Bill Clinton has always been the best at making voters feel that he understood them and their problems.

Hillary, not so much, but she has learned how through disciplined effort.
Obama can wow a crowd, but he can't touch their hearts.
McCain has that war hero, "I'll keep you safe" thing going for him.

However, the best of your ideas IMHO, BTD, is the American exceptionalism stuff.

The thing that McCain will use against Obama most is the "God D**n America" sentiment expressed so eloquently by Reverend Wright.

I'd say, keep bringing out the kids. Show Obama at a baseball game. Make sure the Obamas' house has a flag in front of it. Find some patriotic stuff that Obama did.

Had he done what you suggested prior to Super Tuesday, he might have truly won by now.  

The fact that he didn't tells you a lot.  If he can't reach out to the base during a primary season, what makes anyone think he will do it in the general?

Big Tent does favor an Obama/Clinton ticket, but the support for that seems less than vigorous, especially among Talk Left comments, where the idea of Hillary taking a back seat to Obama provokes raw and wide-spread rage.

Mostly, even including Big Tent's posts, the argument here is that only Hillary stands a chance of winning in November.

Although such an outcome is unlikely, Hillary is still a viable candidate.

What if a significant number of Obama supporters, like Big Tent, publicly threw their support to Hillary on the notion of who can actually win? It might make a difference.

Are we agreed that the problem is Obama's electability in the fall - his inability to attract Clinton-supporting working-class folks (white and Hispanic) in numbers great enough to win the presidency?  And his inability to heal the divisions within the party...

Assuming without Clinton on the ticket - right?  Obama and 'somebody.'

If it's Obama/somebody, we're doomed.

And if it's Hillary/somebody, we're doomed.

Hillary/Obama...maybe.

Best bet:  Gore/Clinton  (mostly likely combination to heal the party, get the nomination, win the election).

But what does Obama have to differentiate himself from Bill Clinton, and lead to success instead of Clinton's supposed failure?

"The primary has been exceptionally good for Party building. Obama has created a number of significant infrastructure pieces through his campaign, displacing traditional groups the way he promised he would by signaling the end of the old politics of division and partisanship.

Obama made his bet that the country isn't into ideological combat and wants a politics of unity and hope, and he has won at [sic] internally. From top to bottom, they have destroyed their opponents within the party, stolen out from under them their base, and persuaded a whole set of individuals from blog readers to people in the pews to ignore intermediaries and believe in Barack as a pure vessel of change."

Where to start?

"The primary has been exceptionally good for Party building." This, of course, in spite of their efforts to crush it.

Gloating that Obama has "displaced traditional groups" and "destroyed his opponents within the party." This is something to be proud of?!  

And by destroying Democratic groups and opponents, he has "won internally" at creating a "politics of unity"?!  The cognitive dissonance makes one reel.

"Barack as a pure vessel of change"?!  Do they really expect moderates to be anything but nauseated by such talk?

The framework and argument behind Obama's campaign seems to be that the problems we have are, at their root caused by the culture of politics we have created- from lobbyist influence, to pandering policy proposals to partisanship defining idealism.  Everything in his campaign comes at us through that narrative frame (and, for the moment, I think it's fair to give him credit for sincerity in the underlying belief in this line of reasoning, though I have to admit at times during the campaign I've had serious doubts and felt it is some kind of a gimmick).  Thus far in the campaign, he hasn't been arguing that we don't need to address the problems of the working class, he's argued that in order to address those problems we first need to change the culture of politics (this, btw, is I think his biggest liability, or one of them in the general... McCain is going to try to steal this issue from them- that's the Rove/Atwater playbook- you attack the strength and make it into a weakness, and McCain, at least in the mind of many w/ his name being attached to campaign finance reform has the credibility to do this).  

He believes he doesn't need Michigan or Florida, he believes most of what Rev. Wright has preached to him for 20 years, he believes Bill and Hillary are essentially running a racist campaign, he believes he doesn't need white blue collar workers, he believes Latinos are not worth a special effort to bring into the party, he believes he's smarter than you.

Occasionally he gets it right, as when he opposed the obviously stupid gas tax holiday idea. But mostly not.

The sad truth appears to be that someone with an elitist attitude, expressed over and over again, will have no authenticity trying to adopt a populist message.  

It's too bad that his health care plan isn't universal since more and more people have no insurance and those who do are seeing their premiums rise and their coverage get worse.

It's too bad that he has felt it necessary to bad mouth the last Democratic administration for no other reason than that if he had something nice to say it migh - gasp! - have helped that awful Hillary Clinton.

It's even worse, and I can find no way to defend or excuse it, that for the same reason - his own self-interest - he chose to condone and encourage attacking the Clintons as racists when he knows - we all know - that they are no such thing.  Self-interest again, but in a way that has poisoned and undermined race relations in a way that will take a long time to heal - if it does.

He has plans to not "waste time" in some of the upcoming primary states and is willing to "give" a few to her by not actively campaigning so much.

It is just like his "no time" to debate excuse.

No time for those states, no time to debate, no time to talk to the people I can't win.

A hell of a job baracky.

Donna doesn't need blue-collars and hispanics, why should he bother?  Is it pathological lies?  

He will have "time" to work on a new rhetoric, um, historic speech to capture women and hispanics and lunch buckets. All will be okay!

What is this about May 20th declaration of victory?

Then he can't spend a week in Puerto Rico with Michelle and the kids!  

Presumptive, arrogant, Bush-like vacation time from now till the end, his end not hers?

What?

But he has not run on these issues. He's run on his judgment and character.

And his personality is where McCain will clobber him like grizzled old hunter clobbering a baby seal.

Here's what Obama should have done if he really wanted to win the GE and not just the primary:

1. Wait until after HRC's second term to run for President. The Republicans would have been in permanent minority mode at that point and the country would be well on its way to ship-shapedness.
   
2. Run on charisma, bumper stickers and party identity.

I doubt he can say or do much convince people that have decided to never vote for him.  You see, he threw the baby out with the bathwater when his campaign took up the right wing talking points and exploited the negatives of the House of Clinton.  

Then there is the double standard of "no more legacies"  while trying to appear like the next JFK...  That beloved family is still involved in politics.  I guess by those standards Bobby should never run for POTUS?

There has just been too many questionable activities and immature behavior from Obama.  He is not POTUS material.  Kids might think it is cool to reference Jay-Z when talking about a rival, but that should be left for high school rivalries, not a world stage one.  

He can say whatever he thinks will work.  He damaged his campaign all by himself.  The gems he has handed the GOP will astound us.  Why do you think so many of these instances have been under reported or not covered by the media at all??

I do not believe he is qualified. And while in past years, I would be compelled to vote for the no matter what, not this time. If he wins, it will largely be based on branding the Clintons as racist, as well as benefiting from the rampant Clinton hate and sexism in the mainstream media.  

I am just sick to death of the way that his campaign pronounced him as something new and historic, along with the media, and Clinton as something old and done. Why is the first woman president any less historic than the first black man? Why do women matter less? This constant undervaluing of women and of the struggles we have overcome just infuriates me.

Howard Dean last week was quick to tell FOX that their coverage of the Wright matter was racist, but where was Dean when women begged him to speak out against the sexism in the press? Where was he? The DNC told callers that he would be releasing a press statement, but that statement never came. Dean did not stand up for women when we begged him to, and now he wants me to stand by the DNC because I am afraid of Roe v. Wade?

No, he will not earn my vote. I will not be called a racist for the next eight years for not supporting him and I will not be threatened with Roe v. Wade by the very people who refused to stand up for me, for Hillary, and for all women by speaking out against the sexism in the press.

I personally do not like Obama, he is neither hope nor change, they have painted the Clintons as racists, he is inexperienced and is not qualified to be President. I also believe Michele Obama is VERY racist, anyone read her thesis? I will also leave "president" blank, but support the down ticket Dem candidates to help cancel out McCain.

Obama is another McGovern, Dukakis, Kerry type LOSER candidate that the Democrats insist on running. The super delegates need to grow some testicles and put forth the STRONGEST Democratic candidate against John McCain....... That is Hillary Clinton. Obama winning all those western states and republican states is bull$hit He simply can not win. Does anyone really believe Virginia and Florida will be blue? Besides, I have also heard racist remarks at work such as , I will not put a"N-word" in the white house, as sad as it is, it's out there.

Patriotism? This is a huge problem and no speech is going to change it much like the speech about Rev. Wright didn't change anything. The problem here is his associations. He didn't clean up before running so there's really not a whole lot he can do.

Populism? He tried that and it didn't work in OH. He looked even worse trying to do it than just going with his pro Nafta stance.

As far as "toughness" goes, that's going to be difficult to because he's already pretty much campaigned as "weak and right" when it comes to fp. Maybe it would help if he even articulated a foreign policy. All I've seen is "I'll talk to dictators unconditionally and the I won't talk to them without conditions."

I also think the small group, roll up his sleeves connection is good.

I think Obama needs to latch onto some populist issues

i think he should promote things he believes in.  I don't think he needs to make up policies he doesn't support.  

The second two suggestions I agree 100%. Frankly I think the third one is enough. If he can REALLY nail the patriotism one that alone would be enough. That's hard though. Republicans managed to make John Kerry look unpatriotic/weak. I think they can make anyone look unpatriotic/weak because the media give them that frame and it's assorted memes hook line and sinker.

Defeating the famed Clinton political machine, will notch up his toughness as well. Hillary is a top ranked political heavy weight, with Bill the ex-champion in her corner.

1 - The fact that he voted against torture

2 - He voted for Telecom Immunity

3 - He came out against a bill that would allow Women the right to sue for discrimination because what we really need is more "training".

4 - He has voted with Republicans 89% of the time.

5 - He has spent the least amount of time voting in the senate of any of the three candidates running despite the fact that he won his race ages ago.

6 - He wants to kick Russia out of the G-8, and can't tell Sunni's from Shia's without help from Lieberman

Having said this, I have not yet contributed to "Solve The Problem", and I guess it is because I feel the clouds of dust bursting around us have obscured the issues for me.  I think HRC should stay in the race until she decides it's over, and if BHO is the front runner, he should wait for this time as well.  With FL/MI I can not even begin to fathom the idea of disenfranchisement as I have not completely understood the process that left these states in the situation they now find themselves.  I wish the rules that have set up this situation were readily available (maybe somebody will point me toward a publication of them).

When Bill was running in his first primary I did not support him, but when he was nominated, my support was complete.  If HRC is nominated, I will give here as much support as I will give if BHO is nominated, who at the moment I do support.

And, I don't see the toughness problem.  Some HRC folks like to (rightly) talk about BO being tough in some of his previous elections.  And, (here's a secret) he's being tougher than most realize in this election.  And, he has been tough as he's been successful in government in IL (even before the last two years when Ds had control) and DC (lead D: online gov. spending accountability and expanded international arms control, one of two lead Ds: biggest ethics reform in 25 years.)  

You may not chatter. Read the comment rules.

All new users are from now on limited to 10 comments in a 24 hour period. For 30 days.

We close comments at around 200 because that's all our servers can take. Too many comments by the same person, particularly if they are just here to snipe, reduces the ability of all to have a say.