Obama weighs next moves, maps out general election strategy
May 8, 2008 -- Barack Obama's campaign on Wednesday sought to increase pressure on Hillary Rodham Clinton to wrap up the drawn-out Democratic nomination race as it mapped out a general-election strategy that will involve early campaigning in battleground states that have already held primaries.
By TOM RAUM
CHICAGO _ Barack Obama's campaign on Wednesday sought to increase pressure on Hillary Rodham Clinton to wrap up the drawn-out Democratic nomination race as it mapped out a general-election strategy that will involve early campaigning in battleground states that have already held primaries.
"We're going to put a lot of states in play," said David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager. He suggested this would include stepped up efforts in Florida and Michigan "to get them up to par with the other states."
Neither Obama nor Clinton campaigned in those two states because of Democratic party sanctions on them for holding earlier-than-authorized primaries. The seating of delegates from those states remains a matter of dispute between the two camps.
But in the meantime, neither Obama nor Clinton has actively campaigned there.
Obama's drive to nail down the party nod was buoyed with a double-digit win in North Carolina and a stronger-than-expected run in Indiana on Tuesday, where he almost overcame rival Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Obama was expected to compete for the six remaining Democratic contests, which offer a total of 217 delegates, but to also turn attention to general election states, aides said.
Obama was enjoying a rare down day in his hometown before returning to Washington, D.C., late Wednesday
He was expected to travel later in the week to Oregon, where he appears to hold the advantage, and then head to the Appalachian coal-states of West Virginia and Kentucky, where Clinton seems to have the edge.
Likely Republican presidential nominee John McCain has "run free for some time now" because of Democratic preoccupation with the ongoing primary fight, said Obama strategist David Axelrod. "I don't think we're going to spend time solely in primary states," he said. "We have multiple tasks here."
Obama's campaign arranged a conference call for reporters with prominent Democratic elected officials who are Obama supporters in a clear effort to nudge Clinton to step aside as she faces a daunting mathematic challenge to wrest the nomination from Obama.
"Now is the time for superdelegates to start bringing this process to a close and announcing their preferences," said Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano.
Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., told reporters the message of Tuesday night's primary votes was that Obama's march "cannot be contained."
At the same time, the Obama supporters stopped short of directly calling for Clinton to step down. "It is her decision and only her decision," said Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo. Still, McCaskill added, "We're confident she'll do the right thing."
"We don't want to be disrespectful," McCaskill said.
Discuss:
Obama weighs next moves, maps out general election strategy
Member Comments
-
Posted By:
-
Posted By:
-
Posted By:
View All Comments »LARRY at 05/09/2008 8:55:06 PM
Comment:
I agree with most the comments on why Obama should not and does not need to offer the Clintons the VP slot. Only today she was showing again her racist demagouery. But I think that many people forget who the Clinton's are, our very own power addicts who care nothing about anyone but their own power. Does anyone remember Vince Foster? And all the other smoking guns in their past. It would be suicide for Obama to choose Clinton as VP. The last time an strong opponent was selected as a VP Reagan ended up in the hospital. Don Imus raised this issue in early 2007 and got fired for it (as soon as an appropriate diversionaryh issue arose). If Obama gave in to these demands to accept HC as VP it would be his first actual mistake, which could be a fatal mistake. Personally I think the woman who on her very own merits has risen to be the most powerful female politician in American history, Nancy Pelosi, is just the insurance policy Obama needs, it would honor her achievemtn in a lasting way, and bring back all those women voters who threaten to bolt.
ksilvers at 05/09/2008 11:58:25 AM
Comment:
I still beleive that Hillary has alot to offer and should be part of this administration many including myself would like to see on the ticket, she has earned it.
POLpursun at 05/09/2008 9:29:40 AM
Comment:
Below are two items which I originally wrote circa mid-February:
The First:
Clinton and Obama on the same ticket is a very bad idea. Quite frankly neither should offer, and, if it came to that, neither should accept. Reasons:
1. Their visions for the country and the functioning of the political system going forward seem entirely different.
2. Their visions of the primary role of potus are vastly different. Listening to them, succinctly, he envisions leader, she manager.
3. Bill Clinton. What will be awaiting one is Billary not Hillary. If they displayed the behaviour in public which they did, imagine what perniciousness one would face in, relatively speaking, behind-closed-door circumstances.
4. The significantly different mindsets brought to the task.
The Second:
Relationships are two-way things. If the ClintonS were truly concerned with the sensibilities of those blacks with whom they have relationships, their post-Iowa behaviour would not have been so despicable. Logically, one cannot claim, simultaneously, to (i) have no so-called, "racist" bone in one's body and (ii) to not have deliberately played the southern strategy. If one is not naturally inclined in a particular way, indeed, so averse to it, one has to deliberately set out to act in that way. Leaders, that is, true leaders, are not so consumed by their personal ambitions and agendas, so that they neglect to account for the sensibilities and intelligence of their would-be followers. However, the ClintonS, particularly Hillary, are not true leaders. There are only two ways to lead by inspiration and by example, and they are not mutually exclusive. One LEADS people; one manages THINGS. Oftentimes when one attempts to manage people, the situation degenerates into manipulation. In politics, manipulation presents as political calculation, often crassly so. Sen. Clinton is not inspiring and the example of her campaign post-Iowa (when HER coronation was threatened ---- recall that she said to Katie Couric, long before Iowa, "it WILL be me.") was astoundingly unattractive, to put it euphemistically. But, as she indicated in proffering her perspective on the presidency, she is a manager. The president, she delineated, had to manage the Pentagon, manage the economy, manage the White House, manage the sprawling federal bureaucracy. Quite frankly, it is difficult to fathom when, in this "48 hour a day" task, she will lead. Indeed, that sounds like a recipe for running round in circles, not even managing.
The above is a comment on ???Backing Hillary??? ----- Clinton's black supporters find her tough to sell. The article was found in theroot.com.
Finally, the difference in their temperaments as demonstrated throughout the process is stark. Indeed, at times one would not have known which HRC with whom one was dealing.