Hard to believe that this is the best we could do after Bush.

His daily tracking numbers just aren't great and seem pretty stuck.  That one Gallup 6-pt spread BTD cited was a big highwater mark in a remarkably flat and stable tide.  Today he's down to 4, also fairly high compared to recent numbers (mostly 1-3).  Ras him at up by 2, but also has McCain's favorability up by 2 also.  He's just flat.

But myiq has a decent point.  With folks here at home struggling financially, a very large and very hyped Euro-Middle East tour probably doesn't come off so well with a lot of people, who would probably prefer to see their a potential president focusing on the economy and gas prices.

Americans just don't like certain genres of arrogance.  That's why Dems always lose points on the elitism thing.  Big brash cowboy arrogance is fine, John Wayne is fine, America the home of the brave is fine, but arrogance tinged with even a small amount of snobbishness or condescension is not.  The narrative and mythology and history of this country is that no one's any better than anyone else.  And the tour narrative isn't that.

Running around other countries posing for photo ops at the same time most folks back home are trying to figure out how to not freeze to death next winter is not a great vibe to send.  I'm not sure how many favors the media is really doing him making this into a huge hoopla.

if you listened to Obama.

What's he afraid of?

But I suspect this year might be different.  This recession certainly is different, if you listen to the guys on Wall Street and in Washington.  It sounds almost like we are going back to the Great Depression.  

Larry, I will say from my personal experience, many Clinton supporters who don't read blogs are just as angry as the ones you see here. I know men and women who say they won't vote for Obama who have never not voted for our candidate. I don't think her female supporters supported her primarily because she was female, but the anger they have because of the way she was treated is an anger in fellowship with her. We've walked in her shoes in a smaller way and it is hard to forget. That doesn't excuse some of the awful comments I read about Obama, though. I can handle the genuine criticism of any of them but not the personal ones.

No one's asking you to let anything go by.  But you are characterizing others' arguments in such a way that makes it sound as you're some brave truthteller and any who disagree with you are unbalanced.

You did it again here.  Obama has made some very troubling statements regarding abortion and many here have expressed their misgivings.  But you cast Obama's nonsupporters in general as arguing that Obama's as bad as McCain.  It's a generalized attack based on the furthest end of a continuum of opinions expressed.

I do not think a person of integrity would lie about passing legislation that mandated the reporting of nuclear waste leaks when he actually sold out to Exelon by legislating self-regulation. Expediancy trumps the welfare of his constiuents.

I was appalled that his top economic aide, Goolsbee, was essentially telling a foreign government that Obama was lying about renegotiating NAFTA at the same time Obama was telling Americans to vote for him so he could renegotiate NAFTA. And then Obama lied about it some more -- repeatedly, even after the Canadian Goverment produced notes from the meeting.  He didn't admit to it until after the primaries.  This may not come even close to meeting the legal definition of treason, but it felt treasonous to me.  Then he essentially did the same thing with Samantha Powers telling the Scottish Guardian that the 16 month withdrawal plan he had sworn to was nothing more than a "best case scenario." Treacherous, treacherous behavior in my book, and not anything I want in my president.

The Bobby Kennedy/assassination slur was a base and disgusting accusation to make, and not one that belonged in any political discussion, no matter how heated.  I cannot imagine a single other pol trying to use that against an opponent. Ruthless.

The blurring of the Separation of Church and State is one of the things that has distressed me most about the Bush administration. I feel very strongly about this, and I feel betrayed that Obama is positioning himself in much the same way that Bush is. I don't ever want someone who is hungry to be forced to listen to prayers and hymns before they will be fed -- and that is already happening, even with organizations that receive goverment funds. I think this is a dangerous, dangerous precedent to drive.

I am disturbed by Obama grinning at the reference to the "next president" as he helped gut our fourth amendment rights.  This all rolls up into the question of who he is, and what he really stands for.  I don't know.  What little I do know, based on his own actions and words trouble me. I simply fail to detect any integrity or moral center whatsoever in this candidate, -- and I would feel the same way if Hillary had said and done the things he did.

Sorry to go on and on, just trying to give you an idea of why I really do not believe this candidate is decent or capable. I actually find McCain less egregiously dishonest, but I am not blind to the fact that his "maverick" label is media-driven and that he is conservative republican through and through.  I don't think think I agree with McCain on a single issue, except maybe campaign reform.

The fact that you cannot imagine legitimate reasons why someone who supported Clinton can't support Obama does not mean they don't exist.  Until this year, I always, always voted for the (D) name.  Not this year, for a number of reasons that have been hashed and rehashed on TL so I won't start in on them now.

However, a great many nonsupporters of Obama this year are exactly like me -- people with 20, 30, 40 years of voting Democratic.  But this year they're not.  Trust me, we all have plenty of experience with voting for a candidate in the primaries that didn't get the nomination.

Obama is the candidate, his competitors (including Clinton) have conceded, and he's been doing a good job as candidate, especially on his "presidential material" world tour, while McCain just flubs around.

Will there be ups and downs?  Yes.  Will he sometimes (as do all politicians) disappoint?  Yes.  Does McCain have a chance?  Not so much.  Is derangement syndrome as serious an issue when it strikes Clinton supporters as when it hits Obama supporters?  Yes.

Look, I voted for Clinton as well.  Some of the stuff she had to fight against was patently unfair -- the media coverage, cultural baggage she has, through no fault of her own, accrued, and a possible bias in the electorate towards male candidates.  Some of it wasn't fair or unfair, it just is -- like the fact that this year is a "change election" big time.  And some of it, frankly, is her fault.  If her campaign had been running before Super Tuesday the way it was afterwards, she might well be the nominee.