Barack Obama’s interview with Chris Wallace wasn’t a particularly convincing performance. Here’s a particularly noteworthy Wallace-Obama exchange:

WALLACE: Let’s take a look at the numbers. Among white union households, Clinton beat you 72 percent to 28 percent. Among white Catholics, again, same margin, 72 percent to 28 percent. Senator, why are you having such trouble convincing white working class voters that you’re their guy?

OBAMA: Well, keep in mind that Senator Clinton was well regarded in the state of Pennsylvania, just as she was well regarded in the state of Ohio. The fact that they voted for her shouldn’t come as a huge surprise. We started out 20 points down in that race, just like we started 20 points down in Ohio. And we actually made significant progress there.

And when you look at the polling that’s now being done post- Pennsylvania, about how we match up in a general election, I think Senator Clinton maybe does a couple of points better than I do, but it’s not substantial.

Most of the voters will vote for me. But you know, they are more familiar with her. She’s from a bordering state. On the other hand, in Wisconsin, I won those same voters over Senator Clinton. In Virginia, I won those voters over Senator Clinton. In Iowa, I won the voters over Senator Clinton.

So I think that, you know, I am confident that when you come to a general election, and we are having a debate about the future of this country, how are we going to lower gas prices, how are we going to deal with job losses, how are we going to focus on energy independence, that those are voters who I will be able to appeal to.

Good luck selling that after being tied to Jeremiah Wright’s racism, William Ayers’ terrorism and Tony Rezko’s corruption. The times that Sen. Obama won blue collar voters were before Pastor Wright’s anti-American diatribes and Sen. Obama’s elitist fundraising speech.

As I’ve told others, the bloom is off that rose. After all that, they aren’t buying into his ‘I share your values’ schtick anymore.

The reactions are starting to filter in on Sen. Obama’s interview with Chris Wallace. Here’s the most absurd review I’ve seen yet:

Greg Sargent’s blog post ‘Obama Doesn’t “Take Fox On,” After All’ kind of says it all. Obama is sucking up to Fox News, and beyond that, the campaign operative who said he would just out and out gave false information.

You can’t trust the Obama campaign, they will lie to you to promote right-wing institutions.

The lefties are attacking Sen. Obama for being a liar? If the Kossacks are attacking him, Sen. Obama’s got big trouble in Indiana. Here’s what one of the KosKids said:

I have been quiet on the presidential campaign. I’m not much of a political writer in the first place and am firmly of the opinion that you should only write to your strengths. However, Obama’s appearance on Fox news was a tactical mistake of massive proportions. In addition, it legitimized the greatest threat to our country, fact free debate. As such, Obama has lost my vote.

WOW!!! That’s pretty harsh. Here’s a reaction from Democratic Underground:

Big mistake to go on Fox and reward the smarmy Wallace

and let him frame the issues. But, in a sense, it DOES show progressive that Obama really isn’t one…lesser of two evils, at best, and all too willing to “accomodate” and sell us out on issue after issue, and procedure after procedure in the Senate.

Sad, but not unexpected, or anything that those of us who’ve been paying attention over the past several years haven’t seen and heard before…

Barack isn’t a progressive? Chris Wallace “smarmy”? P-L-E-A-S-E.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , ,

Cross-posted at California Conservative

Leave a Reply