Opinion, please: Oprah help or hurt Obama?

Obamas and WinfreyA few comments about Oprah and Obama.

So yes, expect loud, rousing rallies in all three early voting states when Oprah Winfrey comes to town with her friend Barack Obama in early December, with gobs of media attention, raucous crowds, emotion and great pictures. But don’t expect those events to do anything productive to allow Obama to get over the biggest hurdle standing between him and the White House. American voters are not looking for a celebrity or talk show sidekick to lead them. Obama is an intelligent and thoughtful potential President, but Winfrey’s imprimatur is unlikely to convey those traits to many undecided voters.

In that respect, Winfrey’s events might even be — dare it be said — counterproductive.[1]


This Oprah-palooza is a big test for her famous power to bring in women, particularly white women. White women are, of course, the basis of her great success.

She is also, obviously, a black woman and she is also trying to pry black votes from Hillary Clinton. So she is telling her female audience don’t buy that solidarity thing and vote for a woman — Hillary — but telling black people do buy the solidarity thing and vote for the black man.

It’s tricky, but I predict she’ll get away with it [2]


“I’m not lying, I came here to see Oprah. I know nothing about him,” said Sandy Beasley, 43, of Amherst. “Everybody wants to see Oprah.” [3]

And check out this video. CNN has a report of a poll that Oprah could have a negative effect.

So my question: has Oprah helped or hurt Obama? Or, has she had no effect?

Inquiring minds want to know 😉

Technorati Tags: ,


48 thoughts on “Opinion, please: Oprah help or hurt Obama?

    The Truth About Obama’s Voting Record
    Posted by RollinTruth on Thursday, January 17, 2008 3:07:53 PM
    The tendency of Barrack Obama to vote “present” on controversial matters during his time in the Illinois State Senate is getting some media attention lately, and his campaign has sought to dismiss the criticism by claiming there were good, sound political strategies involved in Obama’s decision to avoid voting.

    The most absurd aspect of the whole story is not his votes — which are already pretty absurd — but rather his attempted defense of those votes. Obama’s defense of not doing the job he was elected to do? He couldn’t vote on those bills, because his votes would’ve been used against him when he ran for reelection.

    HUH? Since when is it a legitimate argument to say, “I didn’t vote on that bill, because it would hurt my political future.” Even worse is that much of the liberal press has actually accepted this ridiculous, indefensible opportunistic point of view. So, pretty absurd and inexcusable, right?

    Oh, but wait — it gets better! Not only does he admit his votes (or lack thereof) were based on purely political calculations, and not only does the mainstream media accept and defend his argument. Deciding to just take the ball and run with it, Obama and his supporters say that not voting out of personal political opportunism is in fact an example of true leadership on these issues he wouldn’t vote on!

    What is interesting is that during all this examination of Obama’s record in the Illinois Senate, nobody is raising the issue of Obama’s serial non-voting in Congress. Let’s take a look at how he voted during his long one-year career in the U.S. Senate:

    He skipped voting on 26 of 59 budget, spending, and tax measures – that means he didn’t bother to vote on 44% of these measures during his entire career in the Senate. He skipped NINE out of fifteen votes on health related measures. He skipped voting on FIVE of six transportation measures in 2007. He skipped voting on FOUR of five welfare-related measures. He skipped voting on about half of environmental-related measures. He skipped voting on half of education measures. He constantly skipped out on votes relating to farm subsidies and agriculture expenditures.

    He voted AGAINST a bill that would deny legal status to undocumented immigrants convicted of aggravated felonies, domestic violence, stalking, violation of protection orders, crimes against children, or crimes relating to the illegal purchase or sale of firearms. But then he voted FOR a bill reducing the number of guest workers. Now, regardless of one’s view on immigration in general, if you had to choose between allowing in MORE criminals or MORE legal workers, which would you choose? That’s all I’m saying!

    He skipped voting on future military funding for Iraq, as well as multiple other Iraq funding measures, skipped voting on the Iraq Withdrawal Amendment, after first voting AGAINST it a few months earlier; and he also skipped voting on the measure designation Iran’s Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization. But he’s been running around the country for months saying he opposes the war and that he’ll end the war, while being unwilling to go on record about any of it. I’m not saying he should have voted for a withdrawal, I’m just saying he’s like a lot of cowardly liberals who say something but are unwilling to actually risk backing it up with action.

    Finally, in an apparent attempt to continue his strong record of leading by non-example from his grand days in the Illinois Senate, Obama skipped voting on two of three abortion-related bills in Congress. At least on this issue, his vote — or rather, non-vote — has remained consistent, I guess.

    Well, that’s one way to ensure the Republican candidate won’t be able to attack him for his record in the Senate — just avoid having one!

  2. I must admit that I am facinated by the backward logic I see on various websites, including this one, which attempts to trivialize Obama’s association with Rev Wright for the past 20 years. I, along with a lot of people, had hoped that Obama was different and would be the true curator of “change”. However, it is clear that he does not have the capability of bringing about the kind of “change” we need in America. There is no reasonable explanation as to why and how someone can sit voluntarily amongst a congregation for some 20 years listening to the venomn that this man, his self-proclaimed mentor, has preached and not in some form or fashion be in agreement. People…This isn’t a classroom which you might be forced to sit through to get college credit or a passing grade so you can graduate and get on with your life. This is a church where you elect to go each Sunday to recharge your battery in the faith of people, black, white, green, yellow, gold and grey, and the God of your choosing. If you don’t like or agree with something that is being said you simply leave and walk across the street to the next church, PERIOD! I teach my children that there is guilt by association and I’m quite sure many of you were taught the same values by your parents and grandparents. If your driving the getaway car with a person who just robbed a bank in the backseat, guess what? You too just robbed a bank even if you never went inside. Obama should be treated just like another imfamous former candidate for president, David Dukes. That disgusting piece of ***** associated with racists and hatemongers and will be nothing more that a lousy footnote to history. Obama is an organizer alright. An organizer of the same hatred we saw in the 60s. If that is what he want us to revisit then that definitely isn’t the sort of “change” that I want my children to be burdened with. Blacks and whites have come along way in the past 40 years. We live next door to one another. We share rides to and from school. We play sports and attend family functions together. Our children date eachother and get married . What more can be done to unite us. Certainly not teaching a child of both black and whote parents to foresake one side of your lineage for the other because you think it will lead you “to the mountain top” as MLK said. Folks, we all live in the same vally each day as white, black and a mixture of everything else in between. We can and will do better without a devisive leader such as Obama.

Comments are closed.