As an ardent Barack Obama supporter, last Friday caused some serious distress. While reading his reported remarks from the San Francisco fund raiser, I cringed, realizing two things: He was absolutely correct, and this was going to be a story for days to come.
Here we are, almost a week later, and the story just won't die, even though what Obama said is arguably true. While talking about small town Pennsylvania voters who have lost jobs and keep getting ignored by our government, he said it's not surprising that they get bitter."" The second part, where he said ""they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them ... as a way to explain their frustrations"" - now that's just poor wording on his part.
Obama has since explained that he meant this in a Thomas Frank, ""What's the Matter with Kansas?"" sort of way. Essentially, he meant that economically these people should vote Democrat because the Republican party has turned into the party of the rich, but instead they vote based on guns or religion because they feel that's the only way politicians will actually listen to them.
His explanation was good, but it's interesting to see how his two opponents have jumped on him, calling him an elitist for two seemingly different reasons. Personally, I'd say it's hard to argue that Americans aren't bitter. Only 28 percent of the country approves of President Bush and 65 percent disapprove of the way he's handling the War in Iraq. Throw in how the war, combined with ill-advised tax cuts for the rich, has severely hurt our economy, and that's a recipe for bitterness.
Apparently John McCain doesn't believe this. ""These hard working men and women aren't 'bitter,'"" he said in a fund raising e-mail Monday. ""They love their country, their faith, their family and their traditions. They are the heart and soul of this country, the foundation of our strength and the primary authors of its essential goodness - Barack Obama should get to know them.""
Although people may love their country, their faith and their family, that doesn't mean they're still not bitter. All this really shows is McCain defending the status quo. When the status quo includes the aforementioned polls, that's probably not such a good idea.
As for Hillary Clinton, she at least latched onto the truly controversial remark - the ""cling"" part - when commenting on the issue. Since then, we've seen her throw back a shot of Crown Royal and wash it down with an Old Style, all while staunchly defending the Second Amendment. Oh, and talking about church, too.
Hillary's tactic is political opportunism at its finest, and it's a good strategy to try to widen her lead in Pennsylvania - make herself, the one who's made more than $100 million since leaving the White House in 2000, the ""everyman"" candidate, and make Obama, who only paid off his student loans less than a decade ago, the ""elitist.""
Unfortunately for Clinton, it doesn't seem to be working. The first round of polls since his remarks shows very little change. A Quinnipiac poll conducted April 9-13 (he made the comments April 11) still shows a six point lead for Clinton, the same as the previous poll. According to the pollsters, ""There was no noticeable change in the matchup in polling April 12-13, following widespread media reports on Sen. Obama's 'bitter' comments.""
An LA Times/Bloomberg poll now shows Obama down by just five points. SurveyUSA, which had been a major outlier - reporting an 18-point lead last week for Clinton in Pennsylvania - reduced Clinton's lead to 14 points on Tuesday.
Is this a sign of how Obama would be as a general election candidate, able to deflect criticism with ease? ""For a candidate sometimes mocked for being too soft to win a political fist fight, he has shown an uncanny ability to take a punch and then rear back and deliver one in return,"" wrote Ben Smith of Politico.com.
Judging by Obama's ability to shake off other controversies, like the Rev. Wright story or his wife's ""proud"" comments, this could be true, and the polls back it up. Or perhaps it's how Philadelphia Daily News columnist John Baer put it.
""What's offensive to me is suggesting that small-town, working-class, gun-toting and/or religious Pennsylvanians are somehow injured by a politician's words,"" he wrote. I guess we'll have to wait until next Tuesday to find out.
Erik Opsal is a senior majoring in journalism and political science. Please send responses to opinion@dailycardinal.com.
