The Calculations of Barack Obama
Barack Obama the naïve sapling is out, replaced – for the time being at least – by a different caricature: the cunning opportunist, wrapping himself in the mantle of reform in ruthless and amoral pursuit of the White House.
The image began taking hold in the media last week, when Obama rationalized his way out of a previous commitment to make a good-faith effort at participating in the public financing system for the general election.
Given his earlier cutesiness on Nafta, his now infamous 130 “present” votes in the Illinois legislature and his penchant for blaming his staff for his own mistakes, the campaign funding flap could serve as a tipping point in the media’s portrayal of Obama. Something very similar happened to Jimmy Carter at this same point in his victorious 1976 campaign, when a media that had watched his stunning run through the Democratic primaries with fascination and awe suddenly began demanding specificity.
The Republicans see a real opportunity here. The party’s familiar public faces fanned out over the weekend to play up this new caricature: McCain and surrogate adviser Carly Fiorina on Face the Nation, Representative Eric Cantor on CNN’s Late Edition, and, providing by far the most polished and indignant twist on the G.O.P.’s talking points, Senator Lindsey Graham on Meet the Press.
“He seems to be willing to say or do anything for the moment to advance his cause,” Graham said. “And his cause is to win the election. It's not to change this country, and that's sad.”
If the Republican drumbeat continues and the media adopts a more cynical filter for Obama’s strategic moves and policy pronouncements, it’s not hard to imagine this perception taking hold among the masses – especially if Obama himself plays into it. And in theory, that should be devastating for him, particularly if John McCain is able to maintain his own reputation for political independence and courage.
But maybe not. To read some of the criticism of him in the past week is to believe that Obama has broken new ground in the chutzpah department. “Even Bill Clinton,” David Brooks wrote in a widely distributed column last week, “wasn’t smart enough to succeed in politics by pretending to renounce politics.”
Perhaps Clinton didn’t, but Carter certainly did. In his 1976 campaign, Carter presented himself very much like Obama does now, as a unifying postpartisan reformer bursting onto the scene to rescue a dispirited country from deep political, cultural and ethnic polarization. Carter carried himself as the second coming of Jimmy Stewart’s Mr. Smith, a simple, honest peanut farmer from Georgia as outraged and bewildered as the rest of America at the ways of Washington. His platform was rooted in feelings, not a laundry list of policy proposals.
“I’ll never lie to you,” Carter promised a country still recovering from Watergate.
In reality, Carter and his campaign were anything but wide-eyed naïfs. He had set his eyes on the presidency years earlier and set out to run while the 1972 campaign was still going on. Guided by his young aide Hamilton Jordan, Carter executed a sophisticated strategy that recognized and exploited Americans’ yearning for a leader in whom they could trust and from whom they could draw inspiration.
It took the media and the Republicans just about as long to catch on to Carter’s craftiness as it did for them to begin exploring Obama’s Machiavellian side. In the summer and fall of ’76, reporters attempted day after day to pin Carter down on the most politically sensitive issues of the day -- abortion, busing and the like. And day after day he frustrated them with his evasiveness. Republicans howled, sounding very much like Lindsey Graham did on Meet the Press.
What’s most noteworthy about the Carter case is that eventually press frustration and the Republicans’ attacks did trickle down to the masses, and voters did conclude that Carter was not being straight with them on every issue. The election ended up being close – a series of unrelated missteps in the fall also took a toll on Carter – but voters still ended up electing Carter, even though they’d concluded that he was much more of a political animal than he presented himself as being.
That’s because the attacks did not fundamentally alter the public’s view of Carter: They liked him personally and found him honest and trustworthy at the outset of the campaign, and they still did at the end. In essence, voters in 1976 said that they understood that in a campaign, candidates have to act like politicians.
They sent a similar message in 1992, when Clinton unseated George H. W. Bush. In the spring of ’92, after Clinton emerged from a host of scandals as the Democratic nominee, Bush and the G.O.P. believed he would be utterly unelectable, so miserable were Clinton’s poll numbers when it came to questions of honesty, trustworthiness and basic character. Clinton’s need to have it both ways on every issue became an immortal punch line when he responded to a question about whether he’d ever tried marijuana by saying, “Yes. But I didn’t inhale.”
But he was elected comfortably because voters, as they began to meet him through television, warmed up to him personally. They never forgot about all of the baggage that he accrued, but his comforting onscreen presence and his masterful communication skills (on display in the three fall debates) thoroughly convinced voters that his character flaws were insignificant compared to his intelligence, his understanding of the country’s problems and the new energy he’d bring to Washington.
Voters are inured to presidential nominees from both parties who pander, flip-flop and equivocate on the campaign trail. If that’s all they see – a typical politician – then that candidate is in trouble, as John Kerry and Al Gore can attest. But Obama is an entirely different candidate, the first Democratic nominee since Clinton – and the second since Carter – that most people instinctively like.
He and his campaign have calculated that a broken promise here and there won’t fundamentally change that. They’re probably not wrong.
It's the perception, stupid. Ronald Reagan is still called the Great Communicator, when all he did was read cue cards.Obama's personality will get him elected, because Americans almost always(excepting Nixon, of course)elect who they think is a nice guy.Obama is a politician and will do what is necessary to get elected; but he is a number of other things too, as his resume indicates, and these qualities and experience will undoubtedly surface if he becomes president.If the don't, he will pay a high price, and he's probably smart enough to realize that--a bungled presidency is so hard to live down.
This is the Information Age. The first Information Age. Obama, unlike previous candidates, is bound by his YouTube, online pdfs, blogs. He is trapping himself into being the sort of politician he's portrayed himself as being. With the exception of FISA, his every action (including Public Funding, which was not a pledge-breaker since part of that pledge required the Republicans to leash their 527's), has been exactly what it should be.
He won't have a choice once elected.
,
WHICH IS THE BETTER SOLUTION TO OUR OIL & ENERGY CRISIS?
1.) DRILL FOR OIL, ON USA LANDS & WATERS, WHERE THERE IS A KNOWN & VAST AMOUNT OF OIL (estimated 20 billion barrels)?, and
2.) BUILD NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS TO SUPPLY A VAST AMOUNT OF OUR ELECTRIC POWER NEEDS?
- OR, as OBAMA proposes -
3.) RESEARCH & DEVELOP NEW SOURCES OF ENERGY and DEVELOP THE MEANS TO UTILIZE THOSE NEW ENERGY SOURCES?
Obama argues that drilling for oil will not yield results for 10 years. How long does Obama think it will take to develop and implement the “new energy sources” so as to yield significant results? Probably longer since it is “unproven.” (Remember the idea of using ‘corn’ to produce a renewable energy source has caused a shortage of farmlands and increased prices for corn!)
IF WE LIFT THE CONGRESSIONAL BAN ON DRILLING FOR OIL ON USA LANDS & WATERS ---- IT WILL HAVE AN IMMEDIATE EFFECT TO LOWER IMPORTED OIL PRICES BECAUSE IT WILL SEND A CLEAR MESSAGE TO THE OIL PRODUCING COUNTRIES THAT “WE MEAN BUSINESS” TO RELIEVE OURSELVES OF DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL.
A long-term energy plan must be developed, which includes cost-effective and renewable energy sources ---- but we cannot fool ourselves into thinking that our economy and way of life can suffer the current oil & gasoline prices, for long, without irreparable harm TO OUR ECONOMY AND STANDARD OF LIVING..
THE WAY FOR JOHN McCAIN TO DEFEAT OBAMA IS TO ……………………..
“MAKE OIL AND ENERGY THE TOP ISSUE IN THIS CAMPAIGN”.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I thought the American people by now would have realized how important is to choose a President that works for the country and its citizens. And yet we are still voting without really informing ourselves about the candidates plans. Telling that they want change does not explain what they mean to do about health care, etc. As I said once, we are not choosing an "American Idol". To anonymous I will say that I partly agree with him but that a bungled presidency might be hard to live down for whoever becomes president but it could be disastrous for the country.
Thank god the Dems have finally come to their senses and will nominate someone with a decent personality. Gore and Kerry were both viewed by the public as no personality robots. Hillary was in the same league. Her nomination would have been another democratic disaster.
The most important words in this article were "people instictively like".
Thank god the Dems have finally come to their senses and will nominate someone with a decent personality. Gore and Kerry were both viewed by the public as no personality robots. Hillary was in the same league. Her nomination would have been another democratic disaster.
The most important words in this article were "people instictively like".
Information age or not, there is no binding a politician to what they say on a campaign trail. There is no binding contract. All politicians have excuses for their actions and fail when it comes to accountability.
My understanding is McCain has said he does not want negative campaigning. How much he can do about the 527's remains to be seen, the same with Obama. Both have reached an agreement apparently on the 527's. McCain has always been against them.
Sure, Americans think Obama is a nice guy. But he's no Bill Clinton. Obama has no pretense of political moderation, while Clinton was truly a moderate. Obama is from Illinois, which Democrats would win anyway, while Clinton was from the south, which Democrats are losing. And of course, Obama is black. Each of these things peels away a few votes, and perhaps a few electoral votes. Clinton could afford to lose a few to the accurate perception that he spewed a constant stream of lies, half-truths, and misrepresentations. If McCain does a decent job of campaigning, Obama may not have that luxury.
Nick Kasoff
The Thug Report
clinton backed into office courtesy of ross perot
clinton backed into office courtesy of ross perot
Look, stop hating hater. Just because something is different
and good stop putting Obama down. The american entire economy failed problems was not done by Obama. People should
be upset at the ones who are and has caused the problems so
lets be realistic. The economy crisis was caused by others
who are not the Obama people. It really blow me out of the
water to read and hear the haters who are against Obama when
they are the ones who contributed to the reasons why the economy is tore up. The fact of the matter, Obama can not help having a better and smarter method to be President and
fix the problems the haters did cause. Put your hating on the ones who started the problems, and vote for Obama who will fix what the no caring group did to the economy. So, do not be jeolous because Obama is very smart and more than
capable to run our country. People trusted the ones who tore
up the economy so, this time vote smart, vote for Obama.
Mr. Kornacki writes: "...particularly if John McCain is able to maintain his own reputation for political independence and courage." I find it hard to declare George III (McCain) politically independent and courageous when he sides 96% of the time with the policies and whims George II (Dubya.)
Who is it that likes Obama? besides the media and Obama. Hello McFly, remember the KY, WV, PR primaries? Obama is an arrogant putz.
20 billion barrels of oil = ~4-5 cents less per gallon price reduction at the pump, by the Dept. of Energy's on estimation! Not going to be helpful long term.
To even think that "Some" Americans would even consider giving a Republican administration another 4 years is astonishing in itself. Has anyone paid attention? My God. 4 more years of the big spending, war mongoring Republican party.
Carter proved to be such a great President. Why wouldn't we want Carter-part II?
After almost 30 years, we are still paying for the mistake of electing Carter. What will be the ultimate cost of an Obama? The most radical far left candidate to ever get this close to the White House.
The mind boggles at the possibilities and the repercussions.
Clinton only won comfortably because of Ross Perot and I would not start bragging that Obama is like Jimmy Carter. With the internet and YouTube, a candidate's ability to pander to different audiences on narrow issues often contradicting other pronouncements is severely limited. As for the voting public ignoring scandals and flip flops because they 'like the guy', I'm not convinced that's the case this time. There are certainly the Obama diehards but I think the Rev. Wright debacle among others has sunk in on a deeper level than the media and the polls are reflecting. If those videos had come out before Iowa or Super Tuesday, I think Hillary Clinton would be the nominee.
Please continue to support your candidate publicly in forums such as this. Each post you make will help clearly define your candidate and his base. happy posting
Wait, Don't get too excited.. this is just another national election, and the peaceful transfer of power.
The President is the Executive Branch of our Government, any significant actions must have the approval of the Congress.
Be more concerned who you vote into the House ans Senate!
The American voters will again decide what appears best for their individual situation.
Taxing Oil companies raises their expenses and cut millions of shareholder out. Also expenses get passed on to consumers. Duh!!!
Throwing money into the Education pot will not improve education until teachers are given the right to demand quiet
and decipline in the class room.
It is stupidity at it's best when inexperienced children are given adult rights! This is not a VILLAGE!!!
Who was it in Congress that let slip the Socialist Democratic idea to Nationalize the oil industry!!!
What's next?
Consider who you vote for!
While Obama isn't taking public financing, at least Obama didn't take out a campaign loan using public financing as collateral, then later once his fund raising regained traction unilaterally decide to withdraw from public financing without FEC approval. Who was it that did that? John McCain, of course, playing loose with the Act that bears his name.
Even IF Obama is everything the worst Republican smears make him to be, after 7 1/2 years of Bush 2 I'll take the devil I don't know rather than suffer the torture of another 4 years of Republican governing hell.
Patrick, if you think a coalition of Obama-Reid-Pelosi will bring back common sense fiscal restraint, I have a bridge in New York I would love to sell you. Now, the Republicans certainly deserve criticism for out-of-control spending, but the criticism comes from the Right, not the Left. The Republicans are guilty of acting and spending like Democrats and betraying their small, lean government traditions. I, therefore, find it laughable to hear Obama and the Left criticizing Bush and Republicans for big spending. Check out what Obama is proposing. It's the same old "tax and spend" mantra we have heard from the Left since the "Great Society" days. If Obama gets elected, and he very well may, look for government spending to increase like never before. I feel sorry for our children and grandchildren.
I'm not exactly sure how Obama is being criticized as a flip-flopper because of his campaign finance position. McCain has flip-flopped on much greater matters: Offshore oil drilling, Bush's tax cuts, veteran's benefits ... Everything said when running for President in 2000 has changed in 2008, so he can secure the votes of conservatives. They both have said one thing and then subsequently changed their mind. To pretend one is less guilty of this than the other is simply inaccurate.
You said: "The economy crisis was caused by others
who are not the Obama people. It really blow me out of the
water to read and hear the haters who are against Obama when
they are the ones who contributed to the reasons why the economy is tore up."
Thanks. Your eloquence and insight demonstrate why an empty populist neophyte like Obama can actually make it this far in national politics. The great irony here is Obama promises to fix things that have allegedly been "caused" by others. At the core of the Obama strategy is a simple preying upon Americans' sense of entitlement and refusal to accept responsibility. Bush did not cause the economic jam - that was set in motion years ago, as was the economic boom. Obama is a business man and the democratic party is focused on preserving their ability to spend this country into oblivion with earmarks and entitlements. If you think for a second that a government can tax its way into better policy, you might spend some time getting smarter about how things really work. Oh, yes, what's with all the hate? Obama will throw you under the bus just like Wright, Pleger, Ayers, Rezko, et. al. ad infinitum.
Speak for yourself. I don't instinctively like Obama. I have watched his playing to the cult-like following that worships him, and I have reacted by being suspicious about his authenticity. I know a lot of people who feel the way I do, so this election my be very close in the end.
The media will continue to spread the Obama PR because they know they are still the primary source of information for most of America. If they don't show his "warts" then they will not see the light of day.
Im not a McCain supporter either, I dont believe a word that guy says, but I would be more comfortable with him as president than Obama.
Another thing that bothers me is if you are white and you dont vote for Obama, you are a racist. However, if an African American doesn't vote for McCain, he is showing racial pride.
We are in serious trouble.....
obama va haci el centro de la geometria politica
y asi rascarle votos a los republicanos con propuestas y discursos
de tono moral, espiritual , etico ,pues conservador
Kibby Wrote:
The most radical far left candidate to ever get this close to the White House.
Listen to Sean Hannity much? I noticed he started using the phrase "radical" now every time he refers to Obama. This is the type of stuff that worked 5 and ten years ago, but that has not/will not work today.
Also the "most liberal" senator tag is a complete bunch of crap. It comes from ONE CONSERVATIVE MAGAZINE that has admitted in print that its basis for selecting this ranking is totally arbitrary. Its based on 100 of the almost 400 votes O took in the Senate, and includes votes like approving more funding for medical treatment for returning troops as "liberal". If that's liberal than count me in.
Also guess who was the "most liberal" senator in 2004 John Kerry. Wow is this a coincidence??? Has Kerry magically become more conservative over the past three years? Or is this just a scam of the "liberal media" to make every democratic candidate look more left leaning than he is...
Great analysis. However:
1. Obama will be facing two negative books due out in August...in 2004, the Swift Boat group followed the release of an anti-Kerry book by the same name. Right now, commentators say the usual Republican suspects don't have the money this year. Nonsense, the money will materialize if they think a smear will stick. Obama will raise more money for his campaign and has asked that donations be given to the campaign not 527s. The campaign wants to control the message which is why the DNC operations moved to Chicago. However, the GOP has raised far more than the DNC for this elections. All in all: six of one, half-dozen of another.
2. Get your facts straight. The 130 'absent' votes were taken under an arcane, 'outlyer' custom that is peculiar to the Illinois legislature. Instead of voting no, legislators vote absent, so the bill won't be defeated. In voting absent ,a legislator signals his/her agreement with the basic bill but wants to see part of it ammended before giving it a 'yes' The media is really lazy in repeating this 'absent' charge against Obama without knowing what they are even talking about.
horribledictu.com
The comment that National Interest is a conservative magazine and so Obama's ranking is false is simply untrue. The reason Kerry was the most liberal in 2004 may explain why Obama was this year. They tacked even further Left to win the nomination. In point of fact Barack Obama is the most Left Wing major party candidate since McGovern. He is for massive tax increases, the takeover of the health care system by the Government, the repeal of DOMA so that every state would have to recognize same-sex marriage, abortion on demand, even to the extent of killing the child that survives an abortion, and spent 20 years listening to the ravings of a radical black racialist in Church. In school he admitted he specifically chose left-wingers as friends and mentors because only they could provide "authenticity." There will be an effort to cover up how left-wing he is but it is simply extraordinary.
Pres. Jimmy Carter's legacy was to let Iran be taken over by the Ayatollah Khomeini in 1979 - starting the modern Islamic Revolution as a worldwide movement and making Iran its leader.
Obama shows all signs of being the Second comming of Carter. If elected, what would his legacy be? Letting the Islamic Revolution advance unrestrained and get the upper hand?!
Americans should be scared to death when pondering that Obama could be our next President.