Unfair

According to MSNBC, 70 percent of voters (including 68 percent of white voters) thought Hillary Clinton was unfairly attacking Barack Obama. 56 percent of voters thought Barack Obama was unfairly attacking Hillary Clinton. 50 percent thought both were being unfair. Those results reflect about what I'd say . . . there was unfairness on both sides, but also a definite asymmetry -- most of it is coming from the Clinton camp.

The Clinton surrogate, Kiki McLean, on air now is saying "I think campaigns are tough" by way of response. That's true, but also non-responsive in what I think is a telling way.

Comments

Like I said before, the bait (race, gender, and ethnicity) by the two Clintons' attack machine is embedded in our blood stream. We cannot have a blood transfer now. Obama (my candidate) is in for a long surprise. I continue to be puzzled as to when the press is going to zero-in on Clintons' experiences.

The essay by Colbert I. King (washingtonpost.com) today, 1/26, is a terrific start. But, I do not see it referred to any where.

How come? Is the press or blogging world (mostly by white people) afraid to dissect a white woman? I say being an African American today in work force is harder than most people realize. HRC has gotten a free ride all her life. Is there any justice in this world where the press is supposedly free?

Posted by eorse | January 26, 2008 6:46 PM

Like I said before, the bait (race, gender, and ethnicity) by the two Clintons' attack machine is embedded in our blood stream. We cannot have a blood transfer now. Obama (my candidate) is in for a long surprise. I continue to be puzzled as to when the press is going to zero-in on Clintons' experiences.

The essay by Colbert I. King (washingtonpost.com) today, 1/26, is a terrific start. But, I do not see it referred to any where.

How come? Is the press or blogging world (mostly by white people) afraid to dissect a white woman? I say being an African American today in work force is harder than most people realize. HRC has gotten a free ride all her life. Is there any justice in this world where the press is supposedly free?

Posted by eorse | January 26, 2008 6:47 PM

On a related note, in USA Today, "nearly seven in 10 Americans believe it is likely that ousted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was personally involved in the Sept. 11 attacks, says a poll out almost two years after the terrorists' strike against this country" while 7 years later, "41% of Americans answered 'Yes' to the question "Do you think Saddam Husseins regime in Iraq was directly involved in planning, financing, or carrying out the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001?"

Posted by Dan the Man | January 26, 2008 6:51 PM

"HRC has gotten a free ride all her life"

I'll just repeat that without much comment. (hint: Ken Starr says hi!)

Of course, some commenters might think "Ken Starr" is a steakhouse or something.

Posted by Andruw | January 26, 2008 7:17 PM

Matt: "The Clinton surrogate, Kiki McLean, on air now is saying "I think campaigns are tough" by way of response. That's true, but also non-responsive in what I think is a telling way."

Uhm, ah, Matt, isn't that what you've been saying for the last week? That we should ignore the baiting because the Republicans will do it?

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | January 26, 2008 7:29 PM

CNN exit polls have a similar finding. Interestingly, they say of the 20% who think only Clinton was being unfair, 88% voted for Obama, 6% for Clinton. Of the 6% who think only Obama was unfair, 37% voted for him anyway, with 47% voting for Clinton.

Posted by right | January 26, 2008 8:09 PM

I agree with Dan the Man... It's sad that the Clintons have somehow been able to convince 30% of the public that deliberate lies about Obama are fair.

Posted by bwaage | January 26, 2008 8:12 PM

It's sad that the Clintons have somehow been able to convince 30% of the public that deliberate lies about Obama are fair.

Via Talk Left:

From the Obama camp, via Nico Pitney:

"The Clintons have always put people in a box - they look at everything through racial lines, gender lines, geographic lines; they tend to segment people," said Steve Hildebrand, a senior Obama adviser who spearheaded his Iowa effort. "She goes to Nevada and sits with Latinos in their living room to court their vote - that's not the way Barack approaches people. . . .

Say what? Now a candidate can not sit in a Latino's home? WTF? Of course, it turns out Obama does in fact do the same thing, as Pitney demonstrates, but what in blazes is Hildebrand talking about?

Posted by Dan the Man | January 26, 2008 8:51 PM

Dan, stop being deliberately obtuse. You know full well what Hildebrand was talking about - the exploitation of identity politics. It's exactly what Obama has been speaking out against for years.

Posted by Tractarian | January 26, 2008 11:22 PM