Let me be clear. My vote's in the bag for Obama. I made a couple of small donations during the primaries. I've advocated on his behalf among people I know. I expect to do those things and more for the General Election. But I'm disappointed he didn't go for public financing. Sticking with the pledge would have been wiser, in my view, for two reasons.
- Honoring the promise, despite the risks, would have been a reputation booster. Breaking it hurts in some tangible ways.
Sure, the campaign is spinning the move about as well as possible... The system's broken; anti-Obama 527s like Freedom's Watch are ramping up and will be armed to the teeth; McSame's a game player, etc.
Those last items aren't myths. They're actual threats that need to be confronted. And getting elected is important. So the campaign can finesse things by saying the promise doesn't apply to current circumstances. Perhaps another upside is that Obama's move will be perceived as savvy and tough, whereas he could have been portrayed as a weak whatever if he had so easily forfeited a clear advantage in the ability to attract donors.
But I've been paying attention. The circumstances within the current political environment that presumably justify breaking the pledge are a lot fuzzier than the original pledge itself.
I give mental bonus points to nearly any public personality who displays straight up consistency and credibility. I don't think I'm alone on that. So it's fair to say that Obama's decision is likely to push a few fence sitters the wrong way.
- If you really want to change politics, why not trust the intelligence American voter over the influence of Swift Boaters and their ilk?
Play to the intelligence of the American people? Challenge them to think critically and look past the propaganda? Yes. Yes we can.
I prefer to think he could have pulled it off. But that would have meant advancing the public dialog up a few notches really quick. With so much at stake, he evidently preferred to stick with the formula that worked for the primary. I don't fault him for that, but I see Obama as a very ambitious guy (I mean that in a good way), and I would have liked him to demand that ambition of the American electorate as well.
My point is this: Getting elected is crucial, but this campaign is premised on electing a change agent. If there's a way to get that change started sooner rather than later, by integrating means with ends as part of the election process itself, I'd be delighted to see it. "Be the change you wish to see" is a pretty good platitude.