« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Speaking of bubbles, Josh
I'd like to say at the outset that I really enjoy both your website, and your insight. You have gone out of your way to be evenhanded and objective for most of this election season. I appreciate clear-eyed political analysis no matter the particular general position (Lib, Rep, Dem, whateva) of the person providing it. I follow your site because you've been a concise, coherent voice rebutting the Repub smear-and-fear campaign. This 'site has been of inestimable value this election season, and that's part of my current problem. I think you may be getting little too deep into the Village, bro. Your front-page post is a prime example. I quote:
"Small shifts in polling numbers are very difficult to make sense of in August."
True, and yet you seem to build a whole post (not to say 3 days of tertiary postings) on the back of this wholly insignifigant polling fluctuation, leavened with some airing of your personal vague bad feelings about Obama not being aggressive enough. I'm not questioning your political radar, I'm sure it's sharper than mine; I'm trying to point out the fact that you, and alot of other Prog 'sites, are falling for the Traditional Media meme-factory, even if only second hand. Obama and his team are quite well aware of what is at stake here. That they may not be attacking/defending on the timeline you'd like to see may be annoying, may even be a reason for you to panic, but it's sure as hell not a reason to go around to whatever Establishment outlets you've forged links with, and act like you have any useful adviuce for how Obama should run his campaign. You want to see McCain get called on his ocean of slimy bullshit? Fine, do it; you have the platform. Let the people who are actually doing what you comment on (ie-winning the White House) do their job without having to deal with a nationally-known blogger acting like chicken little. I'm just sayin'...
Comments (26)
Good advice, and for the reader posters as well. Why, even Howard Wolfson, on his blog to which I was led by a Ben Smith post at Politico, is counseling:
Relax, Democrats. Given their successes so far, hasn’t the team running the Obama campaign earned the benefit of the doubt?
August 19, 2008 6:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rec'd.
I love how we're doing the old Dem "yank failure from the hands of success" thing.
August 19, 2008 7:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Josh Marshall dropped any pretense of impartiality during the primaries.
He and other "progressive" bloggers stuck their necks out, endorsed Obama and joined the media in Clinton-bashing to help Obama get the nomination.
Since then, Obama abandoned most of the cherished progressive causes and distanced himself from the so-called "left-wing" blogosphere.
His poll numbers are slowly falling, he's unable to come up with an effective message and appears to have assumed (along with Marshall) that McCain will always be the "dazed and confused" senile retard.
So now that Obama's chances are no longer assured and McCain is suddenly on a roll, Marshall and other "progressive" bloggers are increasingly facing the inconvenient truth: they succumbed to the charms of a professional politician and as a result they put impartiality and principles on the line. The progressive movement is no longer bigger than any single politician.
So if Obama loses the election, there will be a loud chorus of voices pointing out daily that, once again, progressives show they have no clue, just as they didn't in 2000 and 2004. And the other equally loud and embarrassing chorus of critics pointing out daily - Told you so.
That's why the pressure is on. Instead of the easy cruise to the White House in the most Democratic of the last 40 years, there is a real possibility that the progressive movement once again will have an egg on their face.
That's why Marshall and others are now searching for the "progressive swiftboat".
And the search, taking place right there on the home page, once again reveals that they remain clueless. It's as if they are taking Connie's daily advice from the "Most Recommended" list.
Instead of building the contrast with McCain in those areas where he is weak and Obama is strong, they stubbornly and defensively want to attack McCain's strength. They don't realize that by doing that they will only reinforce the contrast that McCain created and come across as vindictive, small and mean in spirit.
The more this dazed and confused head-scratching goes on despite the obvious and guaranteed solution staring everyone in the face - the more it's clear that Josh Marshall and the progressives think that winning means screaming "you bitch" and menacingly waving the $1,000 Loius Vitton handbag at McCain.
August 20, 2008 10:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Owww, I have an image of Pim Fortuyn smacking his purse down Maggie Thatcher-style, shrieking "I want my money". Or "Leave Barack alone!!!"
August 20, 2008 10:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
And they can't see the obvious functional different between $520 shoes and a $400 haircut. Hint: good shoes can last years and provide physical support for people on their feet 12 hours a day, haircuts stay pretty for a couple of weeks and serve no other purpose.
August 20, 2008 10:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Lalo - I think accusing Josh of Clinton-bashing goes a bit far, unless you have some examples? Probably you will find some criticisms, but than there would also be those for Obama as well.
I agree with the sentiment of Kordo's blog post. I echoed a similar one early in the primaries:
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/03/waiting-on-josh-or-ropeadope.php
My feeling is that Josh and others "political radar" as you put it (like that term) is a little bit off and is influenced by MSM to some extent. But, I think it is more the result of trying to remain relevant for the political junkies who need to feed so often. Readers have a different level of tolerance for this stuff. Yours and mine is lower I think than many blogging and commenting here.
But, you would think Obama might have earned a bit more trust considering what he did in the primaries.
August 20, 2008 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm an Obama supporter, have been all the way, and I'll be out there campaigning for him. But I have to question the repeated refrain that his campaign thus far has earned any great benefit of the doubt. I've seen phrases like "after what he accomplished in the primaries" many times.
But what did he accomplish in the primaries? He split them with Clinton, and not with the most promising assortment of states at that. And after she started attacking him on experience and national security she beat him 9 primaries to 5. Including big wins in heterogeneous states where he was supposed to be proving the breadth of his appeal. Obama won the nomination through the caucuses, which were all about field organization and devoted young followers, not about winning over mainstream voters.
Now we're seeing exactly what we saw in the primaries: a big lead evaporating as he's attacked by an older, more hawkish politician for being naive and wishy-washy. He has yet to prove to anyone that he can win back middle-American white voters once they've started to have doubts about him.
I think the most self-destructive course Obama and his supporters can follow is believing that he's proven himself as some sort of great campaigner and that victory will come inevitably if we just keep following the same path.
The polls keep saying that what he's been doing from March through August is not convincing centrist voters. I think suggestions for a new course are far from unreasonable.
August 20, 2008 2:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
So, it's not an accomplishment to come from as far back as he did to overtake Clinton? It was not a split, but a victory. It wasn't her attacking him on experience and national security that won her the later primaries. She was expected to win where she won. In fact, if you look at the polls he closed ground with her significantly despite the challenges presented by Wright and the guns/religions remarks.
Obama received an expected bounce in the polls following the close of the primaries that is moving back. The sky is not falling it's just going to be a tough general election as everybody knew. I believe he ran a brilliant campaign strategy and executed it well. You can dismiss this and say the sky is falling. I don't see any reasonable people claiming that he's inevitable (as some Clinton people did). I also don't see any evidence that he will not adjust his strategy as needed to maximize his/our chances in November. Either way, anyone who doesn't want to see McCain in the White House should be doing all they can to help.
August 20, 2008 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess you and I just differ in that I think critiquing the campaign and encouraging new lines of argument IS helping, where so many Obama loyalists still see any questioining of our candidate as disloyalty.
It's worth remembering that Obama's great electoral accomplishment was his meteoric rise from the underdog position. I'm not thrilled with how he, or a lot of his supporters, handle the overdog position so far. I think recapturing a bit of that underdog ferocity and risk-taking will be good for all of us.
August 20, 2008 3:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Probably we don't differ so much. I agree that critiquing and encouraging new lines of argument is helpful.
What's less helpful are the thinly veiled rants disguised as critiques but filled with exaggeration, misrepresentation, and false construction.
Some may come from angry Clinton supporters or concern trolls, but my agreement with this blog post is not about them. It's my feeling that Josh and others sometimes get caught in the daily news cycle and media narrative and lose sight of the bigger picture. I saw it at times during the primary and I'm seeing a bit of it now.
August 20, 2008 4:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
First allow me to congratulate you on your successful contribution to the campaign to tar the word "progressive" with the same brush that the 'Pubs have used on "liberal." Very effective. Soon we cowards on the left will have to start calling ourselves "laborites" or something.
But I'm afraid I have to take issue with a at least a couple of your many unsupported assumptions, overbroad generalizations, incorrect assertions, and unwarranted conclusions.
"progressive" bloggers stuck their necks out, endorsed Obama and joined the media in Clinton-bashing to help Obama get the nomination.
This statement has the distinction of being both unduly broad and incorrect. Overly broad: Many of us only supported Sen. Obama in an attempt to prevent the nomination of a clearly unacceptable candidate in Sen. Clinton. Thus we "bashed" -- that is, accurately described -- Sen. Clinton before we chose Sen. Obama as our standard bearer rather than the reverse as you imply. Incorrect: Every so-called "progressive" (ugh!) blog that I saw had plenty of criticism and plenty of praise for both candidates.
So if Obama loses the election, there will be a loud chorus of voices pointing out daily that, once again, progressives show they have no clue, just as they didn't in 2000 and 2004.
This statement actually contains a kernel of truth, but we progressives have demonstrated for at least a generation that we have no clue, in that we are entirely unable to nominate one. As far as I can recall, the last progressive the Dems nominated for Chief Executive was Hubert Humphrey. Can you think of a more recent one?
Instead of building the contrast with McCain in those areas where he is weak and Obama is strong, they stubbornly and defensively want to attack McCain's strength.
Actually, the Obama campaign has been following your advice for the most part. It's not effective, but I don't see any clear evidence or effective argument that anything would be.
Your comment also makes the implicit assumption that Sen. Clinton would have done better against Sen. McCain than Sen. Obama. This assumption, like so many of your assumptions, is an assumption.
So if we're making broad statements and basing them on assumptions, here's one: Whether the two things have a causal relationship, a correlative relationship, or no relationship at all I can't say with the kind of authority you like to pretend, but this is undeniable: Sen. Obama's race to the other side of the center* and Sen. Obama's slide in the polls have been undeniably contemporaneous.
And here's another: Given the choice between a real Republican and an ersatz Republican, the voters will (rightly) choose the real one every time.
August 20, 2008 1:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
* This phrase is used to describe not a change in the Senator's underlying right-of-center philosophy but rather his change from a mildly left-of-center emphasis to one that is more conservative than, say, Eisenhower or Nixon.
August 20, 2008 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you for responding to my many unsupported assumptions, overbroad generalizations, incorrect assertions, and unwarranted conclusions with your many unsupported assumptions, overbroad generalizations, incorrect assertions.
It's interesting to note that you included yourself into "progressive bloggers" even though you don't own or comment on TPM's front page.
Also of note, you choose to nit-pick the details without conclusively showing them to be wrong.
Then, you assume that everything is about Hillary, even when it is peripheral to my point, so you are saying nothing at all about the conclusion that I'm making. I wonder if I hit the nerve or something.
I admit you bullshit almost as well as Obama does.
But you and him also respond in the same way, just like Paris Hilton would.
August 20, 2008 2:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's interesting to note that you included yourself into "progressive bloggers" even though you don't own or comment on TPM's front page.
Are you sure? And so what?
I admit you bullshit almost as well as Obama does.
And this is how you defend your comment?
August 20, 2008 2:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have nothing to defend, my point remains unchallenged.
Cya.
August 20, 2008 2:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
I see. You agree with my non-challenge that your argument is baseless. I can live with that.
August 20, 2008 3:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ever think of dropping commenting on politics itself and turning to exclusively analyzing political bloggers? If this comment is a representative sample, you're damn good at it (that's not to say I agree on all points, it's to say I find it an incisive analysis.)
Ironically, there could be a future in this specialty precisely because Obama has a history of being disdainful of "netroots." :-)
August 20, 2008 3:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
The above was a reply to Lalo's comment @ 10:05.
(Damn the lack of "parent" links with this software.)
August 20, 2008 3:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good post. I recommend an article from today's NYT about stealth attack ads by the Obama campaign. The second guessing in the blogosphere isn't limited to TPM of course, but it's a bit disappointing to see Josh embrace it. I think that there are several factors driving the phenomenon:
1. Dem losses in '00 and '04. A lack of aggressiveness by the Dem candidates was perceived to be a factor in both cases: Gore during the recount and Kerry during the swiftboating.
2. The Obama campaign's failure, so far, to effectively define McCain.
3. The fact that the Obama campaign has not telegraphed its strategy. Such secrecy has been typical of the campaign. Pundits all but discounted Obama before Iowa. The successful grassroots strategy became clear only after Iowa and Super Tuesday.
August 20, 2008 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Don't forget the Obama mantra: "No drama."
BTW, what happened to the first letter of your name, anyhow?
August 20, 2008 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
I got a new one, courtesy of evainne
August 20, 2008 7:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
i agree that obama's campaign has been pretty spectacular and deserves the benefit of the doubt.
i'm hoping obama's strategy goes something like this. let mccain blow his load of advertising dollars over the summer, when he has to get rid of it, and run positive ads across the country. take the high road.
allow mccain to establish himself as the dirty campaigner, go on record as vowing to overturn roe v. wade and display all of the ill considered belligerence we've seen to date.
then take the momentum of the nomination and veep picks and apply sharper focuses attacks on mccain's summer record of belligerence, anti abortion and low road bush flavored politics.
do it with the capability to spend more money and get to do it just before and leading up to the election, not in the summer.
he took a hammering from mccain this summer, but it didn't do mcgrumpy too much good except shore up his base. if the election were held today, mcnasty might win, but unfortunately, there's plenty of time and playing field is about to shift.
god i hope this is the plan.
August 20, 2008 12:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sounds like you have a good handle on what is going on. If Obama responded to all the "commands" that his followers seem to think he must, he'd be dizzy and broke.
What is stopping these supporters from doing the uber campaigning and ads that damn McCain?
Why does Obama have to carry every cry-baby on his back all the while running a heavy duty operation that seems to know what they are doing?
The general doesn't walk into the war and do all the fighting, his men do that. Where are all Obama's soldiers that are supposed to do battle for him? On their typewriters...complaining.
August 20, 2008 5:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama has been squarely in the spotlight now for months. He just took a week off and went on vacation. McCain is spending gobs of cash on attack ads. A bunch of hit books have just come out. The smear machine is in the process of lurching into high gear. There's chum in the water, and the media are on the scent. Of course he's lost some momentum!
Meanwhile, neither party has officially nominated a candidate. There haven't been any debates (no, I don't think the faith forum counts... people didn't watch it). It's still early.
Obama has made some mistakes. This was never going to be easy.
So while I'm throwing out a bunch of unsupported assertions..... here are some more.
Things are going to get a whole lot tighter in this race over the next month. I don't think either candidate will get a big bounce from the conventions. I think the polling is going to be neck and neck going into October. The last three weeks before the election are going to be where this thing is won or lost.
I think the 'rock star' stadium speech is a huge potential mistake for Obama. I think taking a week off when he did was a mistake for Obama. I think not getting effective response ads out to counter McCain's smears quickly was a mistake for Obama. I think not having more prominent surrogates out blathering and grousing 24/7 in the media is a mistake for Obama. I think announcing his VP candidate via text message and email might also be a mistake for Obama.
This is an uphill battle for Obama, and a slip 'n slide for McCain -- that's the way this is going to play in the media. The Obama folks need to kick things up a notch, and soon.
But, having said all that, I've still got my money on Obama.
August 20, 2008 3:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Point well taken!
August 20, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Looks like there's an answer to you on the front page right now.
August 20, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment