When I was sixteen years old, there was a Presidential election posing an agent of change versus an established pro. The change agent was a sitting Senator, but in this case, the "pro" was an incumbent President. The change agent came out of nowhere, energizing young people with his vision and attitude.
I grew up in the Chicago area when major newspapers generally had their own serious political cartoonists on the payroll. In my opinion, only Mike Luckovich of the Atlanta Journal Constitution approaches (now defunct) The Chicago Daily News’ John Fischetti.
I still have this cartoon. It shows Edmund Muskie on crutches, Hubert Humphrey pushing a broken down jalopy. And overhead? A broad-chested , caped, flying figure with "McG" emblazoned on his outfit.
George McGovern flew to the nomination, surprising nearly everyone. I was an ardent supporter and since he was facing Richard Nixon – it wasn’t hard to figure out who was the good guy in the contest.
Barack Obama will have the advantage of not facing a popular sitting President. But like McGovern, he will oppose a seasoned pro with lots of fans in the mainstream media. McGovern fought the tough fight in Congress for many years and was elected in a highly conservative state. Obama has never faced a credible Republican opponent and comes from a safe Democratic state.
This does not bode well.
Movement Progressives are left pretty unmotivated by Mr. Obama’s tepid and timid policy proposals and his conservative rhetoric in defending them. The vast majority will vote for him, but the number that will put money and effort into his campaign is certainly open to question. Cult of personality campaigns have their limits.
The Republicans will certainly rally to their guy. They won’t overlook the ties (limited as they are) to the Chicago area crime figure, or the politics as usual "present" votes in the Illinois GA. It’s possible they’ll advance the idea of how beholden Obama is to the coal and nuclear power industry. And who knows what else they’ll come up with besides the obvious and obligatory lack of experience claim.
At least with Hillary, we'd know what they'd attack with. Bill, mostly.
It’s not exposing state secrets to mention that if you are on the McCain campaign in this setting, what you need to establish is reasonable doubt of your opponent. That strategy has won in the past and there’s no reason think it wouldn’t now.
I hope I’m selling Sen. Obama short and I’m misreading the situation, but I doubt that’s the case. This looks like a much tougher contest for Democrats than it should have been and we could lose.
Don Wheeler
Edwards Democrat
South Bend, IN