« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Wake up, wake up, wake up, wake up, wake up, wake up
Still Unable To Connect
by Steve Soto
It’s very possible if not certain that a larger and larger part of the Democratic establishment is increasingly uneasy with Barack Obama’s chances this fall. They can point to a range of reasons, from his inability to connect with the general electorate on real issues of concern especially economic anxieties, to his inability to define John McCain, and to his dismissal of any effective Tier Two and surrogate effort. Some are troubled that Obama still seems too focused on image and pandering instead of connecting effective campaigning with substantive politics. That is how we find ourselves with two flawed candidates tied in some national polls, even though the GOP brand is very unpopular.
There should be little surprise with all of this, although I was hoping against the facts before me that Obama would be ahead in the national polls by 6-10 points by now. Yet Obama seems to be banking on a good convention and football stadium acceptance speech to give him the large bounce that will then withstand a nasty GOP convention containing non-stop under-the-radar racism. I don’t think it will work.
We may have to accept that Obama will never connect with everyday voters, as he doesn’t take ownership of pocketbook issues and hammer 3 to 4 main tangible reasons for his presidency. We will have to accept that he hasn’t defined major differences with John McCain on the economy, taxes, trade, global warming, health care, and the rest because he is fixated on running to the center. Unfortunately, because Obama refuses to run a Tier Two campaign through an effective surrogate operation, he finds that McCain already operates in the center after redefining himself as a moderate and not as a Republican without an effective effort by Obama to define him first. Why? Because Obama disdains the politics of the present and wants to get us all to that happy place of the politics of the future where everyone gets along and gets a pony.
When Clinton tweaked Obama’s style, shallowness on the issues, and inability to connect with the general electorate on real pocketbook issues, she was branded as running a racial campaign and eagerly trashed by his supporters and the media because she was a Clinton. That was, and is the Obama campaign’s answer to all criticism that he cannot connect, or is too focused on his image at the expense of delineating a campaign of differences: my opponent is running a racist campaign through old-style politics.
Well, now we are heading into the conventions against a guy who was allowed to define himself as anything but a Republican, while he defined Obama as a lightweight elitist celebrity more in love with his image than with real issues. We can’t say we couldn’t see this coming, because it has already played out in the primaries. Nevertheless, many of us were all-too-ready in our swooning to honestly accept that it wasn’t racism to point out Obama’s shortcomings, but simply a preview of what was to come with Obama in charge of the party. Since it was Hillary saying these things, it was easy for the Obama supporters to dismiss it and chalk it up to racism from a bitter bitch and her overrated husband. However, that didn’t make her criticisms untrue.














Comments (12)
Wake up and do what? Vote for McCain?
Obama's campaign hasn't been perfect. But aren't you Hillary Holdouts supposed to wait until Obama actually loses the election before you say, "I told you so"? (I know it's hard to wait, but still. No need to be, ahem, premature.)
And chill with the "bitter bitch" stuff. I have never used that word in reference to Hillary, and to toss that out so casually is offensive. That's like me implying that Hillary supporters at-large called Obama "an inadequate black male" and the burden of proof is on you to prove that you personally didn't say it. Come on.
August 18, 2008 12:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Is this article directed at you or something?
August 18, 2008 12:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
No. Like many, I'm just sick of the whining - and being tarred as a chauvinist for merely preferring Obama.
August 18, 2008 2:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Would somebody invent a time machine already?
I can no longer deny my fervent desire to go back in time and give Lalo's mommy a double dose of RU-486 at the appropriate juncture.
For baud's sake, asshole -- get. a. life.
August 18, 2008 1:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Lalo, unless you are Steve Soto, your post violates fair use. It also violates intelligent use.
August 18, 2008 7:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
I find it incredible that TPM and DailyKos are the only two progressive blogs left on the internet where ANY kind of criticism of Obama is still a crime.
August 18, 2008 9:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Criticism - of anyone - is not a violation of the rules here.
Lifting an entire article that you didn't write and posting it elsewhere is a violation of the rules at most blog-enabled sites.
You could easily have posted a summation of the article, along with a few key quotes.
August 18, 2008 11:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think the issue is that is all you do. While I am all for honest criticism most of yours or the few other last gasp hangers on is not. It is specious at best and just out and out false hoods at it's worst.
What you think you are accomplishing besides looking silly and, uninformed is beyond me. Believing the likes of Larry Sinclair and the tin foil hat stuff posted over at NoQuarter or the other PUMA blogs only helps deepen the belief that you and your "friends" have lost all vestiges of intellectual or personal honesty.
I have no issue with your unbridled support of Hillary Clinton, but she is not going to be the nominee and that is just a fact of life. Next even if she some how got the nomination she couldn't win, for the simple fact she couldn't mount an effective campaign at this late date. Now your are free to vote for McCain or not vote at all, your right and your choice. However, know that you do it out of spite and not because you believe it's the right thing.
August 18, 2008 12:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Having formerly been respectable Clinton trolls, both Lalo and Billy Glad have reduced themselves to being concern trolls. Even gotalife hasn't sunk so low.
August 18, 2008 9:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Finally, somebody told the one to stop spewing like Kerry and start fighting like Clinton.
The fun starts after the convention with the dirt and they are tied now.
I expect McCain to take the lead after the dirt is exposed and will remain in the lead until the election.
August 18, 2008 11:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
gotalife:
I don't understand what Clinton supporters believe is to be gained by this on-going party divisiveness. Even if Hillary were to somehow take the nom. at the convention, the resulting party turmoil would absolutely doom her for the 2008 general. I think she knows that.
On the other hand, if she is is not planning an convention coup and Obama goes on to lose the general, neither Hillary nor her supporters can afford to be in anyway perceived as contributing to the loss. Why, should be obvious. Obama supporters will make sure that any future Hillary for POTUS campaign fails! Surely, you all must realize that.
Isn't the best move for you to strongly support Obama for 2008, then, if he loses, Hillary is clean for 2012? How exactly are you helping Hillary by your current tactics? I'm honestly not seeing it.
August 18, 2008 11:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
It is not credible that Obama is ignorant of the question of dirty campaigning. We have to discount current polling somewhat as unrepresentative of cellphone users, and the Clinton attacks on Obama were not sufficient, in spite of white-loyalty voting in Rust Belt states.
Steve Soto is clearly partisan, when he uses phrases like "...she was branded as running a racial campaign and eagerly trashed by his supporters and the media because she was a Clinton." She was trashed for throwing trash.
When Soto asserts Obama has shortcomings, he only means untruths such as no depth in position papers, no experience, no proven skill at executive position. Surely out-managing a national campaignw with thousands of personnel and hundreads of millions of dollars, against the proven winners of the Clintons, is not trivial? To belittle Obama's campaign success so far is a subtle discounting, as in "there must have been some kind of cheating, some unfair advantage, for the Clintons to fail." So that camp would reach for a version of affirmative action as an unfair advantage. That many Clinton supporters can't see this is not an argument against its truth.
August 18, 2008 12:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment