Let's Help Put Obama Over The Top
A Chief Source Call To Action!!!I got an email today from the Obama for President campaign and I made my first contribution because of it. The campaign is at just under 245,000 donors and are trying to hit 250,000 by June 30th, which is just two more days. I would ask that if you support Obama for President like we do that you go here and make a small contribution in the next 48 hours to help put his campaign over the top. Go Obama Go!
*The Obama Campaign hit their goal of 250,000! Tell your friends.
By Kyle - 6/28/2007
25 Comments:
I got a 2 more days email from the Clinton campaign 29 minutes after the Obama one. No mention of any donation milestones in her email.
I'm already set up for recurring donation. I figure it's better to give a little every month than a lot at one time.
It is so early in the election and I just don't get the appeal of Obama yet. Not saying he is a poor candidate, but can someone explain to me why he should be the democratic nominee, cause I just don't get it, yet...
oBAMA/ rAMA Hes my man! He caint doit nobody CAN!
Zelin,
Reason #1: He vocally opposed the war from the outset, at a time when it was a political liability to do so. This is the first litmus test.
Reason #2: He hasn't been in Washington long enough to become tainted. I watched him speak and I have no doubt that he actually still cares about the average American and is committed to meaningful change.
Reason #3: He is not in bed with big-everything. He does not accept donations from lobbyists. This is why it is so important for us to step up and help.
Reason #4: He can energize an audience. His sincerity and vision are immediately obvious when he takes the stage. On the other hand, Hillary is a political animal like Reese Witherspoon in the movie Election.
Reason #5: Last election many Dems liked Dean, but went with Vietnam Vet. Kerry cause he was "the safe bet." Let us not make that same mistake again. After 8 years of Bush butchering this nation we have a rare opportunity to put forward our ideal candidate. Dems who support Hillary don't love Hillary. Dems who support Obama love Obama. The difference is that one group's sights are set on victory and the other's are set on a new direction for our nation. If we win with Hillary, we gain nothing but more of the same. If she is our candidate I may stay home on election day.
He is black. They won't say it.
Bob, but do you HONESTLY think he can win? I believe that the Republicans are praying that either he or Hillary is the candidate, because someone like Fred Thompson or even McCain can come in and smoke them in the election. I would like to be as optimistic as anyone about a candidate like Obama, but still unsure if he can actually pull it off.
speaking of donations, I am going to send a few $ to some republican senators up in 2008 today for their vote. if that is how they have to learn, so be it.
Democrats who were agsainst this bill should do the same.
Kyle, when Obama doesnt win the nomination, who or to what PAC do you think he will transfer your money to?
Zelin, Obama is our best chance to win in my view.
Ben, I hope my donation helps to pay for bio-friendly confetti for the victory party.
Zelin,
This is an old article but if you look around you can find more of the same:
Time Mag Poll:
"Clinton's popularity within her party does not translate as easily across party lines as Obama's does, or indeed as Giuliani's and McCain's. Only 58% of the total sample of respondents had a very or somewhat favorable impression of her, compared with 82% for Giuliani (including 7 out of 10 Democratic voters), and 70% each for Obama and McCain — both of whom showed strongly among independents."
Look people have entrenched views on old players like Clinton and Gore. Even right-leaning Americans who regret voting for Bush, are like Pavlov's dog's when they hear the name "Clinton." They snap back into old party-line zombie mode.
Have no doubt, a fresh face with no political baggage has the best chance at a win for Dems.
Bob, I think comparing Obama to Clinton is important, espcially when it comes to the Dem nomination, but we really need to compare him to his potential republican challenger. What is his track record on security? All he can say is he did not suppor the war, but people are going to want to know how he will protect them. I think the republicans will expoit this, yet again.
Zelin,
If you look into and listen to Obama and don't like what you see...fine. But before you play safe and swap a great candidate for a tolerable one you'd better be sure the great one can't win and the tolerable one can't lose. I see no reason to believe either.
Being completely pragmatic, I think that polls have demonstrated that the country (particularly women) is more open to a black president than a female one.
For me, I want for once to have a candidate I can feel good about rooting for, a candidate that I can actually believe in. This is our chance to redefine the party, if we nominate a "moderate," big-pharm, anti-war-when-it's-popular, political animal like Hillary we've already lost.
It's that simple.
You didn't answer my question about security? I still think that will be a key issue.
Zelin,
"Senator Obama is a member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee and has supported efforts to base homeland security spending on risk rather than pork-barrel politics. He has also introduced legislation to strengthen chemical plant and drinking water security and to enhance disaster preparedness..."
READ MORE
Zelin,
To answer your question frankly, most of these candidates have served on a few of these committees at one point and time, and none of the Dems have real National Security experience.
If you ask me, for a President the question of National Security is less about operational and tactical plans than it is about an overall strategy.
The President doesn't need hands-on experience searching containers at our ports. He/she needs a broad understanding of what will and will not make us safer.
Any candidate who supported Bush's war in Iraq and is now still unwilling to acknowledge it was a mistake (to acknowledge that this type of policy has not and will not make us safer) is not ready to part with the spreading-liberty-at-the-barrel-of-a-gun play-book which has only made us less safe and the Middle East more volatile.
You ask about experience.
How about sound logic?
I'm donating $50 bucks to the " Mitt's Mutt Fund" to help pay for room and board for the Romney family dogg while they vacation.
Zelin, Hillary will lose. There are too many many who would never voe for her, even though they may never admit it, even when taking a political survey.
Zelin,
I'm still not sure how G.W. made the U.S. safer, unless taking away our civil liberties is doing that. It seems to me, even more people out there want to attack the U.S.
jeffisa, it's easy enough for people to say that they won't for Hillary because today is not election day.
But a lot of Democrats faced with the choice of Hillary or someone like Jeb Bush or Giuliani, will hold their noses and vote for Hillary.
Democrats have proven time and time again that they hold their breath longer than sea turtles.
bob says -
Look people have entrenched views on old players like Clinton and Gore. Even right-leaning Americans who regret voting for Bush, are like Pavlov's dog's when they hear the name "Clinton." They snap back into old party-line zombie mode.
This is true, and we rarely agree. Jeb would make a great president - he was always a much better governor than george was, but he is shot now. Hillary Clinton could not get away from her last name - it is the truest thing that could energize the Republican base.
And Jeff is right...when 46% of the country already won't vote for you, basically no matter what, then you have a tough road to winning it all.
I think the Democratic field is weak. They are all still favored over any Republican right now, but that speaks to the politcal enviornment as we stand now more so than the candidates themselves. A lot can and will change, but we will see.
Zelin makes a good point on security, and it has nothing to do with Bush. Just say the major issue is security - Obama is going to lose that battle to almost any Republican. I'm not saying he should (he should to some of them) but that is reality.
I also want to clairfy my earlier comment of "Democrats who were agsainst this bill should do the same." Meaning that the Democrats who voted no should see money for their campaigns from Democrats.
I mean that you should send money to the Dems who voted no who are up in 08, not Republicans. I dont suggest you guys send money to Sununu or Coleman, just like I wouldnt send money to Pryor or Landreiu. Vice versa for Republcians. I am hapy with Landreiu's vote, but I still wouldnt donate. Ok.
Ben, I would also say that a lot can change in the perception and plans of a candidate to make us more secure. In 1992, GHWB managed a decent Gulf War, but got beat by a governor from Arkansas. I think Obama has time and as a Senator has the pulpit to help define himself on the security issue. My hope is that he does.
The thing I like most about Hillary is that she serves as the mud flap for Democrats. No matter what, Republicans can't help but attack her first. Maybe she'll offer some cover for our eventual nominee.
2008 Campaign Slogan:
"Jeb Bush - Much better than his brother".
The president is the chief executive. His job isn't to some how know everything about everything but to hire competent people to advise and help run the government.
Obama would likely make someone like Wesley Clark to be his defense secretary. Also, its not like the career people in the CIA and other departments dissapear when a new president is elected.(well, untill 7 years ago that was the case)
I got a mass email from the Obama campaign stating:
"Last night, the 250,000th person gave to this campaign. Think about that for a second -- more people have donated to this campaign than any campaign in history at this point in an election.
The sheer number of people who own a piece of this campaign proves that we can change the old game of money-for-influence politics. Nobody thought we could do this. Nobody thought it was possible.
The window to be part of this moment is closing in less than 48 hours. At midnight on June 30th, this chapter of history will be written. Those who participated will look back with pride; everyone else will look back with astonishment at what was achieved.
Thousands of people stepped up much sooner than expected and hit this historic mark. We blew past 250,000 donors and now have one final goal to reach: 350,000 donations from as many people as possible."
Post a Comment
<< Home