In other news, recent polls in Montana show Obama *this* close to McCain while Clinton lags badly. Additionally, the most recent Gallup poll has Obama 50 and HRC 40. Interesting. My guess is Senator Clinton's going to need to drink a lot more whiskey to get through this.

Yeah, that was my thought too. Obama's saying, these formerly industrial towns have gotten the shaft for 25 years, no wonder they're cynical about change coming from the federal government. What's offensive about that? Once again, Obama shows a real skill for pointing out the elephant in the room.

Wow. In full context there is nothing offensive or really even than patronizing about what he said. At all.

"Bitter" and "cling" should have been replaced with "disillusioned" and "turn to" but even without that switch in its full context we've got a politician actually addressing the truths rather than reciting bullet points and making empty promises.

Clinton should be wise and not overplay her hand on this one. Pennsylvania working class voters won't buy her as a church-attendings, Miller-drinking deer hunter any more than Obama. She should just let it build its own life (if it does, it might not) to John Kerryize Obama or not.

#1: I've long gotten the sense that west of the Mississippi the more working-class white vote favors Obama over Clinton substantially while in the Rust Belt the reverse is true? We've got class, race, gender, and generation talked about constantly but I think there is a geographic split as well. I know some independant voters (pro-gun, socially moderate, working class) in Idaho and New Mexico via my parents and they are all split between Obama and McCain. Clinton is like public enemy #2 after Osama Bin Laden for them, and they are frankly baffled by her supposed "working class roots" out East.

This is just more proof to me that Clinton and McCain both need to be stopped. For those two, millionaires in their own right and far less in touch with "regular folks" than Obama, to take that message and boil it down to patronization? It's fucking criminal.

is it true josh ? are you a clinton delegate ?

It's offensive to portray people as objects of history rather than subjects. To talk about other groups as having beliefs that result from what happens to them via history, rather than being moral actors who make choices.

So saying people cling to their religion or their guns is not only wrong and demeaning. Obama is on TV right now reframing this as in the last decades people lost jobs. No fucking shit. But the problem is he portrayed people as clining to their values and beliefs.

If you said Stranger readers cling to their b3eliefe in Obama due to X or Seattleites cling to their belief in global warming due to Y.....that would be demeaning.

Please stop living in denial by suggesting these remarks are not demeaning. They are demeaning and devastating in a general election. Condescending. Thay are also historically wrong becuase duh, people in PA. loved religion and guns EVEN WHEN they had those great steel jobs.

I like Obama's fighting back and as he is likely nominee he's going to have to fight back a lot, but the denial that this is a huge error is amazing.

Obma is not flawless. Please stop pretending he is. Please recognize he has a vulnerability in being portrayed as an urban effete HArvard liberal and going down the path of McGovern, Dukakis and Kerry. If Obama supporters acknowledged this reality, and problem, we would all be better able to deal with it. But clinging to ultra denial and pretending he's not getting more and more unelectable with every revelation isn't helping.

If OBama can turn this against McCain or HRc fine. But he is on tape saying people cling to their guns and their religion and that with rev. wright gives the GOP everything they need to win OH FL PA MI. He dissed the voters he's trying to lead and represent.

Not smart. Not eloquent. Not unifying. Not new policits, just the old ultra liberal trap. Not change. Not hopeful either, to objectify vast swaths of the voters you need.

If they are Mormon's living in small town Texas, they cling to there 14 year old wives too.

i guess that why my gun-totin', church-goin' folks in the South, like my family, don't have a problem with "cling." some of you non-believers don't understand that "cling," as stated in the bible, is a good thing. they actually appreciate when candidates speak the truth, and even more when they use biblical terms. when i asked them about this controversy, they seemed puzzled. it's a non-issue to them. it's the liberals who have their panties in a twist. and the media is starving for easy stories, because they don't want to cover the real issues (economy, war, foreign relations, etc.)

annie, you are a good, smart writer, but this post is fucking absurd and proof that Obama supporters have no ability to admit that their candidate is ever anything other than perfect.

If you think that equating god and guns to "antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment" is just fine then you are soooooooooooooooooo deep into the koolaid...

Please stop living in denial by suggesting these remarks are not demeaning. They are demeaning and devastating in a general election. Condescending. Thay are also historically wrong becuase duh, people in PA. loved religion and guns EVEN WHEN they had those great steel jobs.

Demeaning? I'm sorry... I've lived in under a president for eight fucking years that's constantly demeaned most of what I believe in. Stating that people in depressed areas are bitter is "demeaning"? That they are clinging to what they have left is off base? I'm just not seeing what's wrong with those statements, and if people are offended by *that*, they're just whiny little babies.

So get off your fucking high horse, asshole.

whenever i read ROMANS, it makes me want to impale a nazarene.

the stranger citing bible nonsense?

What Riz said.

Is Josh a Clinton delegate and if so why hasn't he mentioned that in his articles?

i honestly don't get it. i mean, understand that "bitter" and "cling" are certainly choice words to yank out of context if one wants to foment pseudo-outrage. he should probably know better than to say those things. but in it's full context, there is NOTHING NEW HERE.

if yer interested, here is bill clinton saying the same thing [just replace "bitter" and "cling" with "economically insecure white people" and "scared to death"] in 1991.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/13/bill-clinton-flashback-al_n_96433.html

I would expect a Clinton delegate to regurgitate Faux News talking points. It's funny that this is the worst they have on Obama, that he dares to tell the truth about the facts of economic depression, while their own candidate makes up stories from whole cloth about dodging sniper fire.

@11, so, you think the bible is nonsense. whatever. keep it to yourself. it's offensive. your kind is the reason people run away from Dems. have you considered that there are people of faith on the left? you must be a Ron Paul supporter.

Most of the back-and-forth about this has been between the "latte liberals" that are supposedly so out of touch with all those Real Amurricans, so I'm not moved. Where are these rural Pennsylvanians who were horribly outraged by this - the ones who were plausibly Obama voters until this came along? Have we actually seen anyway? Perhaps throngs of them exist, but I'm not convinced of it quite yet.

Obama's remarks just cost the Democrats the presidential campaign.

It is that simple.

You don't come spouting off your distaste for the 2nd Amendment and private gun ownership, and think you will win Pennsylvania, Virginia, Ohio, Michigan, Texas in the general election. Do you know how many gun loving deer hunters live in those states and VOTE?

Game over.

Say hello to 4 years of President McCain.

This was the final straw to the Dems sinking ship.

Seriously. Legions of voters vote on nothing other than a politicians stand on guns, gun rights, the 2nd Amendment and hunting. Take away any of those, and your political aspirations are over.

Democratic candidates just don't get that. Just wait until both Dems are pinned down for their answer on this question. They'll squirm and avoid their true beliefs, and it will be game over.

It is that simple in a nutshell.

Kool-Aid, Sven? Come on. I grew up in WV, I live in PA, and I'm voting for Obama. I'm sick of politicians pandering to the minority of my neighbors who are fucking maniacs. How stupid do you think we are in the rust belt? I don't hate Clinton, but seeing her try to exploit this makes me sick. Pandering to nativists and xenophobes and reinforcing their bullshit outlook isn't helping the majority of us who aren't psychos.

I can look at older people in my family and see how much of a toll de-industrialization has taken on them. There's a human cost to global economic trends. Those of us that have experienced this know it, and by and large, we aren't going to interpret this kind of language from Obama as an insult. What's insulting is having a hundred-millionaire pretend that those few vocal people who have turned their dissatisfaction into chauvinism ought to be celebrated rather than marginalized.

Eh... I'm an Obama supporter but I'm not going to make this all about "well I think it's true." Not great stuff sure, Obama has got an elitist problem, an anti-america problem (ouch) but he's still a viable candidate. We should be uniting behind him because he will be the nominee.

OK, caveat, if he sucks enough that Clinton wins 80% or whatever she needs to get more delegates then she can win. But "look how strong I finished" won't cut it.

You can say I'm one of the bitter partisans but we all know what opinions are like. I think disgust with the superdelegate system is distinctly different from merely being pissed your candidate didn't win. Maybe I'm wrong, but like all the other wrong people I get a vote.

unPC ... I don't think Obama was saying that the lack of jobs and religion and gun clinging were mutually inclussive.

I'm not even thinking Obama is bashing that, IF anything I think Obama is bashing his own party for failing to address the concerns and beliefs of middle America. Is it fair to say that democrats are at worst insenstive to guns and relgion while the majority are impartial to guns and religion. Personally, I don't give a shit. I'm an aethist and happy, and seriously couldn't give a damn IF people own firearms ... criminal or otherwise, it's obvious people really need them that badly, and I have to accept that. Would I be concerned if people were take away my righ to be an aethist, to be pro-choice, have educational funding, and birth control. Hell yeah.

I think what Obama is trying to say that by ignoring, being impartial, or whatever to the value of guns and religion to people, we have led them to believe that democrats are completely both ANTI-gun and ANTI-religion. If nothing else, Obama is trying to put these people's mind at ease and saying that ... is not what the democrats are out to do.

#20: yes, in full context I also got the sense Obama was saying the Dems had let these people down as much as the GOP, hence their "bitterness" with the system.

@1

Montana has 3 electoral college votes. MI OH PA and FL combined have 75. You need 270 to win.

Give Obama Montana CA WA OR HI NV CO NM MN WI IA MO IL VA DC MD DE NJ and everything else to the NE of that (and hey it's a stretch to give him VA nad MO) and he still loses.
check it out at 270towin.com. Do your own map.

Bottom line has not changed: We need 2 if not 3 out of OH FL PA MI. Usually we assume we get MI and we say we need 2 or 3 of OH PA FL....but this year with Obama being in favor of depriving MI and FL of voting rights, all 4 are in danger now.

The map is not going to change all that much. Yes, there are many redneck Democrats and Archie Bunker Democrats, they are the wswing voters who Democrats lose when Democrats lose, lose, lose, lose, lose and lose presidential elections (Humphrey, McGovern, Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, Kerry).

The problem is Obama is becoming more of a McGovern than a JFK.

The following words make me think the person writing a post is a little dim:
"Drinking the Kool-aid"- For many reasons this is dated and makes you look silly.

Also my born again, voted Republican for the last 25 years, rural relatives and my super Christian co worker are all voting 'Bama. Lets not get too worked up about this.

Karl Rove is smiling right now.

Karl knows that Obama's remarks are right on. Karl was the engineer of a movement that continued the shift of "guns" and "religious" people to the Republican party. Karl discovered that people will take being shafted economically in trade for a couple values they can get out in the street about. Karl helped a large number of people find it a matter of conscience to elect an asshole whose entire presidency defines "elitist".

Perhaps he could have wrapped his thinking in a more palatable package, but Obama is right on...and Karl Rove is smiling.

@20 Newsflash

Most liberal Dems ARE anti gun.

Both Hillary and Barack have strong position statements and/or recent quotes solidifying their hatred of them.

Barack had a chance to bring over some swing voters who might have voted for him provided he had softened his stance on being against the 2nd Amendment. But he has since slipped back down that chasm, and alienated many who believe in most of his message, but aren't willing to sacrifice the 2nd Amendment to see him in office.

Welcome to 4 years of McCain.

Is it the same right winger posting here as four or five sockpuppets, or are there actually that many right wing readers of Slog? Weird.

oh, and WTF is hillary thinking carrying water for the fox news set? was she asleep in 2000 and 2004 when the "all democrats are snobs" line was written and [successfully] deployed? if she gets the nomination, does she really believe she'll be able to escape from under it's weight just by suddenly remembering that one time her grandpa took her duck hunting?

At this point I'm starting to root for McCain. Dems are so worthless anymore that they're going to throw away the first supposedly sure-thing election in my life-time. Maybe Obama screwed himself (I doubt it, but who knows) - but I still don't have any doubt that Hillary can't win either. Right now she's on the offensive and Obama is penned in from saying a lot of things that will absolutely be said in November.

You think Rove is smiling about this? What do you think he's doing about the thought of running against Hillary?!? My god, "she's a fighter," and she no longer has any credibility. The RWC stuff was probably in part true, but once Bill had to apologize, that went away for most Americans. Bosnia is just a microcosm of what the GOP will throw at her - it's as far as Obama could really go within the party - McCain and Rove won't have that same problem.

Yes, these comments aren't great and will probably be an issue. What we'll find out is whether this is really an election where people are willing to listen to what they don't want to hear, because it's important and time for change, or whether the politics of old are going to win out, in which case both candidate are fucked, Obama because of his "elitism," Hillary because a) she's a woman, b) she's a Clinton, c) she's perceived as being untrustworthy, and d) her negatives are already locked in and they inevitably will go up. Maybe 8 years of hell wasn't enough for this country full of dumbfucks, who knows.

@25 Howard Dean ... an example of a democrat who is PRO gun. I forgot that since I moved to the west coast that gun control is in fact a polarizing thing out here.

In fact durring the 2000 election, Howard Dean recieved the PERFECT NRA RECORD, but would still not receive their endorsement ... based on partisonship. When it comes to partisonship ... I hate to say it but, they started it, fuck you very much Tom Delay.

And "hatred" of guns is a strong label for people who want some semblence of gun control. To be perfectly honest, it's been a scare tactic of the NRA that kept dialogue to an imbecil level for the past 50 years.

Peter F, if you were referring to my post @ 8, I am not a right-winger. My entire family always vote Dem. I'm just saying that some liberals hate folks who have guns and/or are religious. And it's too bad. We're on the same side, and you continue to paint anyone who practices religion or owns a weapon as a right wing nut job.

Born and raised in Pittsburgh, family all still there and other PA locales. Have relatives who worked in the mines, mills, and factories. I do take offense to the way he phrased that last statement regardless of what he meant. I find it incredibly condescending. My family and others like them aren't bitter, they're pragmatic. They are certainly not racist, redneck, gun and bible totin', frustrated hicks.

Oh, and of course Clinton jumped on this - she's a freaking politician. Don't forget that he is too.

@30, I haven't painted anyone as anything, nor have I ever said anything disparaging about even disliking gun owners or deeply religious people.

Besides, I agree with your point if not the assumptions about liberals and what we think and feel. I was talking more about the unPC/Wow/Reality Check/McCain-Crist2008/Ed trolling/sockpuppetry.

With all due respect to No. 31, I don't find it terribly offensive or condescening.

I read his statement as implying that in difficult times, people hold fast to the things that remain constant and steadfast in their lives (religion, guns, family, etc.).

Maybe he could have said it better, but the sentiment was right, and had we a rational media, the wording would not have to have been teflon-coated.

Funny when we don't like the truth we're being served, we still have to harp on the messenger.

I'm done. Everything McCain or Bush says is several orders of magnitude more offensive than this passage. This is a ridiculous, ridiculous argument. It is NOT offensive, and only in the context of a democratic challenger attempting to position herself as anything Obama is not does this provide even a news story. Move on.

p.s. GO ANNIE!

I have this theory that unPC and all of unPC's sock puppets are what puts food on Susan's table. She's just a working stiff getting paid to shill for Hillary on the blogs. Seems like a shitty way to make a living, but who are you to jugde? I bet she has bills and maybe kids to feed.

Thank you #33 for respecting my opinion and not resorting to name-calling. I agree that what you said is probably along the lines of what he meant. But that last bit really does comes across to me as "Oh, these poor people, they really don't know any better and can't help themselves because they've been shit on for so long and now they're just miserable and close-minded."

He's not going to convince people that he can make progress by pitying and insulting them at the same time.

Obviously not everyone took it this way, but I did and so did many others. Just because you don't agree with someone else's interpretation, it does not make their take invalid. Are people making too much of a big deal out of it? Perhaps, but that's the game.

Great guy, poor choice of words.

In the final summation, is what he said wrong, or just uncomfortable?

this is not just a case of "the truth hurts".

if someone is overweight, and you tell them, "you are fat," it might be the truth, but it was still delivered in a jarring manner.

if someone is not obviously overweight, and you tell them, "you are fat," it is not only a harsh delivery, but it might not be the truth.

in this case, obama seems to decide for others why they believe something. this makes it highly subjective. even if he's right, the people listening might not think the same thing.

he's done a great job of explaining it. but the "bitter" and "cling" aren't what make it so bad -- they just make it difficult. what makes it bad is deciding why someone feels a certain way for them, saying they "cling to religion" (a good thing) for the wrong reason (because they don't have good jobs).

Wrong.

What Obama is saying is that people don't trust the government anymore, so they are voting to make sure that they don't lose any more of the values they "cling" too. And yes they are bitter, in the sense that their lives are much harder than they should be had the government not made it so easy for their jobs to be shipped overseas.

I'm not sure what all the fuss is about with what Obama said, it seems perfectly clear to me given what I saw the last time I was in rural PA back in '92. It was bad then and I imagine it is worse now.

I wonder ... if there is no such thing as bad publicity, maybe this isn't a bad thing.

Malicious, or well-intentioned (albeit tone-deaf)?

The latter.

OK, I've got to get back to work now. Thanks : )

I honestly didn't find OHB's comments that offensive. But maybe that's just because I realized HRC wrapped this thing up weeks ago. I've moved on...

@44: Do the math, not the news cycle. Obama's guaranteed to come out of the primaries with at least 130 more delegates than HRC. She will never get the nomination.