« Recommend if You're Sick of "Don't Worry" Posts | Armchair Guerrilla's Blog | The Hamas Conundrum »

Recommend if you’re sick of “woe unto us” posts


Yesterday, breaking my vows of chastity and humility, I shamelessly solicited recommendations from those fed up with posts that sift through data to make the implausible claim that somehow we’re right where we want to be at this stage of the game. These posts come in many flavors, but in my (humble) view elevate wishful thinking above the sober reality that we have ample reason to fear. I received a number of responses (as usual thoughtful and informed) calling my attention to another pernicious side of the same coin. These are the posts prematurely lamenting the state of the race in near apocalyptic terms. In the interest of fairness and balance, I thought I’d devote equal time to them.

You know the type. The theme usually goes something like this: It was “Obama’s race to lose, which is about the only thing he’s doing a good job of.” This is followed by some example of how Obama is blowing it and a prescription for the only way he can salvage his campaign before it’s too late – if it isn’t already.

Many of our beloved dissidents are former Hillary supporters (I am one myself, so I know whereof I speak) still carrying their disappointment and hanging on to their belief that Clinton would have made a better candidate. Obama’s perceived stumbles validate this view and an undercurrent of “I told you so” permeates their criticism. At the least there is often an implicit comparison in which Obama comes out on the short end.

In yesterday’s Slate, Christoper Beam reviews (to comic effect) the conflicting advice urged on Obama by the backseat drivers.  To summarize for those who can’t bear to tear themselves away and check out the link: Tie McCain to Bush!/Don’t Just Tie McCain to Bush!; Get Mad!/Don’t Get Mad!; Take the High Road!/Lie Like McCain!; Go After Palin!/Ignore Palin!; Use The Clintons!/Ignore the Clintons!; Fewer Big Rallies!/More Big Rallies!; Screw the 50 State Strategy!/Screw the Swing States!; Get Specific!/… But Not Too Specific. If you ask me, my advice to Obama would be continue being yourself. Gore and Kerry both tried to be someone else. Let’s not go there again. On the other hand, you need to talk more about the economy in ways people will understand, punch up your answers, etc. . How easy to fall into that trap.

The constant second guessing seems a uniquely Democratic phenomenon. Rarely do we see the Republicans savaging their own with the same gusto. Sure, James Dobson and Rush Limbaugh had their problems with McCain, but now that they’re back in the fold, united against the common enemy (which includes the vast majority of Americans), we hear scarcely a peep from disaffected Republicans (More insidiously, David Brooks affects a phony stance of disagreement while surreptitiously carrying Republican talking points.)  Maybe it's the effect of losing so many elections. Or maybe that’s why we lose elections. Maybe that’s just our nature.

To state the obvious, the race right now is a tossup. It never really was “Obama’s to lose.” In fact, he’s always faced a hard road as an outsider with an unconventional biography, a young, relatively unproven, African American candidate.  It really does require a leap of faith.  That he's convinced so many thus far is an amazing story.  And let's not forget he's running against the only Republican seen as independent of Bush whose long love affair with the media is only now beginning to wane. Even as the press bemoans the dishonesty of the McCain campaign, they can’t help but point out what an honorable person he is. That’s a tough image to crack.   

So, you ask, if I decry in equal measure misplaced confidence and premature fatalism, what’s a poor boy to do? Well, you could turn your fury against me for leading you on this fruitless endeavor. You could move on to other, worthier topics like trout fishing in Alaska or the financial crisis. You could continue reading both types of posts as, truth be told, there are many interesting and worthy points made on both sides. Or you could get out and do your best to make sure Obama wins this Fall and we all go home happy.

Finally, I only reiterated my whoring for recs in the interest of symmetry. It is a practice of which I strongly disapprove. In fact, I don’t even care if anyone recommends this one.

36 Comments

| Leave a comment

I would like more "woe is us" posts, sorry.

Are you saying that woe wins out over hope?

user-pic

How many times can I recommend this post?

Yes I am sick to fucking death of Woe is Us posts and I'm sick of so many people consistently underestimating Obama.

Could you please write a post called

Recommend If You're Sick of Recommend If You're Sick of Posts?

This would be an excellent exercise in navel gazing that self-critical, woe-is-us folk could appreciate.

Just kidding, AG.

I promise, I seriously didn't read your comment until after I'd already wrote that exact post. That said, I really like AG's thoughts, but I couldn't resist the easy joke...

I'm sure you know that was my planned Part III of the thrilling series. However, I am already sick of my sick of posts, so I think this is the last. I had consigned this one to the dustbin when it suddenly popped up -- seemingly thanks to the herculean efforts of HusseinTenaX. And as you might have seen, I'm not really sick of either version.

user-pic

Methinks the woody doth protest too much.

Today I am not going to rec your post because you are still wearing that old moldering Castro effigy. Although, you do have a bit more snark in your post. Still, the effigy is too much. I have some suggestions as to your change of avatar. ;)

How about this guy?!? Try the fourth pict from top on pg. 1, and third pict from the bottom on pg. 2. Hey, I'm halfway thinking of using that one myself.

As to woe is us, like, I'm so done with that. As Obama would say, enough is enough. Lets trust Obama to come back and strike. He always does in the end.

user-pic

What about this guy?

Farking hilarious. It's been a long time since I've seen the movie. But don't go around blowing my cover.

OMG, I snorted water all over my keyboard. Oy. You always educate me, Dr. ☠enghis. First with music and now a movie, you're simply the coolth. ;)
I just requested it from Netflix. I'll watch it this weekend. I cannot wait!! Thanks.

The best early Woody Allen is Take the Money in Run ("I have a gub."). The best Allen is Annie Hall. Seven years ago, I had a long distance date where we played Annie Hall over the TV at the same time. I had read that Bill Gates had done that with some flick when he was on a road trip, and it sounded like fun. It was.

user-pic

I used to say Take the Money, but the last time I saw it, it wasn't as funny. Maybe I saw it too many times. For the early work, I say Sleeper. Plus, it's perfect for a long-distance date. "Orgasmatron!"

user-pic

I'm happy to share the woody-love. Try this">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDe0sr71Wsg">this one. If you must drink water while listening, I advise that you remain outside snorting distance from your keyboard. For most people, that's about four feet, but it depends on the diameter of your nasal passages.

user-pic

How about I try that link again...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDe0sr71Wsg

At one time I did find an Obama as Che photoshopped avatar and contemplated switching over around the time he won the nomination - as a symbol of my transfer of allegiance from HRC. In the end, I figured it was a bit kitsch, and there are so many Obama avatars out there already. Still, thanks for the link.

So, you ask, if I decry in equal measure misplaced confidence and premature fatalism, what’s a poor boy to do?

I answered this yesterday: take it out on your coworkers. They don't need to know why you're in a shitty mood, snarling at them when they ask for your help, glaring at them if there using the copier when you wanted to use it, throwing Donald Duck ballistic tantrums when the lousy, lazy inconsiderate motherfuckers take the last cup of coffee and leave a little squit at the bottom of the pot to turn into complex hydrocarbon toxins on the burner.

Play it right and they'll think your politically based venting and snapping is a sign that you're drastically overworked and they'll give you an extra week of paid vacation because they're scared you're on the verge of going postal.

I am a public defender. I can take it out on my clients, who will be spending more time in jail. I'll tell them to blame Obama. Or McCain. Or Josh Marshall. And I'll be sure to provide an address.

I thought you were kidding yesterday when you threatened to make this thread! I'd really like a reduction in both kind of posts, thanks.

But if this is what everyone else loves to talk about, who am I to say? At least there is some level of political analysis to many of the threads - making them far superior to the frikkin "unity thread" hell that erupted after the primaries, so I ain't complainin. They just seem to have reached a certain cycle of redundancy.

Tomorrow, I may just try "Recommend if you're sick of Armchair Guerilla." The ultimate indignity would be to receive no recommendations. Too insignificant to bother with.

There seems to be a redundancy cycle. Eventually something will come along to break the pattern before becoming equally tiresome.

I don't mind either variant of the posts I claim to be tired of so long as the discussion is interesting. Despite the dead horsedness of it all, there are almost always good conversations to be found at the "Cafe."

My pet peeve are the posts that go something like this: [Insert trite or obvious factoid here] and please recommend.

user-pic

I'm sure you have nothing to worry about in terms of recommendations. This is a well-written post for which you will receive a recommendation from yours truly. Of course, you have also provided succor to the notion that any criticism of the Obama campaign by a former Clinton supporter can only be construed as sour grapes. I'm sure you will receive many recommendations for that. And you have also convinced me to keep it to myself if I have any thoughts on the Obama campaign that might be construed as being motivated by my support for Senator Clinton in the primaries. It's just not worth it and I'm too tired. From here on in, until the election is finished, I will keep any criticisms I might have about the manner in which the campaign is being waged to myself.

Say it ain't so. We're all about second guessing here.

God bless Bruce, I love him, but he'll still be writing variations of that post after we win the election.

user-pic

well-deserved lol

user-pic

We shall see Articleman; I don't think you know me. Just remember that in the real world there are people voting for and supporting Senator Obama for all kinds of reasons, and not all of them have to do with "Yes we can". I am not prone to writing things that folks have no interest in, or that too many people find offensive. And, more than anything, I'm bone tired of having to caveat everything I write with an explanation that I have been a loyal Democrat all of my life, that I remain one, and that my criticisms of a candidate--or with me more often than not, criticisms of what some of his supporters write--are not motivated by some sinister purpose. So I guess it took the unanticipated chiding by a former Clinton supporter, but as of now and for the remainder of the campaign, I'll just keep working for the candidate in the real world where I don't get card-checked. I've never done well in Orwellian settings.

Bruce: There was certainly no chiding intended. I for one would be disappointed if the unintended result of my unintended chiding would be to cause you to put a lid on anything. Au contraire. As Democrats, we are consigned to quibbling and disagreement. Let the Republicans march in lockstep (even if it means to victory). We cherish our dissent. I might feel more concerned if you were a regular guest on Meet The Press but in this forum our opinions are not likely to sway the race. To the contrary, the site would be terribly boring without diversity of opinion (to a point - I don't see any McCain fans out there).

My only point (if there really was one - it was a bit of a snark) was that the same feelings that came out in the primary seem to underlie some of the more persistent doom and gloom posts. Nothing wrong with that per se. Truth be told (hopefully, outside the glare of the thought police), I share the feeling. Many of us believed that the Obama love that swept through the Democratic party might be a harder sell to the public at large. That seems to be proving true. Obama faces tremendous hurdles getting America to trust him with President. I happened to believe HRC would not have faced the same resistance, but the majority of Democrats felt otherwise and I hope they were right. I do try to keep my feeling (certainty) that I was right out of my criticism of the candidate, though.

But back to my point. According to the results of my unofficial survey, only 22 people seem to be sick of "woe is me" posts, while a whopping 70 people are sick of the "sky is falling" posts. Therefore, Bruce, I say to you and anyone else who cares about public opinion: "Bitch on, baby!"

user-pic

AG:
Please don't sweat it. I didn't mean to chide you either, and I probably used the wrong word. I know and understand your central point. But I think you also correctly point out that, at least around these parts, if you supported HRC and if you then, for example, criticize lots of the Palincentric messages being bandied about over the past couple of weeks (as I have), you can't expect your comment to be viewed as anything other than sour grapes from a Clinton supporter. That's just the way things work. So, as I said, and please no disrespect to you (your one of the refreshing additions to this place), I'm going to place a self-imposed moratoriumm on any campaign criticism as a result of the fact that I am (as you are) one of the few enduring former Clinton supporters left at this fundamentally changed forum. Remember, it was supposed to be a Cafe.

user-pic

should be "you're" in the parenthetical suck-up to AG.

user-pic

C'mon, Bruce. I do know you, at least a little bit. I figured that you would take articleman's ribbing with the sense of humor with which it was intended. The fact is that you don't have to caveat everything you write with an explanation that you have been a loyal Democrat all of your life. Most of us know it already b/c we've read and appreciated your personal contributions here, and anyone with a few brain cells can see the thoughtfulness and intelligence behind your writing. You surely don't believe that Armchair's cautious chiding was aimed at you. He was not suggesting that Obama should not be criticized, only recognizing that there is a pernicious side to some of the criticism that he receives. This post was an evenhanded, almost reluctant, follow-up to his previous criticism of the pernicious side of the eternal optimism of some supporters.

I'm not sure if you've noticed it, but there is a brand of Obama-whining on this site that is if not destructive at least annoying, just as there is a brand of Obama-promoting that is equally annoying. Armchair has decried both. But no one thinks that you're in the Obama whining camp, and while I don't doubt that you've been attacked by some Obama-lovin' trolls, I don't think I've ever seen you face much criticism at the cafe. Your posts are almost always followed by well-deserved praise.

So please take the joke from articleman, who also praises you, drop the caveats, and keep fighting the good fight.

user-pic

Genghis:

Please see what I wrote to AG which I think explains where I'm coming from and why I'm doing whatI'm doing.

And Articleman, I wasn't offended by what you wrote; I understand and can give a good ribbin' myself. Genghis, on the other hand, you have never been able to take jacks**t. :)

There are plenty of things to write about Genghis. Worry not buddy.

Bruce


user-pic

That's different. Things about me aren't funny.

But what's the "fundamentally changed forum" stuff? As Mr. Glad has been known to declare on rare occasions, this place has been an Obama echo chamber since at least February. I thought that you liked being in the contrarian minority.

user-pic

I am a contrarian, indeed, and I don't mind being one at all, but it's better to be a contrarian on the merits. We'll pick it up again in November when President Obama pisses me off by his choice of DOL Secretary or AG or something, or when he doesn't give HRC absoluutely everything she asks for.

user-pic

I'm bone tired of having to caveat everything I write with an explanation....where I don't get card-checked. I've never done well in Orwellian settings.

Consider trying saying your piece and then not responding to the trollish card checks. That this problem comes in when people feel they have to debate, and put people on one side or another, black or white, that's that's what this is all about. That is what it's all about for a lot of very active posters (sometimes even to the point of adolescent video gamers), but in my experience, it's not what it's all about for mnay lurkers, lurkers vastly larger in number. (I've seen it estimated that on a site like this, 80% of users are lurkers.) Try thinking like this: you've got an idea, an analysis, something someone says makes you think of something, share it. Ignore those trying to make that sharing into a debate point.

I know, when they try to make you into a straw man, it's maddening. And you've got the problem of having posted your full real world name on some posts, so feel you can't leave the straw man labeling lie unchallenged. But I think many lurkers can see through a lot of that (that is precisely why they don't bother to participate at all, but just search for the good Socratic input.)

Try this rule: if it's not going to fun to answer, don't answer. Come to this whole thing anonymous, you don't have a reputation to protect. That's the rule a lot of the more trollish are following, why shouldn't you?

I should add that doing this might be kinda hard for a lawyer type trained in adverserial procedure. :-)

I should also add that it's been exceptionally Orwellian here since the primary because most of the Hillary-leaning or undecided were chased away by mass blog/agitprop churn of Obama supporters with the new software in February. But there is still "all political points of view welcome" on the comment guidelines. I think you are thinking that the problem will pass with the election, but you know, before February we had other similar things going on here on a much lower level. For example, we had a bunch of pitchfork populists always ragging away at the Washington insider thing, continually personally attacking all the think tank folks in America Abroad and running jihad on them and on Josh's DLC friends. I think there are always these clique/gang/groupthink things going on in forums, and you have to learn to let go of them somewhat if you want to enjoy participation. They try to label you, but you have to have the confidence of letting your words stand for themselves. To go a step further and constantly try to gain their approval and understanding is stepping into a high school game.

I'm worried the 'woe unto us' posts are contagiously depressing and may in turn depress Obama voter turnout, (i.e. if Obama is down in the polls why bother showing up to vote for him?).

No one wants to attend a pity party.

user-pic

You're not serious are you?

The type of people who would stay home as a result of "woe unto us" posts don't exist because that type of reader doesn't read posts of any kind on sites like this.

The sky is falling!!!!!!!!!!

just kidding

Leave a comment

Armchair Guerrilla

user-pic

Following: 21
Followers: 21

Posts
Comments & Recommends


  • Location Brooklyn
  • Party in my mind

Favorites

All Reader Posts
How to use myTPM

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address