Why Obama Might Win Massachusetts
Ted Kennedy's direct link to Camelot means that his endorsement of Barack Obama will have national implications. But its impact might be most acute in Massachusetts, one of the largest states to vote on February 5 and a very winnable target for Obama.
Polling has been sporadic in Massachusetts, but Hillary Clinton has led -- often decisively -- in the surveys taken so far. But her margins may shrink as the state's electorate focuses more closely on the race, and in the wake of Obama's South Carolina victory.
With Kennedy on board, Obama now has a monopoly on the Bay State's highest profile Democrats: John Kerry signed on two weeks ago, and Governor Deval Patrick endorsed Obama late last fall.
To be sure, Clinton has her share of elected official support in Massachusetts. But generally, they are lower-profile and less dynamic establishment figures. Kennedy is a revered figure among rank-and-file Democrats, as is Patrick, the state's first black governor (and the first black Democrat ever to win statewide office in Massachusetts). In fact, there are some remarkable thematic and stylistic similarities between the Obama campaign and Patrick's own '06 effort.
Not insignificantly, Obama is also being assisted by Phil Johnston, a loyal Kennedy family lieutenant who chaired the Massachusetts Democratic Party for a decade before stepping down last year.
A Massachusetts win would be a nice feather in Obama's February 5 cap. Not only are 93 delegates at stake (the fifth most among the 23 states and territories voting on February 5), but it would refute suggestions that Obama has been marginalized as "the black candidate:" There are fewer blacks in Massachusetts per capita (five percent) than in Kansas, and George Wallace actually carried Boston in the 1972 Democratic primary.
A victory in Massachusetts, where just 33 years ago rocks were thrown at buses carrying black students to South Boston High, would serve as powerful evidence that Obama's vision of a coalition that transcends old ethnic divides is more than just rhetoric.
- Poll
- Obama (D)
- McCain(R)
- Spread
- RCP Average
- 46.4
- 41.6
- Obama +4.8
- Candidate
- Favorable
- Unfavorable
- Spread
- Obama
- 55.7
- 32.7
- +23.0
- McCain
- 52.4
- 34.7
- +17.7
"The choice in this election is not about regions or religions or genders," Obama said at a boisterous victory rally. "It's not about rich versus poor, young versus old and it's not about black versus white. It's about the past versus the future."
Of course, the question must be asked: Is Hillary running for president or is Bill running for a third term? I seem to recall Alabama Governor George Wallace pulling the same stunt with his wife.
according to the 2006 US census quickfacts pages (http://quickfacts.census.gov), kansas is 6% black and massachusetts is 6.9% black.
the last federal census in 2000 says ks is 6% black and mass is 5 % black
Everyone knows, especially black folks, that Massachusetts is more segregated and racist than places in the old confederacy; that's common knowledge. "Going 'up-south'" they say when referring to Boston. That Obama could win says a lot; however these are Massachusetts voters, the same sheep who keep sending Ted Kennedy and Barney Frank, and John Kerry to Washington. The state that gave us Michael Dukakis. Thanks, Massachusetts. I'm still waiting for the state to fall into irrelevancy like Vermont.
HA! HA! As bad as Bill Clinton may be, Ted Kennedy is the epitome of the fat out of control sex maniac drunken Democratic, who happens to have murdered Mary Jo Kopechne.
Obama will find it tougher to play the poor little victim with bloated Teddy at his side.
Hillary and Bill's time has passed. They are in a bubble after the scandals of the 90s, where they view not only the "Right Wing Conspiracy" but ANYONE who doesn't agree with their particular worldview, is the ENEMY. Sadly these battle scars have forged THEM into a dysfunctional FUSION candidate where, as in the 90s, ONLY ONE has to be accountable -- w/the other operating out of the scope of ANY authority. They have reversed their roles and that would leave the Nation exposed to a 50% of the partnership totally unaccountable and free to operate in the pose of and with the authority of President of the United States. Surrounding and insulating them both in some kind of protection apparatus is THE MACHINE who stonily refused to change course and LISTEN to their own Party Leadership and countless voters -- and change course immediately while in SC. Instead, we heard from Mr. Wolfson and Clinton surrogates they intended to DEFIANTLY stay the course. As each day made us all cringe more, both Clintons and their surrogates DELIGHTED in the toxicity created and escalated it. The Nation has CHANGED. The Clintons have not. They cannot LEAD in this manner, and LEADERSHIP is paramount. The Nation is starving for LEADERSHIP. They don't care. That's NOT what they want or where they want to go. What we want is not part of THEIR PLAN. THEIR PLAN wasn't to campaign. THEY KNOW BETTER. They are ANGRY at ALL OF US NOW...not just the Republicans. Now Florida is being manipulated and leveraged by the Clinton Clan. Let's STAND for something, Democrats and Independents...and likeminded Republicans. This is NOT LEADERSHIP. Turn the page.
Remember, in the last debate, Hillary said the RECORDS available for release this month from the Archives at The Clinton Library are "between her and her husband." So, you had a dual-Presidency where whatever they want to put under the cover of between husband and wife, even if it is being referenced today as HER EXPERIENCE -- is being withheld. 8 more years of this, w/Bill consulting for millions and making speeches for millions more in the private sector??? More Cheney-like secret oil meetings??? WE CAN'T AFFORD MORE OF THIS! Turn the page.
BLAH BLAH BLAH
BLAH BLAH BLAH
I love how when Ted Kennedy comes out to support Barack EVERY. SINGLE. HEADLINE. is all about how this is such a shining moment for Barack, how everything is turning up roses, let's all sit around and sing kumbaya, HURRAH HURRAH HURRAH! Whereas if Kennedy had endorsed Hillary, EVERY. SINGLE. HEADLINE. would have been about how the inside liberal DC establishment was aligning with Hillary, and the body copy would have thrown in several references to his alcoholism, marital affairs, divorce, Chappaquidick and so on and so forth. The media bias (and I'm not talking just Fox News and MSNBC) against Hillary is so transparent, blatant, and hyperbolic that it would be laughable if it weren't so downright sad. Fortunately, for all of us, the meritocracy (which is what has made America the greatest nation on earth) will prevail over empty, undready puffery.
Whatever Senator Kennedy's flaws, and we ALL have them -- including the incumbent President and his wife -- he and Caroline take the legacies of his brothers VERY SERIOUSLY. The Kennedy family's flaws did not negate their SERVING the Nation and giving their lives in SERVING it. Two brothers served during WWII and the eldest DIED doing so. The second, our 35th President, was never the same physically afterward and was an actual war hero. Ted Kennedy has never trivially leveraged or invoked the names of his brothers in the last 40 years. Ditto, Caroline, her father. This is an important moment FOR THEM and FOR US. They are "passing the torch to a new generation." It is a beautiful thing to see and it is up to boomers, who have not left a political legacy to be proud of, to use the time we have left as Senator Kennedy is doing -- to help Xers/Yers/Millennials prepare to assume their role in a very different world than the Clintons' left us -- and most certainly the Bushes left us. It is time and we should not mock the Senator for taking a LEADERSHIP role in helping with this transition. The Republicans should do the same on their side in all kinds of ways. The Clintons should leave the stage, with GRACE. They had their chance.
Had their chance? The only name to have successfully delivered national politics out of the hands of Reagan/Bush, and who knows how to do it AGAIN (all caps). Obama has a glass jaw that would be shattered by the Republican machine, and if people think the GOP isn't salivating over the prospect - WAKE UP.
Deval Patrick is not the first African-American elected statewide in Massachusetts. Edward Brooke was. Did anyone proof-read this thing?
The analogy with Deval Patrick is correct but in a different way.
Patrick never even ran for selectmen before he ran for office - no experience and he is struggling. Neither Obama or Hillary's have any executive experience.
Edward Brooke was a U.S. senator, and therefore was not elected to the state government. Brooke was the first African-American elected to the US Senate, but Deval Patrick was the first African American elected into statewide office in Massachusetts. The article is correct.
Dear/ senate Ted kennendy
subject: mercyful father of the heaven
I wish you will be recover for tumer,I and we are group sudanese we are praying for you. always you are faithful to serve our nation senators we love you we will see you soon senator floor to do you your job I erbuck that tumer in barin our lord will release you form that condition god blessing after holy spirit recover you we love you we need you to continous service our nation.
thank you
machuei Thogkow