Daily Kos

The Obama Problama

by Dvd Avins

Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 07:50:58 PM PDT

He's smart, funny, quick, and right about most of the things he talks about. But

  1. he's not as good as people think he is, because his charisma causes folks to assume he agrees with them on things he doesn't talk about—and we don't all agree about those things, so we can't all be right about him
  2. he's a long way from showing that he can withstand the flows and eddies of an nearly interminable campaign.
But before he has a chance to show that he can't withstand the ordeal, he may suck the wind out of the campaigns of everyone else who could beat Clinton for the nomination.

I'm only about 80% sure that a Clinton nomination would be a bad idea. What had been virtually certain of is that she'd have to be a much more personable campaigner than we think she is, or her campaign would founder as quickly as Gephardt's did. And if she is that much better a campaigner, then she could likely beat whomever the Republicans put up.*

And I was sure that there would be other viable Democrats in the race, waiting for Clinton to implode, because I'm not the only one who sees that likely implosion coming. But with Obama's entry into the race, early support and money for all theo others may dry up, just as Koch's entry into the 1982 New York governor's race cleared out all the other not-Cuomo candidates. If that happens, we damn well better hope that at least one of them lives up their supporters' expectations.

Better, would be to have a crowded field going into the early state contests. It may not have helped much last time, but I don't blame the voters, because there really wasn't anyone obviously better than Kerry. Yeah, yeah, everybody will be outraged and insist that their guy was much better. Dean had a lot going for him, but even ignoring the scream, his media skills really weren't ready for prime time. Clark was too inexperienced to win without first having won a war, and Edwards was almost as inexperienced. In retrospect, I think Edwards would have been a better nominee than Kerry, but I'm not sure—not nearly sure enough to change my opinion that the primaries and caucuses are a good proving ground, and we shouldn't anoint candidates without having them go through such proof.

*(That, despite my opinion that if Clinton seems on the way to the Democratic nomination, it increases the otherwise slim chance that McCain will turn into a real front-runner, rather than just leading in name recognition, as he is now. The activist Republicans, who have always been inordinately scared of this Clinton, will settle for McCain, whom they don't like but whom they correctly perceive as having appeal in a general election.)

(I can find no way to make smaller or grayer text for footnotes.)

Tags: 2008 elections, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 25 comments

  •  Clever diary. (0+ / 0-)

    Thanks.  I enjoyed this and agree with everything you wrote.

    by cas2 on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 08:07:13 PM PDT

    •  Agree with everything? (0+ / 0-)

      Clinton is the huge favorite if Obama does not run.

      How does one then conclude that Obama's running would hurt the chances of non-Clinton candidates?

      Is it not more reasonable to argue that Obama would split votes with Clinotn, thus giving others more of a chance?

      The premier political debate coverage site: DebateScoop

      by demondeac on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 08:51:14 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The field... (1+ / 0-)

        Before Obama got in the race Edwards and possibly others would likely have had a good shot at a two way race with Clinton. If Obama's poll numbers hold up and he raises huge amounts of money that blocks any opening for Edwards, Bayh, Clark, Richardson, etc. If neither Clinton or Obama stumble in the primaries we will probably see the two of them with the most delegates at the convention and even possibly both of them on the ticket.  

        BlueSunbelt.Com Netroots for the Sunbelt states robwire.com My personal blog

        by Rob on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 10:29:20 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  You tend to ramble (0+ / 0-)

    a little bit but your premise and conclusion is sound.

    I am not sure that McCain will be the nominee for the GOP. I suspect Hagel will emerge as the winner in the gop primary and will be a formiddable opponent against any of the recently named dem participants.

    " In our every deliberation,we must consider the impact of our decisions on the next seven generations" From the great law of the Iroquois confederacy.

    by flatford39 on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 08:12:55 PM PDT

  •  and you have the right to bash Obama because??? (0+ / 0-)

    A. You've been a Senator for much longer and know that he is unworthy of the praise you should be receiving?

    B. Fought and Died for our Nation

    C. Read an article once about how a Senator should behave.

    typos are often serendipitously appropriate + HowOd

    by lightnessofbeing on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 08:28:49 PM PDT

    •  Do you honestly consider this bashing?? (5+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      Donna Z, DaleA, baccaruda, witchamakallit, Autarkh

      Isn't there a little room for candid discussion?  Or is the hero worship such that anything other than total admiration and complete capitulation that he will be our next candidate is considered bashing?  There's got to be some balance somewhere here, don't you think?  

      by gustynpip on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 08:35:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Oh please.. (1+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        snout

        Or is the hero worship such that anything other than total admiration and complete capitulation that he will be our next candidate is considered bashing?

        Where in the hell is this so-called hero-worshipping of Obama? I see far more bashing of Obama on Dkos than "worshipping".

        Unreal. The wingnuts must be laughing their asses over this stuff.

        "This is bullshit, this is malarkey." -Sen. Joe Biden

        by assyrian64 on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 08:40:43 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  A senator, or a presidential candidate? (2+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      bluecayuga, DaleA, michael1104

      My take on this reaches a similar conclusion, which is that we have a great chance to take back the White House, but neither Clinton or Obama can get us there, and if one or both of them uses star power to lock other people out of the race, it hurts us.

      Clinton, well, enough has been said about her on this site.  I don't think she can win.  If she tries, it's ego over country.  Big surprise, she's a politician, but still.

      Obama is too young, which would be ok, if he didn't have a "foreign" name and wasn't a black man.  I wish we could have a black president.  It would make me really proud of this country.  I also wish we could have a female president, or an openly gay president, but I don't see it happening in 2008.  We have a chance to take the, "I'm a republican, but . . . " voters, but we can't give them any excuse, knee jerk or otherwise, to say, "eh, it's just too much of a change."

      Howard Dean could do it this time around, but he won't.  He's found a place to make a difference and will stay there and do so.

      I'm still hoping for the guy (yes, sadly, the guy, and a white, straight one at that, with an Anglo Saxon name), go come out, surprise us all, and knock everyone in the country off their feet.  I'm waiting, and hoping.

      by Petronella on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 08:39:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Obama (0+ / 0-)

        I think if Obama wasn't quite soo much substance over style, & such a slick DLC-esch character.. and his name didnt rhyme with Osama, I think he'd have a good shot.  I think a black candidate could win.

        "The truth may be puzzling. It may not be consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences do not determine what's true." -Carl Sagan

        by astronautagogo on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 10:14:38 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Whoops! (0+ / 0-)

      A. You aren't a Senator either. You also don't own a popular political blog site. You therefore don't have the right to post an opinion about any Senate issues here.

      B. You're still alive therefore you don't get to criticize other people who are alive. Wait until you're dead and then post.

      C. I've read more articles about Senatorial behavior than you. I promise that one is all that is necessary in order to have a valid opinion about anything Senatorial.

      by baccaruda on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 11:06:36 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Thinking he's a big green is ot bashing (0+ / 0-)

      I like him. I think he might well be President some day. He might even win in 2008, but we're fools if we obliviously assume he'll hold up as a strong candidate before we see him handle the though weeks.

      Lobbyists are just the piano players in the whorehouse; you could abolish them and the girls upstairs would still be doing business.--al Fubar -6.50 -5.69

      by Dvd Avins on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 02:19:28 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  a *bit* green, *not* bashing (0+ / 0-)

        When I preview, I should look at the title, too.

        Lobbyists are just the piano players in the whorehouse; you could abolish them and the girls upstairs would still be doing business.--al Fubar -6.50 -5.69

        by Dvd Avins on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 02:21:35 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Why are you so certain McCain would thump HRC? (2+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    DaleA, memofromturner

    The rightwingnutism of 50,000 more troops? Thats a selling point?
    McCains frail health may also not hold up.
    But Obama fresh candidacy may take off like a meteor or else or stall with a wimp.
    Wes Clarks the guy for P. He has gotten wiser, has intellectual heft, and with Obama as VP, that combo is lethal

    by wuod kwatch on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 08:32:59 PM PDT

    •  McCain has a good reputation, from before. (0+ / 0-)

      Before he started kissing the wingnuts' butts, selling his soul because this is his last shot.  Unfortunately, the reputation continues despite his capitulation.

      I am thrilled that Giuliani is seriously considering running.  He will split the "moderate Republican" (as if there really is a such thing) vote and result in a super-right Republican candidate.

      I wasn't blown away by Clark the last time, but I'm willing to give him a second look.  I'd love Obama as VP, if it would get us something other than pride in our country (my pride in my country doesn't get anyone any votes, other than mine, which they already have).

      So, is there a dark horse?  A Bill Clinton for 2008?  Who is he and where do you think he'll come from?

      by Petronella on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 08:44:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I said just the opposite. (0+ / 0-)

      I said that if HRC comes off as more personable than expected, she'd likely win despite the GOP turning to McCain.

      Lobbyists are just the piano players in the whorehouse; you could abolish them and the girls upstairs would still be doing business.--al Fubar -6.50 -5.69

      by Dvd Avins on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 02:23:57 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The problama I see (4+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    ptmflbcs, ChiGirl88, proudprogressiveCA, nicejoest

    resides in Democrats who nitpick Obama as if he were the second coming of Zell Miller instead of the popular, charismatic and possible progressive candidate he actually is.

    Is he perfect?

    No.

    So what?

    "This is bullshit, this is malarkey." -Sen. Joe Biden

    by assyrian64 on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 08:35:38 PM PDT

    •  The problama I see is literally (3+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      assyrian64, ptmflbcs, proudprogressiveCA

      dozens of diaries written about the dangers and terrors and heartbreak and impossibility and we-better-just-give-up-in-disgust of the two front runners: HRC and Obama.

      It is quite possible one of these two will be our nominee. Let's not stir up hatred against them.

      If you people don't like Obama and HRC, why don't you write a great diary about how wonderful Richardson is, or what a great vision Edwards has, or how to get Gore to run, etc.

      All this negativity is starting to grate a bit.

      by nicejoest on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 08:43:40 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think it's because no one (0+ / 0-)

        really inspiring is out there now.  When did Bill Clinton hit the radar screen?  Dean?  I think we're all waiting.  At least I am.  It's still early.  There's no one exciting for me right now (well, other than the new James Bond, but that's a different conversation - best Bond ever?).  So, if I express an opinion, unfortunately, it is negative.  I'd love to say, "but so-and-so is my guy," but right now, I'm not feeling it.

        by Petronella on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 08:47:15 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I don't think I"m stirring up hatred (0+ / 0-)

        I like Obama, but I'm leery. I don't like Clinton, but I'm eager to have my mind changed. I just think we're better off with a crowded field in the winter of 2008 than we are having the field narrowed to two too early.

        Lobbyists are just the piano players in the whorehouse; you could abolish them and the girls upstairs would still be doing business.--al Fubar -6.50 -5.69

        by Dvd Avins on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 02:28:51 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Did you try superscript and subscript tags? (0+ / 0-)

    <sub>This is subscript</sub> This is regular text.

    This is superscript This is also regular text.

    http://www.webclumsy.com/...

    "The most patriotic thing an American can do is ask questions." - Madeleine Albright

    by Tuttle on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 08:38:58 PM PDT

    •  I tries sub, not super, thanks (0+ / 0-)

      And from your example (at least using Opera) super works, but sub doesn't.

      Lobbyists are just the piano players in the whorehouse; you could abolish them and the girls upstairs would still be doing business.--al Fubar -6.50 -5.69

      by Dvd Avins on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 02:30:30 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  One thing I think EVERYONE needs to remember (2+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    ptmflbcs, snout

    is that Obama is getting people interested in politics who have been apathetic to it for years.  

    When I went to the OBama/McCaskill rally a couple weeks ago before election day, I went with a fellow college democrat, but 3 people who I never would have considered interested in politics showed up there next to us.  He's enchanting people!

    If the Republicans promise to stop telling lies about us, maybe we'll stop telling the truth about them..

    by Romaniac on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 09:41:15 PM PDT

  •  What has Clinton or Obama actually (0+ / 0-)

    done to merit so much enthusiasm?  Clinton was first lady and as a Senator she is remarkably unremarkable.  Obama is an unknown factor who has gotten a lot of media interest because he is attractive and young.  He has been in the Senate for a couple of years and has no record to speak of.  I think both are untested and there is nothing to suggest that they will survive the rigors of a mud slinging 2008 Presidential campaign.  My own guess is that Dems will go with someone besides Clinton and Obama who has executive experience or exhibits strength and integrity and is a fighter.

    by ice2wata on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 10:16:17 PM PDT

Permalink | 25 comments