Obama’s mis­take

The Washington Times Weekly - - Politics -

“Ten days ago, Sen. Joe Bi­den was the most bril­liant vice-pres­i­den­tial pick imag­in­able. He was go­ing to add the ex­pe­ri­ence and for­eign-pol­icy cre­den­tial that Sen. Barack Obama’s thin re­sume was miss­ing,” Ed Rollins writes at www.cnn.com.

“The so-called ex­pert com­men­ta­tors were ar­gu­ing that blue-col­lar Joe was go­ing to guar­an­tee Penn­syl­va­nia (be­cause he was born in Scran­ton) and other states and get Catholic vot­ers be­cause he is a prochoice Catholic,” said Mr. Rollins, who served as po­lit­i­cal di­rec­tor for Pres­i­dent Rea­gan and na­tional chair­man of for­mer Arkansas Gov. Mike Huck­abee’s 2008 pres­i­den­tial cam­paign

“I guess they for­got that Joe didn’t do so well with Iowa Catholics (23 per­cent of the pop­u­la­tion) when he cam­paigned there for more than a year in the Demo­cratic cau­cus race. But then get­ting less than 1 per­cent of the vote and com­ing in fifth place showed he didn’t do real well with any voter group in Iowa. Nor did he do well any­where else, other than Delaware.

“Then, af­ter Sen. John McCain chose Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, peo­ple laughed and said Bi­den was go­ing to wipe the floor with Palin in the vice-pres­i­den­tial de­bate. Now, af­ter her in­cred­i­ble con­ven­tion speech, Bi­den is say­ing that he’s the un­der­dog be­cause he’s not a very good de­bater.

“If Obama had done the smart thing, he would have picked Sen. Hil­lary Clin­ton for vice pres­i­dent. If he had, he would have united his party for sure and en­er­gized his base.

“He just couldn’t do it and maybe thought he didn’t need to do it. He was wrong.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.