just generalized condescension

...and it's time for your ilk to step aside so we can repair all the damage you've done.

by nafamabo 2008-01-12 10:30AM | 0 recs
Grow up

What damage?

OUr "ilk" reversed a conservative trend that had been building since the 60s.   Study your political history before you chiime in with your insults.

If not for Bill Clinton the Supreme Court woud be solidly packed with rightwing nuts as we speak.

by dpANDREWS 2008-01-12 10:55AM | 0 recs
That was then

We do NOT want to relive the 90s.  NAFTA, DADT, Welfare reform, triangulation.

by dataguy 2008-01-12 11:16AM | 0 recs
Triangulation?

Isn't that another word for compromise or bi-partisanship?

How will Obama create this "change" and "bring us together" without bringing along the Republicans?

Do you think John Boehner and Mitch McConnell will act like a couple of star struck Obamamaniacs and simply do or beliee anything Barry says?

By the way Barry hasn't done anything to block trade agreements since he has been in the Senate.  

by dpANDREWS 2008-01-12 11:24AM | 0 recs
Re: My theory

Do you actually bother to read the diaries or do you just having talking points already prepared.

"Another observation about the crowd: it wasn't nearly as young as the crowds in New Hampshire were and the generation gap,"

Get over this stupid idea that his supporters are all under 25. I am 42yrs old. I voted for Bill twice and sent Hillary' campaign for Senator contributions. But like many, I have been disappointed in her performance as both a senator, where I cannot point to any significant legislation and her performance as a presidential candidate.

She is full of interesting talking points but little esle.

by commoncents 2008-01-12 11:29AM | 0 recs
Re: Barack Obama Townhall In Las Vegas

"I have yet to see a hillary supporter who would boo obama" ???

I seem to remember a certain debate in Las Vegas last fall where that is precisely what happened... and that was booing the man himself, not the mention of his name.

(And do I even need to mention some of the vitrolic anti-Obama postings here? I suppose the people who throw around words like "scum" "stupid" "sleazy" "lazy" etc - all of which and more I've seen here in the last 24 hours - would be too polite to boo?)

--

I wouldn't boo Clinton or Edwards, and I assume you wouldn't boo Obama... but let's not try to pretend that there aren't high emotions and (some) petty-minded people on all sides. The "our supporters are perfect, your's are scum" thing gets real old real fast.

by terje 2008-01-12 09:37AM | 0 recs
Hillary supported that position right?

Hillary was supporting that.

i guess she was in favor of it before she was against it.

by dataguy 2008-01-12 09:53AM | 0 recs
Hillary-bots lie before they tell the truth

Clinton backs N.Y. driver's license plan for illegal immigrants
Tries to steady her stance after debate stumble

By Sasha Issenberg, Globe Staff  |  November 1, 2007

Hillary Clinton came out yesterday in support of a plan by Governor Eliot Spitzer of New York to offer limited driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, after she appeared tripped up by a question on the subject in Tuesday night's Democratic debate.

"Senator Clinton supports governors like Governor Spitzer who believe they need such a measure to deal with the crisis caused by this administration's failure to pass comprehensive immigration reform," her campaign said in a statement. "As presiden

by dataguy 2008-01-12 09:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary-bots lie before they tell the truth

Oh, and Obama's response to the same question in the following debate was crystal clear. Get real.

by StrongDem08 2008-01-12 10:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary-bots lie before they tell the truth

His position on driver's licenses for il-legal immigrants has been consistent he favor's granting them for safety purposes.

Clinton has had so many positions Iam not sure what her position is on this issue,

by BDM 2008-01-12 07:49PM | 0 recs
thanks for your on-the-ground report!

by bored now 2008-01-12 09:22AM | 0 recs
What did Obama say on Yucca Mnt?

Is his official stance still that he "hopes" fro a solution sometime in the future?  

Or does he now have concrete position on the subject that he can provide in 25 words or less?

As for the size and energy of a rally, I would think people would stop using that as any sort of guage after NH.  How many of these in attendence were from Arizona?  How many are registered and even know where their caucus location is?  How many will be sober, in Las Vegas, on a Sat. morning?

by dpANDREWS 2008-01-12 09:22AM | 0 recs
Re: What did Obama say on Yucca Mnt?

Well, 30 words....

The selection of Yucca Mountain has failed, the time for debate on this site is over, and it is time to start exploring new alternatives for safe, long-term solutions based on sound science

Regardless of what alternative is pursued, two premises should guide federal decision-making. First, any storage option should be supported by sound science. We need to ensure that nuclear waste can be safely stored without polluting aquifers or soil and exposing nearby residents to toxic radiation.

Second, we should select a repository location through a process that develops national consensus and respects state sovereignty, not one in which the federal government cuts off debate and forces one state to accept nuclear waste from other states. The flawed process by which Yucca Mountain was selected now manifests itself as a profoundly expensive endeavor of monumental proportion.

by sndeak 2008-01-12 10:16AM | 0 recs
Why couldn't he say that 2 months ago?

It seems his position has "evolved."

by dpANDREWS 2008-01-12 12:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Barack Obama Townhall In Las Vegas

Janet is the ARIZONA governor, you know, that state that is twice as large as NM per population?  as well as now having as many electoral votes as Missouri.

on the immigration issue, Barack isn't going to gain SHIT by being conservative on immigration.  i wonder if anyone told his father that he "must speak english."  There's nothing in the constitution about language.

If Obama ain't careful, he's gonna get swamped by HRC in those big states of Cali, NY, and NJ with the massive latino populations.  Hispanics already have a resentment about being a very neglected minority and are wary that with a black president they'll be neglected even more.  

My prediction is that Hillary makes a HUGE push to get these latinos.  Obama is an idiot if he starts trying to be the "centrist alternative."  

But I guess in this country today, it's okay to be racist against Hispanics but if you even say the word, "fairytale", you're  KKKer.  And I say this as Obama supporter.

by jgarcia 2008-01-12 09:23AM | 0 recs
African America race politics won't help either

If Latinos get a whiff of what Obama is pulling in SC they will lose respect for him in a heartbeat.

Latinos have basically avoided (and don't like) race politics.  Which may be one reason they have achieved so much politically, so quick.

by dpANDREWS 2008-01-12 09:33AM | 0 recs
Re: African America race politics

Latinos have "achieved so much politically"?  What are you smoking?  Latinos have no where near power commensurate with their numbers in this country.

Spoken like a truly out-of-touch white man.

by jgarcia 2008-01-12 09:43AM | 0 recs
Re: African America race politics

Latino's don't have the national power that represents their numbers but no minority,women included, does. The national powers that be are predominately white males. However in the case of latino's their local power is overwhelmingly strong in area's where there is a high hispanic population.

by world dictator 2008-01-12 09:56AM | 0 recs
i know a few latinos that would disagree with

your last sentence.  but i'm sure it's true in places like la or miami...

by bored now 2008-01-12 10:09AM | 0 recs
Re: i know a few latinos that would disagree with

there's lots of places not named LA or Miami that have a strong active hispanic political base. Las Vegas? The entire state of New Mexico. Arizona's not too bad either.

by world dictator 2008-01-12 10:54AM | 0 recs
i take your point...

by bored now 2008-01-12 10:58AM | 0 recs
Re: i take your point...

NO, HE HAS NO POINT.

Not even close.  He wouldn't know the real problems with the Latin community it it smacked him in the face.

You were a civil rights activist.  Do you speak for black people?  No.  as well you shouldn't.  Yet, everyone it seems can speak with abandon about the latino community even when they're not latino and don't know what the fuck they are taling about.

by jgarcia 2008-01-12 11:21AM | 0 recs
Re: i take your point...

And one latino person speaks for all of latino's. I'm sorry, but if you're telling me that Latino's have ZERO  political power you're out of your mind.

As I said, no minority,women included, has proportionate representation. But to claim that there is NO representation just strawman's your own argument.

by world dictator 2008-01-12 12:00PM | 0 recs
Re: i know a few latinos that would disagree with

in Arizona, latinos make up 30% or more of the pop, but they don't have SHIT.

one of the most racist, anti-latino states in the union.  they cannot even vote there because of the draconian measures.

try again.  i am guessing you are not a member of a minority group?  i could get your ill-informed white male opinion ar redstate.

by jgarcia 2008-01-12 11:07AM | 0 recs
Re: i know a few latinos that would disagree with

I'm an African American from inner city las vegas who went to a high school that was literally 85% hispanic. While I don't claim to be the know all be all about hispanic politics, I think I have a pretty good perspective.

Stop race baiting. I think we've all had enough of that.

by world dictator 2008-01-12 12:03PM | 0 recs
No, I think you judge to quick

And too harsly.

Latino involvement in politics, nationally is probably 2 generations old?  Would I be correct in saying that?  I think they have achieved much in that time and are clearly growing in power daily.  

I don't think anyone rejects the notion that the hispanic vote will play a huge part in this election and only get more important with each passing cycle.  

I don't disagree that whites are over represented in government.

by dpANDREWS 2008-01-12 10:00AM | 0 recs
What are you smoking, jgarcia?
The Hispanic American community has 3 sitting Senators (one of which is a Republican), but there is only one African American Senator. The Governor count of Hispanic and African Americans is even at one a piece and (Democrats). The congressional Hispanic caucus has a little more 20 members (all Democrats), and the congressional black caucus has more than 40 members (also all Democrats).
Both the African Americans and the Hispanic Americans are under represented, but collectively they make up roughly 30% of the US population. Or a little more than half of the Democratic party vote.
No Democratic candidate is going to get elected president, unless he or she receives both the African American and Hispanic American vote.
Will it be easier for Clinton to get the black vote, or for Obama to get the Hispanic vote? And can either get both?
by fetboy 2008-01-12 10:28AM | 0 recs
Where do you get this BS from?

I have said it before but I'll say it again, you are an idiot. "Race politics". What specifically has Barack Obama ever said that could be construed as "race politics"?

On the other hand, Bill Bennett, who is obsessed with race, said specifically on CNN, that Obama differs from previous black candidates in that he never uses race as part of his candidacy.

by commoncents 2008-01-12 11:35AM | 0 recs
Re: Where do you get this BS from?

Let me tell you what his campaign has done:

"Sen. Barack Obama's presidential campaign has prepared a detailed memo listing various instances in which it perceived Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign to have deliberately played the race card in the Democratic primary.

The memo, which was obtained by the Huffington Post and has been made public elsewhere, is believed to have been given to an activist and contains mostly excerpts from different media reports. It lists the contact info and name of Obama's South Carolina press secretary, Amaya Smith, and is broken down into five incidents in which either Clinton, her husband Bill, or campaign surrogates made comments that could be interpreted as racially insensitive.

The document provides an indication that, in private, the Obama campaign is seeking to capitalize on the view - and push the narrative - that the Clintons are using race-related issues for political leverage. In public, the Obama campaign has denied that they are trying to propagate such a perception, noting that the document never was sent to the press."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/12 /obama-camps-memo-on-clin_n_81205.html

Still stand by your absurd post?

by StrongDem08 2008-01-12 11:47AM | 0 recs
Immigrants have to learn English
is one that comes to mind.
by Big Tent Democrat 2008-01-12 06:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Barack Obama Townhall In Las Vegas
If you follow History especially on east coast politics you'll learn that the Irish and Italians did not win any races until they started voting together strategically and put their ethnic rivalries aside. Today its an AA running for president and he needs the latino vote, tomorrow it will be a latino running and he'll need the AA vote.
The latino mayor running for mayor of NYC only lost because he got about 50% of the AA vote. If he'd been able to get 80% of the AA vote he would've been mayor. So latinos and AA will need to find a way to vote together strategically as a block.
by joachim 2008-01-12 09:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Barack Obama Townhall In Las Vegas

Be that as it may, people on the ground don't think that way. In general, they follow their community leaders.

In this case, the community leaders are supporting HRC.

by kristoph 2008-01-12 10:30AM | 0 recs
Re: Barack Obama Townhall In Las Vegas

Like Federico Pena who is supporting Barack Obama?

by commoncents 2008-01-12 11:37AM | 0 recs
Re: Barack Obama Townhall In Las Vegas

Pena is not a political or community leader in NV. He is from Denver or Texas or something.

I was not suggesting there are no Obama Hispanic supporters but, clearly, in NV the vast majority are in the Clinton camp (including some who just came in from Richardson).

by kristoph 2008-01-12 10:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Barack Obama Townhall In Las Vegas
If Obama ain't careful, he's gonna get swamped by HRC in those big states of Cali, NY, and NJ with the massive latino populations. Hispanics already have a resentment about being a very neglected minority and are wary that with a black president they'll be neglected even more. Ah ha, you were right about Cali NY & NJ. Let's hope the same applies to Texas tomorrow.
by BrandingIron17 2008-03-04 01:30AM | 0 recs
Janet Napolitano

is the governor of Arizona, not New Mexico.

by lowkell 2008-01-12 09:24AM | 0 recs
Re: Janet Napolitano

No wonder Bill Richardson was so frustrated about people not knowing his resume...

by Steve M 2008-01-12 09:39AM | 0 recs
Adios Senor Obama!

Clinton has always polled especially strongly among hispanic voters and if last night is any indication, there is no exodus toward Obama among that community.

It's no secret that Hispanics resent the race card being played by African Americans.

If the Obama campaign continues to cry "racism" every time a compliment (read Biden) or criticism is made of him or his record, he can kiss the Hispanic vote adios!

by BigBoyBlue 2008-01-12 09:28AM | 0 recs
Re: Adios Senor Obama!

It is troubling to me the enthusiasm with which Hillary supporters delight in between race friction [or at least to them tell it]

"It's no secret that Hispanics resent the race card being played by African Americans."

Just how do you think Hillary, should she become the nominee, would possibly get elected without both of these groups.

But please by all means, continue to alienate her African American supporters. Hopefully, they will switch over to Obama.

by commoncents 2008-01-12 11:41AM | 0 recs
Thanks for the support

It's troubling from your report that Obama supporters booed HRC, but I guess that's primary politics for you. As an AA supporter of HRC, I'm really saddened that these reports that the Clintons are racists now have some resonance within my community. It's sad to see the long-held relationship b/w the Clintons and the AA community destroyed b/c of this campaign. Oh, well, what's done is done....

Todd, I appreciated your description of the differences in the questions that younger and older people asked. Older people tend to have more at risk than younger people, mortgages, maybe some health problems. They've been around the block. They usually see past the rhetoric and want to focus on substantive things, not an ephemeral feeling about a candidate making them feeling good.

I would appreciate it if you added Obama's answers to the substantive questions that the older supporters asked, including the Yucca Mountain question. Thanks again for the diary....

by ademption 2008-01-12 09:43AM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks for the support

What did Clinton really truly accomplish for the minority communities that lasted?  That was permanent?

He let the GOP erode everything that we have accomplished for minorities since the 1960s.

by jgarcia 2008-01-12 09:50AM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks for the support

...25 million jobs, 5 trillion surplus. Middle class tax cuts. Achievements are segregated by race you know. A lot of poor minorities were helped by that economy you know.

Also, Clinton expanded the Earned Income Tax which helps a lot of poor minorities. Also Clinton raised the minimum wage which once again, helps a lot of poor minorities.

by world dictator 2008-01-12 10:01AM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks for the support

all that stuff was ruined by Bush.  THAT'S my point.  Bush's "reforms" were much more permanent.

And please don't ever cite to me tax cuts as an accomplishment when this country is undertaxed and going broke because of it.  And also looks like some pathetic third-world country in parts of infrastructure because we refuse to fund important projects.

by jgarcia 2008-01-12 10:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks for the support

How do you know that Bush's reforms were much more permanent? He hasn't even left office and we haven't seen what the next president is going to do for you to say that his reforms are more permaent....

by ademption 2008-01-12 10:31AM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks for the support

Tax cuts for the rich and tax cuts for middle class americans are COMPLETELY different. I shouldn't need to point to an economics book in order for you to figure that out.

Also, you can't be mad at a president if their sucessor ruins what they established. And like ademption said how do you know Bush's work is perminanet?

You're REALLY grsping here in order to critisize Clinton.

by world dictator 2008-01-12 10:51AM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks for the support

are you reading impaired?

you and ademption utterly failed to understand.  how can i be any clearer:  most people agree that is will take many many years to undo Bush, correct?

it took Bush two years to undo everything Clinton did.  the only permament thing Clinton accomplished was his piece of shit corporate giveaway called NAFTA.

more of that bullshit?  no fucking thanks.

by jgarcia 2008-01-12 11:09AM | 0 recs
For one thing

the empowerment zones that invested tax dollars in poor communities. They have lasted.

I'm guessing that you're talking about welfare reform and the crime bill when you say that Clinton let the GOP erode everything that we have accomplished for minorities since the 1960s. First, I think that statement is WAY over the top. There are MANY minorities, AA included, who have NEVER been on welfare or been arrested for drugs/other crimes. I am one of them. Memmbers of my family have never experienced those things either. As far as I can remember, the NAACP and other organizations were fairly neutral about welfare reform, b/c more whites were on welfare than AAs. As for the disparity b/w cocaine and crack, wasn't AA legislators like Charlie Rangel who pushed that legislation after the Len Bias incident? Weren't there some AA--particularly middle class AA who got tired of the crack dealers ruining their neighborhoods that wanted to put them away? Or am I recalling the fervor to get criminals off the street incorrectly?

I think the biggest problem I have with the blogosphere in general is the lack of historical context to people's viewpoints. People have no sense of history--of what politicians back in the day went through, even as late as the 90s.....

by ademption 2008-01-12 10:11AM | 0 recs
Re: For one thing

I could drive a Mack truck through the massive holes in your post.

Assuming I meant welfare "reform" is offensive.  However, if you must, I would say that it was a disaster for poor people of all races but dispropotionately affected minorities.  And you are dead wrong if you think the NAACP was "neutral."  Almost ALL inner-city politicians were against it.

I was referring more to things like college grants and loans and the emasculation of unions.  Latinos, in particular, are one group who is most fucked by the lack of strong unions.  And if you cannot figure out why then I am wasting my time typing here.

by jgarcia 2008-01-12 10:18AM | 0 recs
Re: For one thing

Well, I assumed welfare reform and the crime bill b/c that is what is always brought up by Obama supporters whenever they go on the spiel that Bill Clinton BETRAYED African-Americans etc, etc, etc.

How could you make college grants and loans permanent? That's all in the budget. When you have a Republican President and a Republican Congress, there are consequences as well there should be. Do we want there not to be economic consequences when Republicans are in control of EVERYTHING? What would be the incentive for people to vote for Democrats if they don't feel a difference b/w Democratic and Republican rule? Remember, the 2000s was the FIRST time that Republicans had control of all branches of government since the 1890s I believe.

The only way that you could make college grants and loans permanent is if the government created a separate self-funding mechanism like social security. Maybe we could create a college insurance program, but that's not likely. Not all people go to college. There are some jobs that don't require a college education. Would people who don't attend college support a college insurance program?

No, there should be some consequences when people choose Republicans over Democrats. So, no I STRONGLY disagree with your thesis that we should make all programs permanent regardless of who's in the White House....

by ademption 2008-01-12 10:30AM | 0 recs
Re: For one thing

I never said that people should make things permament.  BUt isn't that what Medicare is, or should be?

you make no sense.  Bush has accomplished a SHITLOAD in seven years.  He has given the corporations everything they have wanted.   And that wouldn't have been possible but for an ineffective prior administration.  Clinton's presidency, in retrospect, was an utter failure.  He was like a GHW Bush second term.

most people agree that is will take many many years to undo Bush, correct?

it took Bush onlly TWO years to undo everything Clinton did.  the only permament thing Clinton accomplished was his piece of shit corporate giveaway called NAFTA.

If Bill was so special, Bush would not have accomplished so much in so little time.  Fuck, we haven't even rolled back reagan yet, but Bush did a fine job undoing everything supposedly progressive that Bill did.

Bill's administration created NAFTA and then ran out the clock.  Nothing more elegant than that.

I do not want to waste eight more years of my life with a milquetoast, wimpy, centrist pro-corporate government.  yes, Obama may turn out way more moderate than Hillary.  No one really knows.  But to quote your beloved selfish Bill Clinton, i'd rather "roll the dice" on Obama HOPING (yes, hoping) for a tru progressive that willl commence real change than KNOW FOR SURE that HRC will do no such thing.

Color me stupid, but I'd rather risk Obama than go back to the nineties where we could have accomplished much much more but didn't.

by jgarcia 2008-01-12 11:17AM | 0 recs
Re: For one thing
Color me stupid I think we have to do just that, if you really think Obama's a progressive. http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.p hp?option=com_content&task=view& id=539&Itemid=1
by BrandingIron17 2008-03-04 01:36AM | 0 recs
Re: For one thing
And color ME stupid for not formatting that link right. Progressives Cave to Obama.
by BrandingIron17 2008-03-04 01:37AM | 0 recs
Re: For one thing

you say your arguments are so strong and then you fail to provide any.

by world dictator 2008-01-12 10:52AM | 0 recs
Charlie Rangel on drugs from 1989 Ebony article

With his characteristic humor and wit, Rangel takes it all in stride. But his charming smile dissolves into anger and dismay when he talks about the hard, cold realities of the drug war. He rattles off anecdote after anecdote, depressing statistics after statistic. He is outraged because gangs that operate as armed "crack" distributorships were responsible for 387 murders in Los Angeles alone in 1987, even more in 1988.

He is outraged because already impoverished inner-city neighborhoods are being paralyzed by drug dealers who control the streets and terrorize the residents, who turn children into drug couriers and stifle operation of the few remaining businesses.

He is further outraged by the fact that cocaine overdose complaints at hospital emergency rooms have soared more than 700 percent since 1983 and that "crack" complaints rose 15-fold between 1984 and 1987.

He is outraged because a number of heroin addicts who seek help are being "pumped up" with methadone. "It's a crime to give these kids a drug that is more addictive than heroin itself," he says.

He is outraged because the "politically powerful men of God" won't put drugs on their agenda and because they aren't screaming about the babies being born to teenage-addict parents. "All these people are talking about protecting the world against communism and the Soviets, and they talk about abortion and peace and goodwill and Christ... How dare them let this happen to our children and not scream with indignation!"

He is outraged that policemen are shooting each other as well as drug dealers as they take orders from rival gangs to eliminate the opposition.

He is outraged that there has even been debate on the possibility of legalizing drugs which, he says, would be "moral and political suicide."

"When you see what is happening to American youth," Rangel says with compassion, "when you see what is happening to America, when you see the type of contamination that corrupts our police departments and criminal justice system, one might suspect that this would be enough to alert us that this thing can get worse--and it will get worse before it gets better. Yet, the folly of not doing anything is something I will never, never ever understand.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1 077/is_n5_v44/ai_7405467

by ademption 2008-01-12 10:19AM | 0 recs
Thanks for the report, Todd

It would be great if you could update with reports on Obama's responses to the substantive questions.

It's unpleasant how polarizing the Clinton-Obama race has become. I was very favorably disposed toward Obama before all the Clinton-bashing began; now, I can't stand to watch him (though I do--hoping to find something to like in case he wins the nomination) and I've grown extremely irritated at his "hope" and bipartisanship mantra.

by Coral 2008-01-12 09:51AM | 0 recs
Obama has far left who are big Clinton haters.

Visit Kos if you want the flavor. These people seem to be deeply anti most things Democratic including Pelosi, Reid, Emmanuel, et al and most of the Democratic leadership. The bile these folks churn out is not dissimilar to that to be found at Redstate and we see occasional manifestations here. Usually the same folks taking a break from Kos. So it doesn't surprise me they boo Clinton. Beeton's racial makeup numbers are interesting. I don't know what the black demographic is in LV probably around 10%. I've visited there dozens of times and I'm not conscious of a huge black community. I'm bound to say the increasing racial tenor of the comments here, look at the list of diaries, suggests to me Obama and his guys are playing with fire. No one other than Clinton haters or overwrought Obama fans seeking some electoral advantage thinks the Clintons are racist. And yet they keep on playing this theme. Why is a mystery because I can't imagine anything more likely to turn off mainstream Democratic voters over 25 years of age than behaving like a Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton clone. These guys are toxic outside the black community and indeed in a large part of the black community who are fully aware of what buffoons they are. If Obama want to become identified with these people, go right ahead but I can't imagine anything more likely to destroy his candidacy.      

by ottovbvs 2008-01-12 10:01AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama has far left who are big Clinton haters.

The far left is far smaller then you realize. It's just very loud which is why it features prominently in politics.

Anyway, a president pandering to the far left is NOT what our country needs (and it goes against Obamas message of inclusion).

by kristoph 2008-01-12 10:34AM | 0 recs
Re: Barack Obama Townhall In Las Vegas

How about this news flash...Hillary Clinton got boo'd...just because some people DON'T LIKE HER? Maybe thats it...just maybe.  There are so many people that vote based on who they like and not on issues.  If someone think that Candidate A will make their life better and they like them they will vote for them.  Candidate B might be able to help improve their life WAY more...but if they don't like Candidate B they aren't going to vote for them no matter what.

by jmeugniot 2008-01-12 10:12AM | 0 recs
Re: Barack Obama Townhall In Las Vegas

From the back of the Culinary union hall on Friday, all that could be seen were hundreds of upraised hands -- black, brown and white -- clapping to the chant "Sí se puede."

by sndeak 2008-01-12 10:31AM | 0 recs
Re: Barack Obama Townhall In Las Vegas

Of the 6 times I saw Obama in New Hampshire, 2 were town hall meetings, and 2 general Democratic confabs anyway. He quit with the Q&A during the final stretch just to cram in more events around the state, I think.

by Nathan Empsall 2008-01-12 10:38AM | 0 recs
Re: Barack Obama Townhall In Las Vegas

HRC voted to invade Iraq without even bothering to read the NIE... 4000 dead american soldiers are the result.

Those soldiers come from families of all races... anti-war voters will not forget HRC's vote and negligent and nonchalant attitude about sending our sons and daughters into harms way.

That would account for my booing if I was thus inclined.

by hawkjt 2008-01-12 11:09AM | 0 recs
Re: Barack Obama Townhall In Las Vegas

I'll also say this was a far more African-American crowd than a hispanic crowd, which no doubt speaks both to the make-up of Obama's support as well as Las Vegas's racial demographics. Clinton has always polled especially strongly among hispanic voters and if last night is any indication, there is no exodus toward Obama among that community.

If that's true, it's excellent news for Clinton.  African-Americans make up 7.9% pf the Nevada population, while Latinos make up 24.4% of the population there.

by markjay 2008-01-12 11:43AM | 0 recs
Yeah, but...

she's got to get Latinos out to caucus and that's a challenge.  As it is for all groups in Nevada.

by mboehm 2008-01-12 11:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Barack Obama Townhall In Las Vegas

Then any less than a huge win for Clinton is to be expected. Like 15-20%. If Obama comes close or win's then it will be huge boost for him.

by BDM 2008-01-12 08:08PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------