# Latest Obama Scandal: Can he Survive This? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 12, 2008, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/latest-obama-scandal-can-he-survive-this/445048 "2008-04-12T16:33:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2008, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/latest-obama-scandal-can-he-survive-this/445048/121 "2008-04-14T19:19:28Z")
[QUOTE=Huerta88] I am sure his comments were an accurate reflection of his mindset and the mindset of the bien pensant San Francisco crowd to which he was speaking. In his mind (or hers), because there is no legitimate reason for being a gun enthusiast, or drawing political opinions from religious beliefs, or opposing immigration, these viewpoints must be explained away as an artifact, a side effect of some external cause. This is a prime example of the Genetic Fallacy (attacking a belief by calling into question the source or motivation that ostensibly gave rise to it), and thus is not irrelevant to whether a candidate’s judgment can be trusted. [/quote] This is absolute nonsense! He never said, or implied, that there was no legitimate reason for being a gun owner. Not even close. He wasn’t talking about gun owners in general, he was describing a very specific subset of people living in a very specific region of the country who have been affected by very specific economic issues. NOT all gun owners. [Here’s an account](http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/YesWeCanandWe%20WILL,Now/gGBpp8) from someone who actually lives there, and about whom Obama was speaking. > [@](#): > > . . . > > I live in western Pennsylvania, and I can tell you, people here are bitter and angry. Poverty is prevalent. People hunt squirrels and eat them, along with racoon stew. People also hunt deer here, not for sport, but so they can put meat in their freezer so they can feed their families. They cut wood in the forests and heat their homes with wood stoves because they can’t afford to pay the gas bill. I know a guy who goes to old landfills to dig up old milk and beer bottles to sell on eBay. He uses the proceeds to buy clothes for his family at the Salvation Army (and to pay for his dial-up connection). > > . . . > > Prejudice, racism and fear do run rampant in areas like this. People are poor. They are in bad health, overweight from a deep-fried diet, and toothless from the lack of dental care. They are unemployed. They are uneducated. **They do cling to their hunting rifles and to their religious beliefs. For many, it is about all that they have.** The towns around here are full of decaying, boarded up buildings. People live in rundown old trailers with abandoned cars in the front yard. I have seen people using an old car as a stable, with their goat tied to and living in it. I could drive you by a least three old houses that have Conderate flags in the windows. > > So go ahead and discount Obama’s talk of how bitter and angry that some of the people of rural Pennsylvania are. **Call him elitist for taking the time to pass through areas such as this to listen to what the people have to say, and to then relate what he has heard to people in more prosperous parts of the country when he is asked about it.** I have lived in San Francisco, and let me tell you, there is a marked difference between the general attitude there and the attitude here in the “rust belt”. Go ahead and dismiss everything that Obama said as political posturing. Let Hillary and McCain “pick him apart” and parse his words. \*\*But please keep in mind that when Obama said: > > “it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.” > > that he is 100% accurate in his assessment. > \*\* > I know, because I live here, my family and my friends’ families have lived here for generations, and we see it every day, all around this region. There is a very fine line between poverty and prosperity here, where making above $20,000 a year puts you in the realm of the “haves”, but also knowing that you’re one contract termination away from joining the ranks of the “have-nots”. > > . . . > > Thirty years worth of the right wing dismantling our public education system has taken its toll. Thirty years worth of mismanagement of the economy, of shutting down factories and shipping jobs out of the country, of subsidizing corporate farms and taxing family farms out of business, has taken its toll. > > Yes, people are angry, and bitter, but Obama never said that they aren’t resilient, opitmistic or hard-working. Those are Hillary and McCain’s twisted words, and for them to stand up and suggest that rural Pennsylvanians aren’t fed up with the way things are, only reveals how out of touch they really are with at least this part of the country. > > . . . Barack Obama has been traveling all around those areas over the past several weeks. He has SEEN it first hand. He has HEARD their bitterness. He has ASKED them how they’re feeling. And when guests at his fundraiser, who were on their way to Pennsylvania to help him campaign, asked what to expect, **he told them what he saw and heard**. He spoke the truth about **them**. Not you. Not all gun owners. Not all religious people. Rural Pennsylvanians who ARE angry and bitter and clinging to the only things they feel they have any control over because the Washington elite don’t give a shit about them and their economic woes. [QUOTE=John Mace] But I also think both are smart enough to know that people have legitimate reasons to want to own guns, to care about their religion, or to be concerned about immigration (especially of the illegal variety). [/QUOTE] And so does Obama. He never said otherwise. ---
**Author:** ![Huerta88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/82dd89/32.png) [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2008, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/latest-obama-scandal-can-he-survive-this/445048/122 "2008-04-14T19:30:21Z")
[QUOTE=Shayna] Rural Pennsylvanians who ARE angry and bitter and clinging to the only things they feel they have any control over because the Washington elite don’t give a shit about them and their economic woes. And so does Obama. He never said otherwise. [/QUOTE] You missed the portion of my discussion of the Genetic Fallacy that said: > [@](#): > > Genetic accounts of an issue may be true, and they may help illuminate the reasons why the issue has assumed its present form, but they are irrelevant to its merits. Others may be disputing whether the Pennsylvanians Obama saw were in fact “bitter,” but all of your material in support of the notion that they are is kind of irrelevant to me because I am going to assume that they **are**. He felt the need, though, to posit a linkage between their “bitterness” and their support for those issues. I think the fairest reading of why he posited this linkage is that he is frustrated that he has to prove his bona fides on issues that he thinks are side effects or artifacts. The language you cite is telling – why would one speak of “clinging” to guns except to posit some psychological inadequacy or displacement as the source of Second Amendment support? “Clinging” is not a value-neutral term in that context. So: people in rural Pennsylvania may be bitter. They may support gun rights and immigration control and faith-based policies. The latter is not necessarily a result of the former, but Obama clearly implied it was (he obviously discounts the equally-plausible possibility that the former is a result of their not seeing their preferences on the latter implemented). When I’ve had lovely conversations with various girlfriends in which I was intemperate enough to say “you’re just saying that because your hormones are all out of whack,” their retort was never “no, wait, I can prove I’m not on the rag.” It was “I may be, but you never should have even brought that up as a way of trivialzing my complaints or avoiding the merits of my argument.” ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2008, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/latest-obama-scandal-can-he-survive-this/445048/123 "2008-04-14T19:31:21Z")
[QUOTE=Shayna] Barack Obama has been traveling all around those areas over the past several weeks. He has SEEN it first hand. He has HEARD their bitterness. He has ASKED them how they’re feeling. And when guests at his fundraiser, who were on their way to Pennsylvania to help him campaign, asked what to expect, **he told them what he saw and heard**. He spoke the truth about **them**. Not you. Not all gun owners. Not all religious people. Rural Pennsylvanians who ARE angry and bitter and clinging to the only things they feel they have any control over because the Washington elite don’t give a shit about them and their economic woes. [/quote] Really? You really think lots of people told him they cling to their guns (or whatever) because the economy is bad and they’re bitter about Washington politics? _You see, Senator Obama… I lost my job last year and all I have left is my gun and my religion!_ I mean, I guess that’s possible, but it sounds pretty far fetched to me. Especially since concern about religion, gun rights, and those other things have been alive and well in “small town” America since before Senator Obama was born. > [@](#): > > And so does Obama. He never said otherwise. He was part of “both”-- ie, Hillary and Obama both… ---
**Author:** ![LilShieste](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/9f8e36/32.png) [@LilShieste](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LilShieste)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2008, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/latest-obama-scandal-can-he-survive-this/445048/124 "2008-04-14T19:34:10Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] But I also think both are smart enough to know that people have legitimate reasons to want to own guns, to care about their religion, or to be concerned about immigration (especially of the illegal variety). [/QUOTE] I completely agree. However, I think both are also smart enough to know that people have illegitimate reasons to want to own guns, to care about their religion, and to be concerned with immigration, as well. ISTM that _those_ were the people that Obama was actually talking about. I know that he could have worded his statements better (to not have it generalized for everyone), and he admits the same. Now that he has clarified, though, the intentions behind his remarks should be clear - and I don’t see how they could be construed as elitist. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2008, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/latest-obama-scandal-can-he-survive-this/445048/125 "2008-04-14T19:44:28Z")
[QUOTE=LilShieste] I completely agree. However, I think both are also smart enough to know that people have illegitimate reasons to want to own guns, to care about their religion, and to be concerned with immigration, as well. ISTM that _those_ were the people that Obama was actually talking about. I know that he could have worded his statements better (to not have it generalized for everyone), and he admits the same. Now that he has clarified, though, the intentions behind his remarks should be clear - and I don’t see how they could be construed as elitist. [/QUOTE] I also don’t think that Obama said that these concerns were illegitimate. ---
**Author:** ![Huerta88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/82dd89/32.png) [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2008, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/latest-obama-scandal-can-he-survive-this/445048/126 "2008-04-14T20:02:24Z")
[QUOTE=mswas] I also don’t think that Obama said that these concerns were illegitimate. [/QUOTE] Two dead giveaways that he considers them non-legitimate and meant to convey this: (1) the use of the word “cling.” As I noted, a pejorative implying the beliefs in question are serving not as sincere political policies, but as psychological crutches. (2) his inclusion of “antipathy to people who aren’t like them” among the list of issues he imputes as being on the minds of the Pennsylvanians. I’m pretty sure you’re not going to suggest that Obama is value-neutral on whether “antipathy to people who aren’t like [us]” is okay, or that he thinks it is a legitimate political motivator. To a lesser extent “anti immigrant sentiment” is a loaded term – this is the term immigration supporters always use, to posit hatred of individual immigrants (of course, on nasty racial grounds), rather than concern with the effects of unrestrained immigration, as the motivation behind calls to limit immigration. The coupling of these two (supposed, and illegitimate) motives, along with guns, and religion, was clearly pejorative. Here: “Senator Obama has found broad support among blacks, women, murderers, and urban residents.” “Senator Clinton’s policies are motivated by her concerns for union members, rural residents, terrorists, and people who hate kittens.” Sorry, neither of those phrasings is value-neutral. ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2008, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/latest-obama-scandal-can-he-survive-this/445048/127 "2008-04-14T20:05:16Z")
[QUOTE=Huerta88] He felt the need, though, to posit a linkage between their “bitterness” and their support for those issues. I think the fairest reading of why he posited this linkage is that he is frustrated that he has to prove his bona fides on issues that he thinks are side effects or artifacts. The language you cite is telling – why would one speak of “clinging” to guns except to posit some psychological inadequacy or displacement as the source of Second Amendment support? “Clinging” is not a value-neutral term in that context. [/quote] You have no idea what “need” he felt, that’s just a baseless assumption on your part. And the fairest reading of why he stated this linkage (as opposed to “posited” it) is that that’s what he saw and heard while traveling around the region. That you wish to ascribe nefarious motives based on the usage of one word, speaks to your bias, not his intent. > [@Huerta88](#): > > So: people in rural Pennsylvania may be bitter. They may support gun rights and immigration control and faith-based policies. The latter is not necessarily a result of the former, but Obama clearly implied it was (he obviously discounts the equally-plausible possibility that the former is a result of their not seeing their preferences on the latter implemented). > > When I’ve had lovely conversations with various girlfriends in which I was intemperate enough to say “you’re just saying that because your hormones are all out of whack,” their retort was never “no, wait, I can prove I’m not on the rag.” It was “I may be, but you never should have even brought that up as a way of trivialzing my complaints or avoiding the merits of my argument.” Feel free to judge yourself and your own outrageous motives for your own words. You are not free to judge someone else’s motives when they have specifically denied those motives. [QUOTE=John Mace] Really? You really think lots of people told him they cling to their guns (or whatever) because the economy is bad and they’re bitter about Washington politics? _You see, Senator Obama… I lost my job last year and all I have left is my gun and my religion!_ I mean, I guess that’s possible, but it sounds pretty far fetched to me. Especially since concern about religion, gun rights, and those other things have been alive and well in “small town” America since before Senator Obama was born. [/QUOTE] Yeah, I think people walked up and said, “I’m bitter an clinging to my guns because of that.” :rolleyes: Please. There _are_ ways to have conversations with people and hear how they respond to questions to come away with the impression (which is a true one according to one of the residents there as I cited above) that people **in those areas** are so bitter and angry with the government that they’re holding onto whatever they feel they can have more power with. Obama has already acknowledged the fact that made some poor word choices. But, he is not walking away from the larger point he was making because it’s true. > [@Barack Obama](#): > > . . . > > As I said yesterday, I regret some of the words I chose, partly because the way that these remarks have been interpreted have offended some people and partly because they have served as one more distraction from the critical debate that we must have in this election season. > > I’m a person of deep faith, and my religion has sustained me through a lot in my life. I even gave a speech on faith before I ever started running for President where I said that Democrats, “make a mistake when we fail to acknowledge the power of faith in people’s lives.” I also represent a state with a large number of hunters and sportsmen, and I understand how important these traditions are to families in Illinois and all across America. And, contrary to what my poor word choices may have implied or my opponents have suggested, I’ve never believed that these traditions or people’s faith has anything to do with how much money they have. > > But I will never walk away from the larger point that I was trying to make. For the last several decades, people in small towns and cities and rural areas all across this country have seen globalization change the rules of the game on them. > > . . . > > I’ve heard these stories almost every day during this campaign, whether it was in Iowa or Ohio or Pennsylvania. And the people I’ve met have also told me that every year, in every election, politicians come to their towns, and they tell them what they want to hear, and they make big promises, and then they go back to Washington when the campaign’s over, and nothing changes. There’s no plan to address the downside of globalization. We don’t do anything about the skyrocketing cost of health care or college or those disappearing pensions. Instead of fighting to replace jobs that aren’t coming back, Washington ends up fighting over the latest distraction of the week. > > . . . > > But I will say this. If John McCain wants to turn this election into a contest about which party is out of touch with the struggles and the hopes of working America, that’s a debate I’m happy to have. In fact, I think that’s a debate we need to have. Because I believe that the real insult to the millions of hard-working Americans out there would be a continuation of the economic agenda that has dominated Washington for far too long. > > I may have made a mistake last week in the words that I chose, but the other party has made a much more damaging mistake in the failed policies they’ve chosen and the bankrupt philosophy they’ve embraced for the last three decades. > > . . . > > [http://thepage.time.com/full-text-of-obamas-remarks-at-ap-annual-meeting/](http://thepage.time.com/full-text-of-obamas-remarks-at-ap-annual-meeting/) So go ahead and parse his words to mean whatever hateful, arrogant, ugly thing you want to twist them to mean. Pretend you can get in his head by examining his word choice and declare him elitist or out-of-touch if it satisfies your need to find some reason to find fault with him. But it is not what he said and not what he meant. You can either take him at his word about that and move on to the real issues that are important in this country, or you can judge him like his competitors want you to and not vote for him. Either way, it doesn’t change the basic fact that he spoke the truth, however poorly worded. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2008, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/latest-obama-scandal-can-he-survive-this/445048/128 "2008-04-14T20:18:49Z")
[QUOTE=Shayna] Yeah, I think people walked up and said, “I’m bitter an clinging to my guns because of that.” :rolleyes: Please. [/quote] Roll your eyes all you want, but that is what you said. He didn’t tell them what he say and heard, he told them what he inferred their motivations were. > [@](#): > > There _are_ ways to have conversations with people and hear how they respond to questions to come away with the impression (which is a true one according to one of the residents there as I cited above) that people **in those areas** are so bitter and angry with the government that they’re holding onto whatever they feel they can have more power with. OK, so now it’s the impression he got, not what people actually told him. And what a lot of people are saying is that his impression is informed by his own personal bias. That, and the way he said it, did come off as being condescending, even if he didn’t mean it to be. Note that he has admitted to using a poor choice of words. ---
**Author:** ![LilShieste](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/9f8e36/32.png) [@LilShieste](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LilShieste)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2008, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/latest-obama-scandal-can-he-survive-this/445048/129 "2008-04-14T20:24:41Z")
[QUOTE=mswas] I also don’t think that Obama said that these concerns were illegitimate. [/QUOTE] Well, I do think that it was implied, though not said outright. > [@Huerta88](#): > > (1) the use of the word “cling.” As I noted, a pejorative implying the beliefs in question are serving not as sincere political policies, but as psychological crutches. I don’t see why the beliefs couldn’t be both sincere political policies _and_ psychological crutches. And I don’t agree with your use of the term pejorative, in describing this. I don’t think he intended to insult people with his statements, but rather draw attention to the issue. Kind of like telling someone who is coming back from a 10 day float trip that they’re dirty and smell funky. Sure that could be insulting (and could have been brought up more tactfully), but is it really far from the truth? ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2008, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/latest-obama-scandal-can-he-survive-this/445048/130 "2008-04-14T20:32:41Z")
[QUOTE=Huerta88] Two dead giveaways that he considers them non-legitimate and meant to convey this: (1) the use of the word “cling.” As I noted, a pejorative implying the beliefs in question are serving not as sincere political policies, but as psychological crutches. (2) his inclusion of “antipathy to people who aren’t like them” among the list of issues he imputes as being on the minds of the Pennsylvanians. I’m pretty sure you’re not going to suggest that Obama is value-neutral on whether “antipathy to people who aren’t like [us]” is okay, or that he thinks it is a legitimate political motivator. To a lesser extent “anti immigrant sentiment” is a loaded term – this is the term immigration supporters always use, to posit hatred of individual immigrants (of course, on nasty racial grounds), rather than concern with the effects of unrestrained immigration, as the motivation behind calls to limit immigration. The coupling of these two (supposed, and illegitimate) motives, along with guns, and religion, was clearly pejorative. [/QUOTE] No, it is only pejorative in your own mind. Given that that was not the intent of the speaker, you cannot impute that motive to him. It’s really that simple. “Anti-immigrant sentiment” is not a loaded term, it’s a factual one that even former President Bill Clinton acknowledged leads to anxiety when people look at the economic situation. From my previous post in this thread: > [@Bill Clinton](#): > > So I think that the rise of this has sort of crystalized for a lot of people. That I think doubling healthcare premiums has had a lot to do with this. The further loss of health care coverage in America. So there’s a lot of economic anxiety. **In the Republican party is expresses itself as this sort of very hard line against immigration. In the Democratic party it expresses itself in a very hard line against trade.** But the real problem is we haven’t created enough good new jobs. > > [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9684842&postcount=66](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9684842&postcount=66) ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2008, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/latest-obama-scandal-can-he-survive-this/445048/131 "2008-04-14T20:35:54Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] Roll your eyes all you want, but that is what you said. He didn’t tell them what he say and heard, he told them what he inferred their motivations were. OK, so now it’s the impression he got, not what people actually told him. And what a lot of people are saying is that his impression is informed by his own personal bias. That, and the way he said it, did come off as being condescending, even if he didn’t mean it to be. Note that he has admitted to using a poor choice of words. [/QUOTE] No, that is not what I said. You made up some ridiculous faux conversation as if that was the only way Barack Obama could have “heard” something that told him people were more concerned with gun issues and religious issues and immigration issues than with their own economic issues. And I’ve already acknowledged that he admitted a poor choice of words. That does not mean that he had ill motives, that he is condescending, or that he is _wrong_. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2008, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/latest-obama-scandal-can-he-survive-this/445048/132 "2008-04-14T20:50:00Z")
[QUOTE=Shayna] No, that is not what I said. You made up some ridiculous faux conversation as if that was the only way Barack Obama could have “heard” something that told him people were more concerned with gun issues and religious issues and immigration issues than with their own economic issues. And I’ve already acknowledged that he admitted a poor choice of words. That does not mean that he had ill motives, that he is condescending, or that he is _wrong_. [/QUOTE] Oh, come on. Of course the conversation I made up was ridiculous, but so would any conversation that would’ve conformed to what you claimed Obama was doing: > [@](#): > > …he told them what he saw and heard. He spoke the truth about them. No, that’s not what he did. He didn’t speak “the truth”-- he gave his analysis of what he heard, throwing in a nice little dig at Bush and Clinton along the way. And his analysis doesn’t stand up to even the slightest scrutiny. Does he really think that if the economy improves, people will no longer “cling” to guns and religion? That’s absurd. As I’ve said, people have been “clinging” to those through good times and bad, and Obama isn’t going to change that one iota. If he thinks he can, he’s delusional. ---
**Author:** ![Huerta88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/82dd89/32.png) [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2008, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/latest-obama-scandal-can-he-survive-this/445048/133 "2008-04-14T20:51:37Z")
As **John Mace** pointed out, certain culturally conservative issues and priorities have always been prevalent in certain rural, or blue collar, areas of the country. I can’t imagine that anyone who was pro-gun today wasn’t pro-gun when farms and factories were thriving. They were pro-gun from way back forever, because in the boonies, lots of people have and like guns and don’t want them regulated. Similarly, I doubt a bunch of Bohunk Catholic steelworkers, even when the union jobs were plentiful, could be expected to support NAFTA, or abortion, or to look at mass immigration with anything but suspicion. The problem for Obama is that if a bloc of voters is really concerned about deregulating guns, or about faith-based principles being applied to government policy, or about stopping immigration, Obama can’t help them with those priorities. He’s simply never going to be able to take the position that guns need to be less regulated, or abortion needs to be more limited, or illegal aliens should be deported en masse. It’s not what he believes, it’s not what the national Democratic party supports, it is definitely not the kind of “change” he is selling. So since he can’t help them on these priorities, he’d rather explain them away as all being artifacts of a bad economy and a broken system in Washington. Well, that makes sense, because on “fixing the economy,” and “changing Washington,” he **does** have a sales pitch (some find it more plausible, some less). So of course he would believe, or want to believe, or want Pennsylvanians to believe, that all of their anxieties and political discontents will go away if the economic and governance problems he **can** fix (so he says) go away. It’s kind of like a hammer salesman trying to persuade the punters that their stated desire for a screwdriver is really just the result of their lack of hammers, so they should just stop bugging him for screwdrivers that he doesn’t have. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2008, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/latest-obama-scandal-can-he-survive-this/445048/134 "2008-04-14T20:59:56Z")
So far, the answer to “can he survive this?” is Yes. He’s 10 points ahead of Hillary in the national Gallup tracker, which is as far ahead as he’s ever been (and his 8th straight day of leading by 7-10 points). The Rasmussen tracker has him up by only 4, but he was only up by 3 in Friday morning’s tracker, just before this hit. No clue how this is affecting things in Pennsylvania, but I expect there’ll be new polls in the morning. ---
**Author:** ![stolichnaya](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bcef8e/32.png) [@stolichnaya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stolichnaya)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2008, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/latest-obama-scandal-can-he-survive-this/445048/135 "2008-04-14T21:00:07Z")
It is kind of amazing that a candidate can generate millions of words saying one thing, and dozens saying another, and those dozens are seized on as a symbol of what he “really thinks”. I am not saying that it is incorrect, but it’s interesting. I was dissapointed to hear that Obama had said this, regardless of context, but I am hesitant to arbitrarily determine that this is his real feeling on the matter, and everything else he has said is studied political blather. Of course, I have a bias that I bring to the table. But so do most other participants. ---
**Author:** ![Frostillicus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Frostillicus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frostillicus)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2008, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/latest-obama-scandal-can-he-survive-this/445048/136 "2008-04-14T21:20:16Z")
The Daily Kos weigs in on “Orange Juice Gate” and sums it up better than I ever could: > [@](#): > > There is a point in which a triviality becomes less than trivial, less than banal, and becomes, to use the most technical term for it, deeply and abrasively stupid. There is no spin possible that turns “asking for orange juice” into an issue of elitism or snobbery: there is, in an infinite sea of alternate realities, not one in which asking for orange juice demonstrates an important negative aspect of character. It is stupid. It is aggressively stupid; it is soul-burrowingly stupid; it is mind-fuckingly stupid. It is the kind of stupid that seeps into the rug so that the entire building stinks of stupid for the next ten years whenever the air conditioning comes on. It is the kind of stupid that wounds all those who come into contact with it. It is a stupid that has been rendered physical: it leaves a scar. ---
**Author:** ![ArizonaTeach](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/45deac/32.png) [@ArizonaTeach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ArizonaTeach)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2008, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/latest-obama-scandal-can-he-survive-this/445048/137 "2008-04-14T21:27:55Z")
[QUOTE=RTFirefly] So far, the answer to “can he survive this?” is Yes. He’s 10 points ahead of Hillary in the national Gallup tracker, which is as far ahead as he’s ever been (and his 8th straight day of leading by 7-10 points). The Rasmussen tracker has him up by only 4, but he was only up by 3 in Friday morning’s tracker, just before this hit. No clue how this is affecting things in Pennsylvania, but I expect there’ll be new polls in the morning. [/QUOTE] I heard this moning that he had dropped pretty far in Penn…like 20 points behind. I don’t know how true that is for what polls, though. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2008, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/latest-obama-scandal-can-he-survive-this/445048/138 "2008-04-14T21:33:17Z")
[QUOTE=ArizonaTeach] I heard this moning that he had dropped pretty far in Penn…like 20 points behind. I don’t know how true that is for what polls, though. [/QUOTE] That was the deservedly much-maligned ARG. RealClearPolitics stopped including them in their averages awhile back because they were so mindbogglingly unreliable. ---
**Author:** ![spazattak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8e8cbc/32.png) [@spazattak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spazattak)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2008, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/latest-obama-scandal-can-he-survive-this/445048/139 "2008-04-14T21:48:52Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] Oh, come on. Of course the conversation I made up was ridiculous, but so would any conversation that would’ve conformed to what you claimed Obama was doing: No, that’s not what he did. He didn’t speak “the truth”-- he gave his analysis of what he heard, throwing in a nice little dig at Bush and Clinton along the way. And his analysis doesn’t stand up to even the slightest scrutiny. \*\*Does he really think that if the economy improves, people will no longer “cling” to guns and religion? \*\* That’s absurd. As I’ve said, people have been “clinging” to those through good times and bad, and Obama isn’t going to change that one iota. If he thinks he can, he’s delusional. [/QUOTE] Anecdotally, do the people who you know that trend further toward the ‘god gays and guns’ category fall more into the economically well off or more economically disadvantaged groups? ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2008, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/latest-obama-scandal-can-he-survive-this/445048/140 "2008-04-14T21:50:26Z")
Once a liar, always a liar, apparently. > [@](#): > > [http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/04/bill-clinton-ke.html](http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/04/bill-clinton-ke.html) > > Over seven stops in North Carolina, Clinton said “Everywhere I go there are all these people with signs, saying I’m not bitter - I’m not bitter.” > > Clinton said during a stop in Jim Thorpe, Pennsylvania "this fellow said to me… “President Clinton, we are not bitter, we just want to turn the country around.” Clinton said another supporter in North Carolina said “I hunt 'cause I like to and I go church ‘cause I need to. And if I were a millionaire, I would still hunt and go to church.’ He said what we need is to get this country together, get it on the road and go forward. So that is what this election is about. And we all gotta go forward together. We all have to go forward together.” Wow, that’s pretty impressive. Everywhere he goes there are all these signs! Everywhere! > [@](#): > > The strong sentiments were appreciated by the crowd, but were not entirely accurate. **During Clinton’s seven stops in North Carolina on Saturday there were no “I’m not bitter” signs**. There was a small assortment of people at his later events wearing stickers with the slogan, but many of those sporting the stickers weren’t even sure what they meant. Clinton also was a bit confused about his encounter in Pennsylvania. The conversation actually took place at an earlier event in Bloomsburg, PA - **or so Clinton told the crowd in Bloomsburg.** Signs. No signs. Real conversation. Made-up conversation. Hmmmm. Yeah, these are the people I want back in the White House instead of a man who’s willing to speak hard truths some people don’t want to hear. Liars. Truth-teller. Liars. Truth-teller. I think I’ll go with the truth-teller, thanks all the same. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/latest-obama-scandal-can-he-survive-this/445048.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/latest-obama-scandal-can-he-survive-this/445048.md?page=8)