Diversity Training

This is great.

The sign went up Sunday evening, bold black letters against the stark white background of the marquee at the Colony South Hotel Conference Center in Clinton: "Country First. McCain/Palin."

Sounds pretty provocative, no?

By daybreak, pandemonium had broken loose all across heavily Democratic Prince George's County. Many local supporters of Democrat Barack Obama, jolted by the message as they headed down Branch Avenue on their Monday morning commutes, grabbed cellphones and BlackBerrys to notify friends. Operators of neighborhood e-mail group lists cried foul to their memberships. The NAACP logged calls. Community leaders demanded boycotts of the hotel, a common venue for Democratic events.

It's pretty shocking, in a political campaign, to see a sign for the candidate you're not supporting.

The outcry over the hotel marquee tapped into the passion -- and sometimes anger -- that has characterized this fall's presidential campaign. Supporters of Republican candidate John McCain have vented their rage at rallies this week, applauding thunderously as McCain's running mate, Sarah Palin, accused Obama of "palling around with terrorists."

Yes, it's been a passionate campaign. Usually, though, people maintain some perspective.

Prince George's, though, is clearly Obama Country. As the nation's wealthiest mostly black community, where about 77 percent of registered voters are Democrats, residents have Obama placards in their yards, bumper stickers on their cars and the candidate's visage on their T-shirts.

Ah, so their goal is to be delusional - and they want nothing to interfere with the fantasy that Republicans aren't part of the equation.

The marquee supporting the GOP ticket in "an area that is strongly African American was like putting a stink bomb in the middle of the living room," said University of Maryland political Professor Ron Walters. "What it does show is the emotions that are around this campaign and this election."

Aren't there at least some angry Hillary supporters in Clinton?

Broken Home

Why is Barack struggling still to get the support of Democrats?

Barack Obama's support from backers of Hillary Rodham Clinton is stuck smack where it was in June, a poll showed Tuesday, a stunning lack of progress that is weakening him with members of the Democratic Party in the close presidential race.

This should have been job one for Barack - settling the score with Hillary, and closing the deal with her supporters.

An Associated Press-Yahoo News poll shows that among adults who backed his rival during their bitter primary campaign, 58 percent now support Obama. That is the same percentage who said so in June, when Clinton ended her bid and urged her backers to line up behind the Democratic senator from Illinois.

Are Democrats too racist to adapt to Barack? Or are Hillary supporters too committed to electing a woman to let go?

The poll shows that while Obama has gained ground among Clinton's supporters — 69 percent view him favorably now, up 9 percentage points from June — this has yet to translate into more of their support.

While Barack hasn't been able to swing them, McCain has been more successful.

Those supporting McCain have also edged up from 21 percent to 28 percent, with the number of undecided staying constant, the survey showed.

The Hillary problem explains why McCain gets better support from GOP voters than Barack does with Dems - 87% to 74%.

Yet they find Obama less likable, honest, experienced and inspiring than Democrats overall do, and have a better view of McCain. And while majorities of Clinton supporters say Obama shares their values and understands ordinary Americans, they're less likely to say so than Democrats overall.

"It's just a gut feeling, my gut tells me he's not it," Leslye Burgess, 53, a federal Treasury Department manager and Democrat from Fairfax, Va., said of Obama. The Clinton supporter added, "I'll have to fight with myself between now and November" about how she'll vote.

Will they suck it up and go for Barack on election day?

Loose Change

One ticket talks about change, the other has a proven ability to deliver it. Once again, McCain/Palin proves itself to be the true change ticket, as it forces change on Barack Obama.

As of this weekend, Barack no longer represents "Change We Can Believe In."

Barack Obama has suddenly changed his campaign slogan and signage replacing the 19 month Obama campaign event staple with a new one: "Change We Need."

The addition of Sarah Palin has created turmoil in the presidential race, and forced a revamping of the Obama approach.

Former Howard Dean guru Joe Trippi explains that Barack is making the mistake that Hillary made during the primaries - he's running as an insider, forgetting the enormous power of the change message:

What worked for Obama is now working for McCain. The important lesson for the Obama campaign is that the Clinton campaign kept looking at its research, kept stressing experience and did not adjust until it was too late. The McCain campaign has not only adjusted to the Obama message, they have changed the terrain.

The tables have been turned - McCain/Palin represents a change ticket - real mavericks who've practiced and achieved change, not just used it as a brand. Obama's got to find his way back onto the playing field.

Now the Obama campaign and its allies need to understand that in arguing that John McCain represents a third term of George Bush and the GOP agenda it is the Obama campaign that risks sounding partisan in a country that yearns for the post-partisanship of “country first” and “shaking things up in Washington.”

What does Trippi think Obama should do?

Get back to being an outsider. And get there fast. Clinton adjusted too late. McCain may have adjusted in the nick of time. Will Obama’s campaign make the right adjustment now?

Rollin' with Colin

Will Colin Powell endorse Barack? Speak, perhaps, at the convention? Fox News commentator Bill Kristol says that's what he hears from inside the Obama campaign.

“He may well give a speech at the Democratic convention explaining his
endorsement of Obama,” Kristol, a FOX News contributor, said, citing inside
sources.

Powell says it's not true.

“I do not have time to waste on Bill Kristol’s musings,” Powell told ABC News.
“I am not going to the convention. I have made this clear.”

Clear to whom?

Kristol said sources told him Powell will “quite possibly” speak at the
Democratic convention on the same night as Obama’s vice-presidential selection
and former President Bill Clinton. “The Obama people are quietly trying to
line up a pretty strong convention,” Kristol said. “I think the Obama campaign
shouldn’t be underestimated. Obviously anyone would like to have Powell’s
endorsement.”

Add a Touch of Forbes

John Kerry for Vice President?

A top aide to U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) during her presidential run this year said Tuesday night that U.S. Sen. John Kerry has been vetted to be presumptive Democratic nominee Barack Obama's running mate.

Now there's an idea for how Barack can shake the "elitist" rap.

Howard Wolfson, who was the primary spokesman for Clinton's campaign, said that he has "heard some rumors" about Kerry (D-Boston) being vetted on Fox News Tuesday, where he has since become a political analyst.

Wolfson also said that Kerry would be a smart pick for Obama.

Howard must still be a little hot over Hillary's loss to Obama.

"Look, John Kerry has been vetted," Wolfson said. "He ran for president. I think he would be a strong choice. He'd be a good choice, especially in the context of foreign policy."

I Have a Wife

Why is the Obama campaign doing this?

Sen. Barack Obama's campaign announced yesterday that his wife, Michelle, will be the star attraction on the opening night of the Democratic National Convention, Aug. 25 in Denver.

It strikes me as a mistake. Michelle comes across as strident - a black activist, not an American political wife who happens to be black.

Two of the dates will be rich with symbolism: Clinton, who came closer than any woman in history to winning a major party nomination for president, will speak on the 88th anniversary of women receiving the right to vote, and Obama will give his acceptance speech on the 45th anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech.

Do Americans want a party on a barrier breaking mission, or do they want to see leaders prepared to attend to the nation's business? And who benefits from a Clinton overdose?

The New York Daily News reported that Clinton has raised the idea of being introduced by her daughter, Chelsea, which would make the convention truly a family affair. Former president Bill Clinton is scheduled to address the delegates on Wednesday night.

Okay - so Democrats want to calm women who are upset still over Hillary losing the nomination to Barack's lies on the war, but what's Bill doing there? The timing is amusing - to have him speaking at a time when John Edwards has put sexual escapades back in the news.

I Have a Clinton

Why is the Obama campaign doing this?

Sen. Barack Obama's campaign announced yesterday that his wife, Michelle, will be the star attraction on the opening night of the Democratic National Convention, Aug. 25 in Denver.

It strikes me as a mistake. Michelle comes across as strident - a black activist, not an American political wife who happens to be black.

Two of the dates will be rich with symbolism: Clinton, who came closer than any woman in history to winning a major party nomination for president, will speak on the 88th anniversary of women receiving the right to vote, and Obama will give his acceptance speech on the 45th anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech.

Do Americans want a party on a barrier breaking mission, or do they want to see leaders prepared to attend to the nation's business? And who benefits from a Clinton overdose?

The New York Daily News reported that Clinton has raised the idea of being introduced by her daughter, Chelsea, which would make the convention truly a family affair. Former president Bill Clinton is scheduled to address the delegates on Wednesday night.

Okay - so Democrats want to calm women who are upset still over Hillary losing the nomination to Barack's lies on the war, but what's Bill doing there? The timing is amusing - to have him speaking at a time when John Edwards has put sexual escapades back in the news.

On Media Bias

Since most Democrats have always argued that media bias doesn't exist - that it's a fantasy of the conservative mind, and worse - that it's impossible - it has been a satisfying year for those of us who advance the theory.

It was very exciting when Democrats themselves, in the form of the Clintons, complained about how they were treated in the media compared to Barack. Bill was downright bitter before the New Hampshire primary when explaining, in response to a voter question, whether Hillary would join Barack in calling for a new kinda politics.

"Nobody would be happier to see all this go away than us. But you can’t ask somebody who is at a breathtaking disadvantage in the information coming to the voters to ignore that disadvantage and basically agree to put bullets in their brains," he said.

Saturday Night Live did such a nice job spoofing Hillary's newfound media irrelevance that the media was impacted.


Now, of course, there's the Obama World Tour, dutifully covered by the three networks by sending their anchors along, when McCain's overseas trips have received virtually no coverage.

"If this were John McCain's first trip to the war zone, that would be a story and we would cover it big time," said Paul Friedman, the senior vice president of CBS News.

Okay. That's a point. But don't the networks still have an obligation to maintain some level of balance?

The Tyndall Report, a news coverage monitoring service that has the broadcast networks as clients, reports that three newscasts by the traditional networks — which have a combined audience of more than 20 million people — spent 114 minutes covering Obama since June; they spent 48 minutes covering McCain.

It is, I believe, the combination of two factors that leads to the lopsided Obama coverage. One is the fact that reporters love the guy. But then there's the issue of commerce.

The news industry's fascination with Obama has carried over to general-interest magazines, with the candidate landing on considerably more covers in recent months than has McCain. In the last couple of weeks Obama has graced the front of Rolling Stone and, for the second time now, that of Us Weekly (both of which are owned by the company of a prominent Obama supporter, Jann Wenner).

Covers are responsible for people making spontaneous grabs at magazines.

Beth Jacobson, a spokeswoman for Wenner Media, said they were among the better-selling magazines of the year.

Ned Martel, the deputy editor of Men's Vogue, said, "He's what is called in the magazine world an 'interest driver.' " The magazine put Obama on its cover in 2006 and has recently dispatched the photographer Annie Liebovitz to produce another spread for an upcoming issue. It did do a feature on McCain in 2006 as well; it did not make the cover.

Whatever the reason, the media is failing to do its job properly - in a big way.