Obama could have fought "bitter gate" better than he did

[keep_it_real]

I am a Obama supporter. When Obama said "cling" he was actually referring to "Wedge Issues" that prevent people from voting on the real economic issues like health care. So people lose faith in politicians who talk about economic issues and focus and "cling" to the "wedge issues" like abortion rights, prayer in school which are religious issues, or gun control, or immigration, etc.

The real issue he was trying to say but did a bad job was about people "clinging" to "wedge issues," which all the TV pundits understood but refused to tell the people that it was "wedge issues" that Obama was trying to say that people "cling" too; this is what he was getting at.


But instead the MSM and the pundits said over and over again that Obama said people "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."

But it was not ACTUALLY guns or religion but the "wedge issues" of guns and religion that Obama was referring too that people "cling" too.

But Obama should have in all his speeches said this and everywhere he appeared on TV or he maybe even should have done a TV ad to explain this.

[Cant trust em]

1. Totally agree. I said that too.

My guess is that this cost him 2 points at least.

[The_Casual_Observer]

2. How? He said a stupid thing. What's to fight?

[SeaLyons]

3. He said what he said....

It's gets a little old to have a candidate who constantly has to make speeches to explain or correct his statements and/or intentions.

Also, he's not much of a fighter. We've seen that.

[BlooInBloo]

4. Not it PA he couldn't. It was a foregone conclusion.

[RBInMaine]

5. Fine to talk about frustration and cynicism. Should have left the wedge issues part alone and

just talked about what to do to reach them more effectively on their bread and butter concerns, especially as a new candidate that they don't know well.

* In another context, it would have been fine to discuss his theories about why the Dem party has lost many rural voters to the R's on guns, god, and gays, and how to work to re-focus electoral attention on bread and butter issues which work for Dems, but you have to be both clear and careful in such an analysis. His word choice in this instance (i.e. "cling to their guns, religion, etc.") was admittedly poor. * In a 2004 Charlie Rose interview, he actually made the same points but explained it much better. Anyone who saw it and comapared would agree that there was no problem with how he said in that interview where he talked about "voting patterns" on "wedge issues" rather than "clinging to guns, religion, etc."

[wowimthere]

6. manufactured fake outrage that never made any sense... People were looking for a reason not to vote

for him. It wasn't a serious issue. It became serious because Hillary gave the media a talking point.

[locker13]

7. i agree

but i also agree with the threadstarter

[jbnow]

8. Agreed. He could have done better, even just

sending a clip to the media where he did say it better before as he claimed he did on TV, like this one from an appearance on Charlie Rose in 2004 where he showed respect for the traditions and understanding
http://youtube.com/watch?v=xkrL0G9wonE
People I talked to that were upset or puzzled by it completely understood when I shared that and things like the fuller context where he did blame government and politicians for letting them down
http://thepage.time.com/transcript-of-obamas-remarks-at-san-francisco-fundraiser-sunday/

Or the posts by the people who were there and heard the volunteers headed to PA and wanting to know what to expect. They were so struck by this thoughtfulness, concern for the people and his compassion, his attempt to give the volunteers a deeper understanding
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-coleman/i-was-there-what-obama-re_b_96553.html
http://momocrats.typepad.com/momocrats/2008/04/obamas-remarks.html#more

I wish he'd gotten it across better. He knew he'd said nothing insulting except for the clumsy wording. He should have made it easier for others to know that was true. I doubt it would have changed this vote much but since the media (and Hillary) value hyped distortion over truth, clarifying the truth is on him.