Loading ...PRESIDENTIAL PERSPECTIVE
Indiana has the pleasure of actually mattering in this Election year. Earlier in the month, Barack Obama visited Plainfield High School. Hillary Clinton visited Ben Davis High School this past Saturday. WXNT producer Chris Spangle covered both and here are his impressions:
Both gyms are of equal size. Both Schools opened space for overflow. Senator Obama filled the entire gym and the auxillary gym used for overflow two hours before the event. Senator Clinton did not have anyone in the auditorium used for overflow. She did not fill the entire main gym. There were at least 50 seats empty out. I’d estimate that 3,000 showed up for Obama, and 2,000 for Clinton.
Both candidates brought a proportionate amount of Indianapolis’s ethnic make-up. There were members of all races, colors, creeds, and religions at these events. Economically, Obama brought more middle-class and upper-class listeners. Clinton had more working-class and union members.
Crowd Reaction: Both crowds were very enthusiastic for their candidate. Surprisingly, Hillary’s crowd cheered more intensely. Could be the building, but they were louder and more fervent. The crowd leaving Obama’s event was more positive on the Senator, and more upbeat. I heard a mixed reaction from the crowd exiting Clinton’s event. Some were inspired, some were calling B.S.
Message: Obama was more a message of hope and unity. It was meant to inspire. Hillary’s was more intellectual. The speech was mostly that the G.O.P. has left the country a disaster, and asking the crowd to remember how wonderful it was under her husband. The job will be hard, but she is the only one to fix it. Obama was more upbeat, saying that while we have problems, they aren’t anything Americans can’t overcome. I won’t say Clinton wasn’t positive, but I did have a looming sense of doom if I didn’t take her advice and elect her.
Campaign Staff: The Obama event was very structured. Press had to register online the day before. Clinton had open press. Obama had three press agents there greeting the press, helping them set up. They also had student ambassadors to keep the press in their spot, and to assist with questions about the school. The two or three hours that I was there, I didn’t meet one member of the Clinton team. No one introduced themselves or asked if I needed assistance. Now, in fairness, the Clinton Camp is doing a lot of stops in a short amount of time, which needs a lot of logistical support and planning. That could have been why there seemed to be a lack of staff wandering around.
P.S. Superdelegate Andre Carson spent a few moments with Barack Obama when he visited earlier this month. He also attended Obama’s speech. Congressman Carson was not present at Senator Clinton’s speech.
March 31st, 2008 at 8:58 am
Obama’s message of hope and unity has gotten old. Has he got anything else? No, he didn’t.
March 31st, 2008 at 9:07 am
Congressman André Carson earlier had prominently attended a Hillary Clinton event up in Anderson…
March 31st, 2008 at 9:13 am
Yeah, but that isn’t in his district…
March 31st, 2008 at 10:17 am
“Congressman André Carson earlier had prominently attended a Hillary Clinton event up in Anderson…”
Who cares what Carson does. The first thing Andre Carson did as a congressman was kiss Queen Nancy’s butt and then voted to raise taxes. I can’t wait until November, Carson will be gone. Good riddance.
March 31st, 2008 at 10:31 am
IndyErnie firmly backed Dickerson and Elrod - he knows how to pick the winners, doesnt he?
March 31st, 2008 at 12:19 pm
“IndyErnie firmly backed Dickerson and Elrod - he knows how to pick the winners, doesnt he”
I recognize the most qualified…that’s for sure. Vote tampering has never sent the better man into any elected office. The 7 Th. has proven this time after time.
March 31st, 2008 at 12:21 pm
“Vote tampering has never sent the better man into any elected office.The 7 Th. has proven this time after time.”
or woman.
March 31st, 2008 at 5:01 pm
Tito, I’ll take “hope and unity” over fearmongering, race baiting, “misspeaking” about coming under sniper fire, trying to win at ANY cost, disenfranchising Las Vegas casino workers, cheating by trying to get the soviet-style vote in Michigan to count, breaking her word to try to get the FLA vote to count, and more.
And I’m a republican who will cross over to vote for Obama, not because I don’t like Sen. McCain (I do), but because for the first time in my voting career, I find myself looking forward to voting FOR a presidential candidate as opposed to against their opponent.
I KNOW that scares the hell out of you and Sen. Clinton’s crew. And it makes me smile.
March 31st, 2008 at 5:11 pm
IndyBar - Too bad you don’t know what you’re voting for. If a bunch of speeches about nothing but “hope, change and unity” from a smooth talking inexperienced politician will make you smile, you need to get out more.
March 31st, 2008 at 6:46 pm
While I won’t vote for Obama, I certainly hope he is the Dems candidate against McCain for a couple of reasons: 1) I’m tired of the lies and divisive politics by the Clintons. It’s been off-putting for the longest time for normal Americans which is why nobody except a vocal minority pays attention to either side anymore. 2) Because the candidates are so dissimilar, I think they’ll each spend more time discussing their respective plans than they will spend tearing each other apart. Yes, they’ll both go negative of course, but they will still focus more of their campaigning on their own policies than on each other. In that sense, they’ll both help bring us back to one America, rather than a bunch of factions or groups living in the same country.
April 1st, 2008 at 9:59 am
All Hoosiers need to know the truth about Hillary Clinton’s NAFTA history. See DailyKos - http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/4/1/85359/24244/36/488126
April 1st, 2008 at 11:18 am
FYI-
The gyms are nowhere near the same size. Ben Davis’ gym seats around 1,000 more than Plainfield’s gym. The more accurate thing would have been to say that the gyms were set up nearly identically.
April 2nd, 2008 at 4:38 pm
I was there Sat and I took crowd shots from every vantage point. It was a packed house.
There was not 50 empty seats. This is exactly why I take these shots. I will be more than happy to send them to you.
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:14 pm
At the risk of further condecension from Shelia Seuss Kennedy or the black Pastor from the Christian Theological Seminary, I’m still looking for logic versus rhetoric from Sen. Obama. I would dearly LOVE to vote for a uniting, oratorically profound leader, able to unit all kinds of demographic spectrums in America. But, when the main summation of the guys voting and legislative record is “present”, and he’s determined not to distance himself from a 20 year influence who has managed to appall at least half of America, what am I suppossed to do? All I’ve heard are ways to spend money, with no sacrifice required. I’m not buying it.
April 3rd, 2008 at 6:20 am
At the risk of being called a racist…. There is of course that saying, if it sounds too good to be true it probably is. It seems anyone that takes on the Obama juggernaut is labeled a racist. Frankly, I do not care if he is purple, I like some meat with my milk in the old baptist way.
April 3rd, 2008 at 8:15 am
Right there with you, MD. I’d vote for anybody orange with a horn growing out of their head, if they’ll get specific on the issues and I concur with their stands relative to the other guy. Good luck with health.
April 5th, 2008 at 8:36 pm
Some of this chatter about Andre is really juvenile and won’t get a response from me. Got a preview of Myers yet-to-be-released TV ad. It is great. This is a guy who genuinely cares about people, and, as you will see, about the environment. I am a Myers convert.
April 6th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
Thank you Taxpayer 834512 for your good wishes on my recovery from cancer. A event such as this does wake one up about this whole health care debate, not taking sides today on which is right and wrong. I see elements on both sides with merit. Taking positions on stands concerns me unless we could make a firm law that says if you take a position once elected you have to hold true to it period. The honest reality is regardless of whom gets elected they needs a support base in the Congress to get a roll of toilet tissue shipped to the Pentagon at 10 times the retail cost with 15 copies in triplicate of the Requisition and Purchase Order and either parties Senator’s earmark. Get my point. All this discussion of he, she, they will do this or that is stupid because with or without some base (not saying that the base has to be of your party if elected president) you get nothing done anyway. We have been rolling from side to side for too long. Bush even with dominance of his own party got little done on his original agenda pre-911. Not to get into that debate either. For a Unifier it sure seems that 8 years after his election we are more divided than ever. War/Peace, Rich/Poor, Healthcare/No Healthcare. all of it is a mess to the point that I have said and continue to say, give me a mountain with internet access, a case of Skol Vodka and I will move.
April 6th, 2008 at 10:58 pm
That’s why I propose (more like dream) of undertaking tasks requiring “bipartisan sacrifice”. Theoretical example: Pursuing less domestic spending (affecting the less affluent more) in conjunction with removing tax loophole(s) (affects the more affluent). As I believe our greatest threat to be economic, I think first of our different polarizations along the lines of production and comsumption, with each respective “side” equitably strong enough that zilch is going to get done without this perception of joint sacrifice. Maybe there will be across the board spending reduction. I think it’s more likely losing a city or a literal revolution to bring this magnitude of change. We’ll continue to flop in the bottom of the boat awhile longer. Last Indiana assembly being an example: a diluted pursuit of tax caps and township government reduction with zilch on lobbyist reform or hiring/immigration reform (despite voter support for all four).
April 7th, 2008 at 8:07 am
Well all that is very true Taxpayer834512… you make some interesting ideas there. However, those in power will never allow a law to dilute their power. That is an age old story shown in every civilized nation over and over again throughout our human existence. Power corrupts as we all know. I long ago gave up on my party to be solvers of problems and surely dont trust the other party to be solvers of problems. The very notion of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit is just that a notion. Now that our once agricultural nation is an industrial one, and that the industrial one is now service based (having shipped our jobs to other countries) and rampant crime, economic uncertainty, etc. that mountain, my vodka and the internet seems more enticing than ever.
April 7th, 2008 at 10:40 am
Agreed. Looking like better shot with benevolent monarchy (easy there, Abdul). Otherwise, after getting the birdies out of the nest, will be headed up the mountain for next shift behind you.
April 7th, 2008 at 11:07 am
Taxpayer 834512-
‘with each respective “side” equitably strong enough that zilch is going to get done without this perception of joint sacrifice.’ This pretty much sums it up-personal sacrifice. Politicians must do what is right at all cost and do what the majority of their constituents demand. Case in point is every poll I saw regarding property tax repeal was that most Hoosiers wanted it but, obviously the politicians ignored that. Go to the STOPINDIANA site and read the quotes from OUR representatives and it will make you sick.
-
MissouriDemocrat -sorry to hear about your cancer, fight hard and stay positive, our prayers are with you.
April 7th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
Thanks Jon G and Taxpayer, the code at the gate to the mountain top is 1234 and then shout “here we go” it opens right up. I was wondering when the last time a politician did do what was right? Hum….
April 7th, 2008 at 2:42 pm
Is that mountain in Montana? If it is I’m right behind you guys.