BALTIMORE - Democrat Barack Obama likes to tell audiences that he can get Republican support for his presidential bid. Now he’s given those supporters a name: Obamicans.
Get it? Sounds like Republicans, just drop the “Repub” and add the Illinois senator’s last name. Really.
We quote the senator: “I want to attract some Republicans into the fold,” Obama told a stadium packed with some 11,000 people in Baltimore, repea
ting his story of how members of the rival party sometimes offer whispering support to him after rallies.
“Sometimes they whisper to me when I’m shaking hands, they’ll say ‘Barack, I’m a Republican, but I support you,’” he said to applause. “We call them Obamicans. We’re going to get some Obamicans in this election.”
The Republican Party was nonplussed.
“If Obama wins the nomination, he’s right that voters might cross over - but it’ll be moderate Democrats abandoning his liberal agenda,” said Alex Conant, a Republican Party spokesman.
McCainocrats anyone?
Click here for more Reuters 2008 campaign coverage .
- Photo credit: Reuters/Jonathan Ernst (Obama speaks at a campaign rally on Monday in Baltimore)
Trackback
33 comments so far
Previous | 2 | 1 | Next
Obama is a good man and will be a great leader. When was the last time a politician inspired so many people.
- Posted by Jihn tWho would you rather have in the White House…Bill Clinton or Michelle Obama. Easy choice for me.
I’m a Republican who voted for Bush the second time, so he could clean up his own mess. I had no idea what a bad mistake that would be. I just changed my voting registration to Democrat to ensure I can vote in our primary and get Hilary out of the race for all the reasons Kris in CO (above) says, and more. Aside from that, I am voting for Obama because of his intellect and honesty, and I switched parties because the Republican machine no longer reflects voters. It is a top down spider-web in which all leaf-nodes support the vision of one man. That’s not the way it should be. And while the Democrat machine and politics in DC will probably always be that way to some extent, I think it’s time for someone fresh and new to at least _consider_ the people’s wishes. Please. Do not vote for McCain, who thinks it’s ok to stay in Iraq forever, at any cost. We need to recognize that we didn’t understand what we were getting into, and get out of it. We need to protect our homeland with military here, and focus our military abroad in the RIGHT countries. We need to not have someone in office who is there to fulfill their own ego, but there to represent the country. Please do your homework and vote carefully.
- Posted by DMSWe are the Clorg, We are the President.
- Posted by sparkyWe will triangulate you, Reistance is futile.
The self-righteous angry old men and smug neocon Republicans, the people who failed to capture bin Laden, lied us into a useless unending war, brought us the culture of torture and amassed an incredible debt to our future enemies now presume to tell us the only person with a message of hope is “unfit” to be President.
Same old Rovian lies.
Ed
- Posted by Ed RuttledgeIn response to #2 Maggie, don’t worry if the youth make mistakes, the youth will be the ones to pay for them. Which is fine because the youth are already the ones who have to pay for all of the baby boomer’s mistakes, so why not get a chance to make a few of our own!
- Posted by CaseyI don’t think there’s a lot of risk in having Obama as president, even if he is relatively young. One thing we know from the current Administration is that the nation can survive, in a manner of speaking, even when the president is not up to the job. McCain, Clinton, and Obama would all represent improvements over the incumbent. Obama is likely to be the most pro-business candidate. That is because his core constituency includes young people and professionals, and those are constituencies that benefit from economic expansion. With regard to Iraq, it should be obvious to any businessperson that it falls to the next Administration to reach a negotiated resolution to in Iraq. The Iraq was was never a part of the war against al-Qaeda. It should be clear to everyone that al-Qaeda was a pretext for invading Iraq. There was no significant al-Qaeda presence in Iraq, and certainly no armed al-Qaeda presence there, prior to the U.S. presence there. The suggestion that there was is a complete fabrication intended to distract voters. Let’s face it, the Iraq situation was brought about by the current Administration’s incompetence and lack of candor. Obama is in a better position than McCain or Clinton to negotiate a favorable resolution, because Obama can do so without having to repudiate any of his earlier positions. Obama spoke well in the California debate when he said that we should be as careful getting ouf of Iraq as we were careless getting in.
- Posted by BobI’m an Obamadian, a Canadian cheering for Obama. It’s about time America changes its policies, whether that be in the Middle East, on global warming or medical care. We need an America that has the moral standing to act for the global good.
GObama!
Garen, Toronto, Canada
- Posted by GarenWhichever way one looks at it, Obama is the most qualified for the President of the United States. He is Half black and half white, tasted Islam as a child and now a christain, father from Africa, lived in Asia, citizen of USA. If these don’t qualify him as a global candidate, one wonders what would! In fact, I see the United Nations (U.N) in this man called Obama.Apart from this,he is full of confidence, highly educated and is an embodiment of change. His ability to motivate his followers towards actions that will change their lives and that of the whole world positively is not in doubt. The people have chosen Obama over others. And who says ‘the voice of the people is not the voice of God?
- Posted by Awele OdigoAlso, in my opinion it’s the job of the Prez to supply goals and outlines for how to ge there - not the details. The detailed execution is performed by those around him/her and those in the House and Senate, Cabinet, etc. I doubt there’s ever been a Prez who actually delivered promises in a campaign consistent with the details they provided. Goals, yes, but not in the way they promised…
- Posted by BobSteHey, I’d like to think I’m older (45) and I’m for Obama. I’ve been waiting a long time for a Prez who gets the people fired up (like, since JFK or HST for example). I think it’s great to have lofty expectations and to put the emphasis on people, not politicians, making change. Young people have a voice and I trust them with my future. Many of those against Obama are pessimistic and numbed by years of institutional politics, infighting and partisanship. Let’s give him a chance - it can’t be worse than the current administration. If I told you there was little or no chance to overcome the lobbyists in DC, would you just give in? I think it’s worth a fight. Finally, I’d also hazard a guess that those politicians who’ve been in office, getting fed by lobbyists are probably a bit worried too. I hope Obama wins so we can move on to the next step - replacing a bunch of cronies in the House and Senate. Term limits baby.
- Posted by BobSteAll these HRC supporters really need to do a little homework.
- She is a liar. (Agreeing not to campaign in Florida/Michigan, then doing so and then asking for the votes to be counted even though Obama didnt even run in Michigan)
- She is a thief. (Ever hear of Peter Paul? Search YouTube for Clinton campaign finance fraud)
- She will literally do or say anything to get elected. (See her and Bill attempting to bring race into this race, or her crying for votes in NH and again in a later state)
- She is someone who goes with the political winds instead of thinking for herself. (See voting for the Iraq war, voting to give Bush cause to go to war with Iran)
Sure, Obama’s experience in a corrupt system is not as lengthy as HRC’s…But is that such a horrible thing? Lets not forget, both of these cantidates are Senators, neither of which is much of an administrative job. Hillary’s “experience” claim in the first Clinton White House is laughable, she held no posts, conducted no foreign policy…nothing.
But lets focus on her experience, after all the GW Bush Administration had some of the most foreign policy experience in recent memory when elected and look where it got us!
- Posted by Kris in COIt seems like a lot of people are still confusing Hillary with her husband; because as far as i know he is the one who have been in office.And Please…please…PLEASE!!! do some research about Obama before talking about his inexperience.I don t even want to start a discussion about his wife.The woman has such an outstanding background, i would lack the space to do so…
- Posted by TedDon’t forget Harry Truman complained that a young John F. Kennedy was too young and inexperienced to run the country……Look at that great legacy.
- Posted by AmyThank goodness the voters back then didn’t listen to the naysayers! Obama 08!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hillary is too polarizing, she could never get the country together like Senator Obama!
(”Trouble is…we’ll all have to pay for the mistakes of the young.”)
-Maggie
Because it’s never the older generations fault, right?
- Posted by NeilMaggie,
Lets keep in mind that it was the ‘older’ generation that couldn’t elect a Democratic President in 2000 or 2004. It was the ‘older’ generation who authorized the Iraq war and it has been the ‘older’ generation that has lagged on Climate Change and health care. I am tired of living through the mistakes of this older generation - maybe it is time to give younger people a voice and push out the cynics and naysayers.
- Posted by StephenHi Suzana says:
- Posted by trevorYou are just like the other lazy followers that will not take the time to check things out for your self if you take five minutes of your time you would see that Obama have more experiences than HRC
Go Obama!08
Maggie,
- Posted by MarcActually, the young are already paying for the mistakes of the older generation and will continue to do so into the future. Think budget deficits and repairing the damage done to America’s image worldwide. Seems to me, it is time to let them have an opportunity to get involved and pick somebody who can make things better!
Marc
If Obama wins the nomination, he would be the one that the saying “right place at the right time” fits so good and not that he well-deserves it. This guy is flying over the moon and the only thing that he mentions in his campaign is “change” without any history or experience so ever on making changes as a senator first.
America should not choose a president just because he is young and is time now to elect an african-american or even a female. People should choose one who really has the experience and has records for it. He is loved at the moment by people because of the current situation America is–that’s it. But he is quite prepared to deal with all these foreign nations and foreign policy? If he was a candidate in 1992 or even 2000 in the same age as now, was he going to win these numbers? I guess no.
- Posted by SuzanaHere’s one McCainocrat you can count on! NObama for me!!! Been a democrat all of my life, but I will vote for McCain if the nominee is Obama. He is simply not ready to be in charge of a country with so many problems. It will take a pro like Hillary to dig us out. Some of us out here know that…but it looks like the young ones, who are giving Barack “superstar” status, are going to pick the Prez this time. Trouble is…we’ll all have to pay for the mistakes of the young.
- Posted by MaggieMr. Obama seems to have a penchant for the banal. cutesy names for his followers is just another addition to the ‘cult’ edifice he will have trouble tearing down if he gets the nomination. Another is visuals such as this:
- Posted by Didereauxhttp://inlinethumb02.webshots.com/14273/ 2302473400102238172S600×600Q85.jpg