Several themes of the Hillary/Obama contest are likely to remain relevant for the general election. Among them are two of Hillary’s favorite canards: (1) that Obama lacks experience, and (2) that Obama is an elitist. At least that’s the lesson of the GOP’s new anti-Obama attack ad, described at the The Caucus today.
His momentary break from the campaign trail, and return in triumph to Washington, D.C., should give him a chance to allay some of these concerns, if he plays his cards right. Suggestion to Mr. Obama – start acting magnanimously, and start making the right kinds of connections in your campaign.
John Kerry taught us that the trick to defeating the “elitist” image is the little things: don’t go on skiing vacations. Don’t eat at fancy restaurants. Rather, vacation with the common man, and eat with the common man. Act with magnanimity. Thankfully, Mr. Obama seems to be taking these concerns to heart already. By turning even the mundane act of eating into a stopover at a
“normal” restaurant, he can start accumulating the many small deeds that, together, add up to a presentation that rings with populism.
The simple act of even talking about servicing Hillary Clinton’s campaign debt, too, graces him with the mantle of clemency, and makes him seem all the more leader-like. Clemency has long been a positive trait of leadership, and the key to recovering unity in a divided nation. The Roman princeps Augustus built his image on clementiae, among other virtues (to the left, the Augustan “Clipeus Virtutis,” or “Shield of Virtues”), more by talking about it than acting on it. Deeds like these will make the GOP’s “empty rhetoric” attack sound itself empty, and set Obama up to sweep to victory in the general election. Should he take the time to couple this with some last minute lawmaking, or compromise-brokering on the Hill, he could turn this little reprieve into a veritable turning point.
Obama has weaved a messy web of lies across the primary season – it will be interesting to see if McCain points them out.
Posted by Progressive Conservative | May 9, 2008, 10:29 pmWhat lies!?
Posted by Ames | May 9, 2008, 10:37 pmThe list is a mile long, but let’s look at just one example:
I could care less about the comments made by Wright. It sounds like the guy is a real idiot and that’s the kind of stuff idiots say. But Obama originally defended him, saying he could not disown him based on certain remarks. Then just recently he finally turned his back on him FOR THE EXACT SAME REMARKS! His whole approach was disingenious from the start.
Obama is going to crumple under heavy scrutiny. He just doesn’t have enough substance.
Posted by Progressive Conservative | May 9, 2008, 10:53 pmThe Wright thing is perfectly explainable. He tried to play nice with Wright – look, I can’t have this being seen as part of me, but I still can’t disown him, because we’re close – and Wright steps it up, and tries to bring Obama down with him? That’s ridiculous! No flip flop, based on changed circumstances.
Posted by Ames | May 9, 2008, 11:01 pmHe said he couldn’t disown him based on the comments and then he disowned him based on the exact same comments, pretending they were new and more outrageous.
Posted by Progressive Conservative | May 9, 2008, 11:08 pmNot only is Obama smart and wise beyond his years, he is and will to continue to surround himself with a diverse crowd of smart, reasonable advisors and operatives. He’s going to be great. He always comes through by being thoughtful, honest, and measured in his choices, and responses to conflict and changing circumstances. A presidency, like a campaign, is more than one person. I think his “machine,” as it were, will outperform McCain’s.
Posted by marianna | May 9, 2008, 11:10 pmYeah, Marianna, agreed! I remember in 2000, my dad (a moderate, but socially liberal and generally awesome fellow) defended his decision to vote for Bush based on his belief that Bush would surround himself with good people. Dad, like I, loved Colin Powell.
We know how that turned out.
The people surrounding him are key. And I don’t think that McCain’s cabinet would be much different than Bush’s, and his base would be more or less the same.
Posted by Ames | May 9, 2008, 11:19 pmAnd ProCon, Wright had that whole extra speech where he mocked white people, and various other presidents – how are those the same comments? And even if they were more of the same, he was clearly forcing Obama to choose – US mainstream, or me – and so he made that choice, when it was forced on him.
Posted by Ames | May 9, 2008, 11:20 pmI am hoping for Obama out of the field of candidates but a lot of criticisms I’ve heard of him are quite valid.
Posted by parallelsidewalk | May 10, 2008, 11:24 amObama has zero chance of winning after the bitter remark. McCain will not hesitate to remind voters in early November that Obama thinks that the only reason they believe in God or their second amendment rights is becuase they are bitter over the economy.
I am by no means a small towner, I’m right near Chicago. But I’m still not going to forget that comment or what it shows about Obama, and neither is anyone else I know.
Posted by Ken | May 10, 2008, 2:31 pmKen, I’m sorry you feel that way… but I don’t think that, and I don’t expect that, one off-color remark can justify voting for a guy who’ll commit us to Iraq (and Iran!) for 100 years. America’s in trouble, and one verbal misstep ought not to justify resignation to policies that’ll only perpetuate it.
Posted by Ames | May 10, 2008, 2:36 pmIt’s not a misstep….these are his feelings. You can’t keep contributing all his bad comments to being misspoken or playing politics. if that is the case, who is to say we have even met the real Obama? At some point he’s going to have to prove he is more than his campaign promises. This will be a huge burden for someone so new to the national stage.
Posted by Progressive Conservative | May 10, 2008, 4:54 pmUpon what do you base the statement that Obama is smart and wise beyond his years? For one thing, as a member of the Joyce Foundation’s board, he voted to spend millions to deprive people of their basic right of self-defense. Is that wise?
Posted by the-helix | May 10, 2008, 5:09 pmObama has no track record. Running the country is way more complicated than simply the Iraq war. If you vote for Obama for the sole reason of getting out of Iraq, you will be sadly dissapointed, since he himself stated that he knows he cannot pull out our troops right away. Nixon wanted to pull out of Viet Nam, was elected, and four years later, we were still in Viet Nam. Do you think Obama can magically make things happen? Given that the above premise is true, and that Obama will not be able to find a way to extricate us from the Iraq mess for several years, what other reasons do you have to vote for him? At least Hillary is a realist, has experience, and knows what can and what cannot be accomplished.
Posted by the-helix | May 10, 2008, 5:14 pmI think skill and intelligence, coupled with a good Cabinet, is a substitute for experience. How well did all of Bush’s experience serve us?
Posted by Ames | May 11, 2008, 3:42 pmWe have no guarantees that Obama will appoint anyone of substance to his Cabinet. The man has only been clear on a few ideals and they have been REALLY bad. He also listens to people even less than Bush. Obama’s economic plans is ludicrous. As just one example, he wants to make a huge raise on capital gains taxes. He has no ideal how much this will hurt our economy.
Still, I had an epiphany last night. I want to see Obama elected. Americans need to suffer through another Carter administration to be reminded that you don’t put liberals in the White House. I also think that given the cult-like status of Obama, if he isn’t elected McCain will be hated ten times more than Bush ever was. He will probably have to be transported in a tank to deal with all the death threats.
So I say Obama in ’08 ! Progressives in 2012 !
Posted by Progressive Conservative | May 11, 2008, 8:58 pmI have to ask, in what sense is McCain “progressive”?
Posted by Ames | May 11, 2008, 9:22 pmFrom what I have seen so far, McCain is going to be more Progressive on the environment, democratic reform, on economic policy. Is he an ‘ideal’ Progressive? No. But right now, he is the best we have out there. Obama will no doubt promote some Progressive policies, but he will take them too far, meaning he will liberalize them. At least with McCain there will be a moderate tone. Progressivism is about common sense and moderation.
I do not like McCain’s foreign policy statements or his position on Iran. I also think he is going to have to work hard to prove to us that he wants to streamline the government.
At the end of the day to get the Progressive stamp of approval from me, I want to see a candidate that is moving to the center and less likely to be beholden to special interests. Right now, I do not sense a Centrist message from Obama. He hasn’t done anything to prove to me that he is anything other than a typical lib.
To be sure, I am scared McCain has sold his soul to the establishment, but if I cast a vote for him it will be in hopes that the maverick is still in there.
Posted by Progressive Conservative | May 12, 2008, 4:04 pmGreat Thread/Post!
Godfather (theslowbleed.com)
Posted by Godfather | May 12, 2008, 4:13 pmI take the George Lakoff route:
http://stuffwhitedbagslike.wordpress.com/2008/05/13/juntas/
or maybe it’s of a piece with Carl Schmitt’s theory? Either way, the spin is over strength vs. weakness, and every progressive cause is labeled “weak” by conservatives — e.g. Cheney’s comment that environmentalism is a “private” (that is, feminine) virtue.
Posted by chunque | May 13, 2008, 10:41 am@Progressive Conservative
I think if you look back at most of the celebrated Presidents, you will see a lot of Democrats in that mix.
I think Obama will have a cabinet based on the capability of the people. He doesn’t have a long list of loyalists that he needs to set up. Which I believe Bush has done at the sacrifice of good government, and that both Clinton and McCain would do the same to a big extent. Especially the Clintons.
Also on the big ideals, he used to be criticized for being too professorial about the issues. I think he’s holding back on that with Hillary since they do have similar ideas. I think he’ll just blast McCain out of the water come the general.
And besides, I think your faith in McCain is misguided. McCain is making promises in his campaign to stay conservative, Obama is making promises to stay away from idealogical fights and work together with Republicans. If you believe that they will be pressured to stick to these things after elected, especially if they wanted to be reelected. then Obama has the best bet to be the most balanced. So I don’t see why you would vote with a hope that he would change. Seems like more of a gamble.
Besides, McCain has backed off on his strong stances on issues, changed his mind, given up anything to the nominee, and already has a known reputation for flying off the handle. I don’t want a man like that in office.
Oh and Obama denounced him because he was going around stabbing him in the back repeatedly. I think that’s valid. I do love how some conservative jump on some small thing like this, but then give Bush the benefit the doubt on…every decision and idea he’s had…that affect the country.
Posted by oneiroi | May 13, 2008, 12:25 pmVery interesting thread.
Something to consider: McCain is on cruise control right now. He hasn’t had to fight for his nomination the way Barack and Hillary have been going at it.
He’ll get bloodied up soon enough. There will be some intense scrutiny of him as summer and autumn play out.
Another point, I don’t think the Republicans are going to be able to muster the kind of turnout that the Dems will be capable of this year.
I think Barack will be formidable.
Posted by Thaddeus Dombrowski | May 13, 2008, 3:37 pmI agree with Ames – it’s the quality of the experience and the quality of the people supporting the president that matter.
Posted by Kristie | May 13, 2008, 5:08 pmAnd besides, I think your faith in McCain is misguided. McCain is making promises in his campaign to stay conservative, Obama is making promises to stay away from idealogical fights and work together with Republicans. If you believe that they will be pressured to stick to these things after elected, especially if they wanted to be reelected. then Obama has the best bet to be the most balanced. So I don’t see why you would vote with a hope that he would change. Seems like more of a gamble.
If recent history has shown us anything it’s that people will say a lot of things to get elected. Still, McCain is not exactly paying tribute to the far right to get elected. he’s been contrary on the environment andI expect him to bolt on a few other hot issues, like ID.
Posted by Progressive Conservative | May 13, 2008, 5:49 pmSure people say a lot of things, but I think with McCain, once he gives lip service to these things and they help get him collected, he’ll have to pay them back…by being the far right guy they wanted.
Posted by oneiroi | May 13, 2008, 8:50 pmI don’t see him serving more than one term, so I anticipate he will be beholden to none.
Posted by Progressive Conservative | May 13, 2008, 10:30 pmI don’t see him having the strength behind him to reform the party to anything _but_ a farther-right party.
Assuming that’s a given, if he doesn’t campaign “right,” he won’t get elected, and if he doesn’t act that way in office, he won’t get anything done; he’ll be blocked at both ends by Congress. If the choice is between being useless “maverick” and being a meaningful farther-right conservative… well, America can’t really afford either.
Posted by Ames | May 14, 2008, 1:04 am