Most Democrats running for office or especially for re-election, do not want Barack Obama to campaign for them. They say so. Today another class of Democrats gave them fresh reason to run from Obama. Democrat voters walked out on an Obama campaign stop. This while the most infamous commentator on a reliable Democratic Party house media organ excoriated the candidates running from Obama.

Runaway Democrats

The Obama rainbow flag. Source: BarackObama.com online store.

Listing Democrats who welcome Obama campaigning for them is easier than listing the runaways. One, two. Anthony Brown, running for governor of Maryland, and Pat Quinn, running for re-election as governor of Illinois. (The Associated Press listed them five days ago.)

Maybe those two Democrats don’t run from Obama because they seek, or hold, “safe” governorships. Maryland seems especially “safe” for Democrats. Maryland once elected a governor who ordered motorists on Highway 301 to drive for five miles with their headlights on during the day. (Your correspondent knows: he drove the route himself.) Nobody ever figured out what that was all about.

This afternoon Obama campaigned in Maryland for Mr. Brown. And Democrats in the audience started leaving early. Reuters gave some details; WND gave others.

“You’ve got to vote,” Obama repeated over and over.

But Democrats suddenly got tired of hearing it. Reuters described “a steady stream” of people walking out of the venue.

If Obama can’t hold his audience in a “safe” State, how can any Democratic candidate expect him to pack them into the voting booths in purple or blue States?

The “Mad Cow” doesn’t get it

[ezadsense midpost]

Rachel Maddow holds a dubious distinction at MSNBC. If anyone still tunes in to that network, they do so to laugh at her. She doesn’t seem to care. Nor does she seem to know what she’s talking about.

Take her criticism of Democrats running from Obama. Another host asked her whether Democrats would regret running away or call it a smart move. And she said:

If your opponent loses the thing that they’ve been using as a crutch for six years and you just let them walk away from it like it never existed, maybe you don’t deserve to win. They just don’t have the killer instinct it takes to make their opponents pay for a big mistake and I don’t understand why the Democrats are doing that.

First, her notion of “losing a crutch” is strange. She actually convinces herself Obamacare is working! “Costs are down”? “Lots of people signed up”? (Play the video to listen to Rachel Pollyanna Maddow.) Tell that to people like your correspondent who received cancellation notices from their insurers. Tell that to people finding their networks narrowing and the premier treatment centers in the country, like the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, seemingly closed to them. Now to be fair: “The Sloan” might work something out with you from its own charitable foundation. Ask. And incredibly (and no thanks to Obama), the law actually allows expense-sharing ministries to take the place of insurance, at about half the cost of conventional insurance. So the sky did fall, but patients can find shelter. And again: no thanks to Obama.

So her argument becomes: if Democrats are not willing to assume, as she blithely does, that the Emperor wears exquisite clothes when in fact he has no clothes on at all, they don’t deserve to win. She might as well say, like Hans Christian Andersen’s con artists posing as tailors, Democrat candidates and voters who run from Obama are stupid or unfit for their posts. And in the case of the candidates, she did say that.

Well! What will she say after today, when voting Democrats ignored the “stupid or unfit” jibe, pointed to Emperor Obama, and said, “But he has no clothes on”?

[ezadsense leadout]