Barack Returns to Iowa, and Both Bear the Wounds of the Long Campaign
Last night was glorious in Des Moines--balmy, clear, a moon like a gold doubloon on the low horizon. It was the perfect backdrop for Barack Obama's return to the state that set him on the path to the Democratic nomination. It should have been an occasion of joy and celebration with the Iowans who so early on believed in him, many working their hearts out for him. Instead it was, at least to my eye, a troubling event that inadvertently dramatized the disjunction with reality that characterizes Obama's persona and speech now, as well as the divisions among Americans that the long campaign is laying bare and deepening.
From the beginning of his race for the presidency, Senator Obama has inveighed against divisiveness in society and politics. This has been a grand rhetorical trope, and a successful one, bringing forward many of Obama's first adherents. Divisiveness has been out there somewhere, separating some people somewhere. But now it's more than rhetoric; it's here, bearing down on the Obama Campaign, threatening to ground it, no matter how high Obama tries to fly. There is no better example of this than the setting for his remarks about Senator Clinton last night in Des Moines. Before the rally began, some reporters and photographers gathered around a TV rigged up behind the cut riser in the press area to watch Hillary Clinton's Kentucky victory speech on MSNBC. Mostly, these were guys watching--and commenting derisively. "She's still talking?" "Why won't she shut up!" "All her supporters in Kentucky are racists."
The press compound was as full as it ever is--maybe a hundred people, from all over the world--and I have no idea who these guys were. The traveling press had not yet arrived. National media almost never reveal anything personal, particularly at such a public event (spectators just on the other side of the barrier). But it's not uncommon for local press, particularly in small towns, to openly wear their preferences--to clap for "their" candidates, for example. Nevertheless, I've never seen anything like it in the months I've been following the campaigns. To my mind, it's part of the spreading, corrosive factionalism. And the backstage commentary was completely at odds with what Barack Obama was about to say about Hillary Clinton--at least on the surface.
"We have had our disagreements during this campaign, but we all admire her courage, her commitment and her perseverance. No matter how this primary ends, Senator Clinton has shattered myths and broken barriers and changed the America in which my daughters and yours will come of age." Aside from the disingenuousness--surely Senator Obama knows that many in his audiences do not admire Hillary Clinton--condescension clouds the lofty tone. And what exactly are the "shattered myths" and "broken barriers" to which Obama's very young male speechwriters are referring?
In effect, Senator Obama has been trying to step past Hillary Clinton with a tip of his hat, a nod and a few nice words. But the reality is that they are still at war, for she has refused to surrender. Not only has she not given up the fight, she is now damaging him. Obama's response lately has been passive-aggression. This was one of the most troubling aspects of his appearance in Des Moines, for it was not in all honesty a celebratory reunion with Iowans but a maneuver to counter Clinton's anticipated big win in Kentucky by returning to the battleground state that gave him his first big win. Passive-aggressive strategy dictated Iowa redux. If Obama had waited until he actually clinched the nomination, he could have returned to Iowa and given its citizens the rally they deserve. Instead the rally lacked the same sense of place as did Clinton's in Nashville on the night of Obama's win in South Carolina.
There is a widening gulf between Clinton's supporters and his, and so far Obama doesn't know how to approach it. He has yet to figure out how to reach beyond his base. Before the outdoor rally, I walked along the queue waiting for the gates to open and asked people whom they had caucused for in January. It was great fun because Iowans are so open and friendly, and within an hour or so I had several hundred marks in my notebook. Some had come with self-deprecating confessions about switching sides. One man--laughter all around--admitted that he was second at his caucus to desert Edwards and was now an Obama delegate. A woman announced, to much applause, that she was the last hold-out at hers for Richardson. After two hours and give-or-take five hundred tallies, I found, not surprisingly, that most rally-goers had been Obama supporters from day one. Indeed a reminder of the strength and brilliance of his Iowa campaign was the astonishing number of precinct captains, special invitations in hand, waiting in their own line for VIP seating. But there were also Iowans who had caucused for Edwards, Kucinich, Richardson, Biden and Dodd. There were Iowans for all the Democratic candidates. Except one. And there were no Republicans.
Later that night in post-election coverage on MSNBC (competing with an Italian journalist shouting copy into a cell phone in our hotel lobby--something about Barack Obama and la campagna), Paul Begala gave as evidence that the Democrats are coming together the fact that both Senators Clinton and Obama have run "no negative ads in three weeks." But attacks are now beside the point. The trenches have been dug. Adherents are hunkered down. And supporters are doing all the negative work themselves. Leaving the Des Moines rally, for example, an older Iowa lady, upon seeing a yard sign for down-ballot candidate Representative Leonard Boswell, said, "I could never vote for him. I'll never forgive him for endorsing Hillary." I asked the woman when Boswell had come out for Clinton. It was before the caucuses, she thought, and she didn't see that the timing made her condemnation any less reasonable.
The heart of the Des Moines rally was, of course, Obama's speech. First reading the copy prepared for the press, then listening to Obama himself, I was struck by how much darker his words were than the ones he delivered the night of his Iowa victory. Last night was supposed to be a victory speech of sorts as well, for winning not only Oregon but also the lead in pledged delegates. Nevertheless, negative words and phrases--promises broken, disappointed, skeptics, cynics, a lot of hype, failed us, point-scoring, petty bickering, cynical, doubtful, fearful, doubt, disappointment--threaded the remarks. Obama rushed through them, moreover, stepping on his audience's applause and cheer moments three times. As usual lately, he talked about changing the tax code, changing health care, changing our energy policy, changing the war. What he should have been talking about, down-to-earth, is changing the dynamics of his support. He should have asked, "Is anybody here for Hillary Clinton?" He should have asked his Iowa supporters to reach out to the local Hilaryites and to begin to mend fences. He should have asked for their help in reaching out more generally.
It was a subdued crowd that slowly walked away from the corner of Locust and 6th in Des Moines. These were people who love and trust Barack Obama and who would follow him far and farther. But last evening there had never been a moment-- and really the crowd deserved many-- when Obama came down from the loftiness of his thoughts to rest in the crowd's assured faith, to relax with some of these earliest supporters, to reminisce a tiny bit, to engage in as much call-and-response as white folk are capable. This is what Barack Obama's return to Iowa should have been. But it was not the right time. And divisiveness has exacted its price, even from the Obama Campaign.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Well DUH. We're still in this freaking primary. We can't celebrate until we cut her loose.
Killing the satire and orphaning its admirers so they don't appear doesn't change the underlying truth, "mayrose." It does say a lot about you, though. This is what happens when the reporter becomes the story, Woodward. As Wild Bill Hickock said to Three-finger Monty, "Learn how to deal."
It's still a dark and stormy night.
JP
It was a dark and stormy night. I peered through my Minolta X-700 at the campaign. "Auto-focus? Who needs auto-focus?" I snorted, inhaling the intoxicating lavender of my own perfume. I prefer the self-directed focus, so that my view of the race comes out as soft, fuzzy and unedited as my prose.
My name is Umbridge. Dolores Umbridge. Confidential Reporter, on assignment under the name Mayhill, pretending to support a subject who calls himself Obama - clearly an alias. I abhor people using an alias.
My employer's report is confidential, which is why I'm a confidential reporter because I report things confidentially for people who want things reported in confidence. I'm checking out the story that this Obama is the nuts, the candidate, the macguffin, the real deal, the stuff that dreams are made of. Looks like just another man to me, only less so.
I scan the excited crowd through my lens. Things look dark. They always look dark through my lens. Maybe because I keep the lens cap on. Makes it easier to imagine things the way they ought to be.
Everyone is clearly a plant. No one can be this exciting, this real. The hope is clearly bought and paid for, the way you buy and pay for things that are for sale to be bought...IF you can pay for them.
I take out my fuzzy Hello, Kitty! pen and begin to blog. The pretender is pretending to be gracious... how pretentious!
*** Huffpo Reader Alert ***:
This is the same Trojan horse who wrote that the elderly lady, Jean Weiss, admonished Obama to not "hit on Hillary". She neglected to repeat the rest of what was said.
"Don't hit on Hillary, bring us all back, let her do that stuff. Leave her alone, you don't need to do that, you are higher than that. Bring us up higher than that," The crowd loved it, and Jane Weiss continued: "You"d better be president. You"ve gotta be president."
She went on to ask Obama a pertinent question about the environment and the senator responded, "Before I answer that, I just want to know, will you be my running mate?" Ms. Weiss at this point runs(!) up to the senator, gets a kiss from him and then she fires the crowd up as she returns to her seat, fists in the air.
Mayhill, however, described the scene as a public chastisement; "Age admonishing youth, it was a powerful moment that the crowd much appreciated." Such a lie, it was a powerful moment indeed but not for the lie Ms. Fowler would have us believe.
And here's the video proof of the reality:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/02/dueling-grannies-fight-ov_n_99835.html
So for the benefit of new readers, Ms. Fowler has less than zero credibility!!!
I COPY YOUR POST TO USE AGAINST, Mayhill Fowler, EVERY TIME SHE WRITES A DUM SEXIST and DIVISIVE ARTICLE!!
By all means, please do!
Go ahead, ignore us, trivialize us, try and walk over us, the Hillary Clinton supporters. So far, how well has it worked? A 51% to 49% victory for Obama, a bare victory. A non-mandate victory. And if it's your preference, continue to look down on us. Call us racists and every other name you need to feel good about your smug selves. It's really endearing, truly. It's really like to win us over. I mean, what better way to show how you support a move away from divisive politics than to heap scorn upon your opponents for their choice? Because as much as you expect Clinton supporters to just line up behind Obama, it's not going to happen if you keep insulting us like you Obama supporters do.
We're Democrats too, and our concerns should be addressed as much as yours. If Obama can't even convince his own party in a reasonable way to support him, what chance does he have in the general election?
Obama's supporters are NOT Obama. If you want to vote against him based on what people who comment here say, that makes you appear very small minded and silly.
Mayhill just always sees a dark side in everything Obama does. I've never read more biased reporting. She sees only what she wants to see and spins a story from it.
Mayhill Fowler,
THIS LADY IS "DARK VADER"!! ALWAYS NITPICKING, Obama CAN "NEVER" do anything to please you and Geraldean Ferraro!
YOU MAKE ME FEAL A shamed To Be a Woman Right Now!
AS A "FORMER" CLINTON Jewish Supporter you make me sick writing this DIVISIVE article in a time when we NEED UNITY!!
The disjunction with reality that you hurl at Obama is the disjunction of you and you your ilk that want to change the rules in the fourth quarter to benefit your preferred candidate.
And that, Mayhill, is the biggest problem Obama supporters have with you"disjunction with reality. Full disclosure would give you some shred of credibility. It"s okay to blog as a Clinton supporter, but it"s not okay to insult your readers" intelligence by feigning objectivity, or even worse"masquerading as an Obama supporter.
You "spread corrosive factionalism," and "widen the gulf" between Clinton and Obama supporters when you parse words and deceptively dissect quotes like you do here and on your April 30 post.
"Negative" is not an accurate description of Obama"s speech or the tone of his campaign. "Negative" is the disposition of a writer with the gall to fabricate the mood and tone of a speech and speaker that can be referenced at any time for verification.
As of May 20, the Democratic people have put Obama in a historic position. He has achieved yet another benchmark on the road to the Democratic nomination. Instead of gloating about why he should be the nominee (won popular vote, more states, more delegates), the first thing he does is congratulate and praise his opponent. And this is what you condemn him for? That condemnation makes you seem less reasonable.
This makes people say when they see your posts:
"She's still talking?" "Why won't she shut up!"
The sooner Obama gets out of the campaign the sooner the Dems will have a chance to win in November. Hillary is the only one who can win the White House. Without her at the helm the party is toast.
Is this a joke? Hillary is running for 2012 -- which is truly a joke as we Democrats won't vote for a Republican, ever again.
Count All The Votes! HRC deserves what she has won!!
Hillary won MI and FL and deserves all the delegates she won in these two states.
If she is robbed of the nomination in Denver she will run a third campaign. She has nothing to lose!
"She has nothing to lose!"
Oh, really? How about her self respect? (although, given her "Bobby Kennedy assassination" comment today, that ship may have sailed already). How about her future in American politics? How about her legacy, and Bill's? How about her current job as a US Senator from NY?
By "...she will run a third campaign" I assume you mean that she would run as a third party candidate? For which party? If that's the future you propose for Hillary, you've given the perfect example of what she has "to lose." Aside from the odd seat in the House or Senate, third party candidates are essentially nonexistent. They are occasional aberrations, who hold no power at all, unless they align with either the Dems or Repugs, because the two parties control the committee appointments, etc.
Nothing to lose, indeed. I bet, as of today's lovely comment about Bobby Kennedy, her closest advisors are reminding her just how much she DOES have to lose -- and WILL lose -- if she continues with this divisive, destructive, self-serving campaign.
I want to be angry at Mayhill but let her be... there are bigger fish to fry here and she's only a teensy part of a bigger distraction. Unfortunately, Hillary Clinton has set the low bar for this behavior...
I have been a firm believer all along that she "deserved" to play out the primary, that we should appreciate her effort and let her supporters relish her few wins and her grit. But now, with her comparing the FLA and MI issues to Zimbabwe, civil rights, 2000 election etc. etc. she has stripped herself of all credibility and respect. That her supporters are as zealous and misguided isn't surprising, but that they are coalescing around such an inordinately divisive idea is so very troubling. To imply that Obama is stealing the election or insist it has been unfair, when the rules were clear from the outset, is to undermine the democratic process. And to do it for personal and political gain is just wrong. Opportunity squandered... hope it's just Hillary's and not America's.....
This from the same person who wrote, "Clintons Tag Team North Carolina Undecideds; little sign of Obama." (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mayhill-fowler/clintons-tagteam-north-ca_b_100097.html)??
Really the old adage rings true " "There Are None So Blind As Those Who Will Not See."
Ms Fowler; Barack Obama is not Perfect, but neither is any human. So Open Your Eyes & Free Your Mind!!
Thanks, Mrs. Fowler. Amazing how hard it is for people to accept even the possibility that there's another side to their story line, how easy it is to be partisan.
And another thing!
Obama inveighing against divisiveness is not a "rhetorical trope" as he is using simple terms in their literal sense. A trope is "any literary or rhetorical device, as metaphor, metonymy, synecdoche, and irony, that consists in the use of words in other than their literal sense."
For example: "Give her enough trope and she'll hang herself."
And thanks for all the kind words, everyone. As it happens, tenilla, they DID give me a column here. You can check out my stuff at : http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chip-collis
JP
thanks!
FUNNY! Are you serious?
What a speach! What an event! Barack is now over the top and he is the winner! It is because of the working class men and women of Iowa, Wisconsin, Oregon, Virginia, Missouri, etc., etc.
Now let's get moving to a November victory, and to the change we have been waiting for!
LOL!
For the sake of honesty - I'm an Obama supporter. I don't think Hillary should drop out of the race; we live in a democracy and I am content to see her campaign through the final primary. I appreciate good and thoughtful writing on the part of her surrogates and supporters. I don't mind getting into a spirited disagreement about our candidates so long as we keep it civil.
But this writer...dear god, I haven't seen a decent column produced by Mayhill Fowler yet. Take a writing class. Please. I'm dead serious. Your writing is stilted; your actual content is far too anemic to justify SO MANY FREAKING WORDS. It may be a shock to you, but most of the rest of us aren't as in love with your written 'voice' as you apparently are.
If you want to rally readers against Obama and for Clinton, then have the backbone to speak straightforwardly and make substantive points.
Or did you imagine that this column was all moody-dark and lyrical and, like, kinda poetic and edgy? You have aspirations of being a Real Writer Someday or something? Spare me. Clean up your writing. Clarify your narrative 'voice'. Learn how to express nuance. Realize that you are quite transparent and that you are clumsy in putting your agenda forward. Meanwhile I'll hope that HuffPost will replace you with a columnist who's capable of being interesting.
And jungpatawan...I think I love you.
Bravo!!!!!!!
jungpatawan
Read your post just made my day! THANK YOU!
Mayhill - haven't you done enough damage?
Last night was beautiful - it was a glorious speech and very respectfull of Hillary. WHY are you on that bus?
Clinton and Obama supporters will unite because we are DEMOCRATS and we need our country back!!
And, if Obama had reached out to Hillary supporters, this post would have attacked him for presuming the race was over.
Kesey would say she is off the bus.
Dear Ms.Fowler.....What are you smoking? I saw the rally in Iowa and watched every moment of Senator Obama's inspiring speech and shades of Fox News and Sean Hannity..your reportage is so inaccurate and biased my head is about to explode. My expectations were immediately lowered when you referred to the huge crowd of Iowans as "many of Obama's first adherents" (a tip: Loyal Democrats hate to be likened to gooey glue) but onward I plunged, straight into the bottomless pit that is your love for Hillary Clinton.
You have been twisting Senator Obama's words and misreading his message for months now and you even managed to make a little trouble for him but the moment was fleeting and to his credit he is wise to people like you, yet he has maintained his good manners and his idealism. Your mindless little hate piece has managed to insult Senator Obama, the people of Iowa and elsewhere who support him, and very young male speech writers as well. Does Rush Limbaugh send you flowers?
If anyone can find a cloud in the silver lining of an Obama rally, it's Mayhill Fowler!
This is my first post to this website. This article is crazy. I am from Iowa and was there. I'm not sure why you would post this. Obama's word were far from dark. They were full of hope and truth. Everyone there was fired up! Your observation is totally off.
thanks for the breath of reality "hippiemom." after a while you get used to living in Ms.-Flower-world. i used to get annoyed too, but, really, it is pretty amusing. (perhaps Sen. Obama doesn't return her calls or something.)
Truth be told, Obama is too smart to fill the balmy Des Moines evening air with insignificant gesture. The fact is he realized that the venue was special and required special treatment. This guy is thinking about a lot more than any of us realize. How many times has he surprised us? Not just with his rhetoric, which has changed political discourse in this country, but also with wise choices about where to use his gifts.
What is the point here?
Maybe Mayflower should go to conservative blogs where they will love her.
At the begining of this race, many people were attracted to Obama because they wanted to feel that our ugly racist past was behind us. Then, in WV (and before when Hillary said she would have left Rev. Wright's congregation) Hillary made it OK to be racist. Her "hard working white people" speech opened the door. Now, it has been legitimized. Why not,...pollsters even ask them as they exit the voting booth where race entered into their decision. So, why not admit it? Why not even be proud?
And during this all, HRC says that she is the victim of sexism.
I'm tired of clicking on to Huffington Post and seeing this persons opinions. Wasn't all that Bittergate enough?
Why is this woman still covering the Obama campaign? She's not even trying to hide her disdain for the man. I hear McCain needs some internet help, why doesn't she go work for him?
*rolls eyes*
Dear Mayhill,
I am baffled. If you will just state that you hate Obama, all will be well, too. It is a free country . Instead of making that declaration you go about it the long and twisted way by blaming Obama for the behavior and comments of foreign press people. To you, his complements of Mrs. Clinton are full of, "disingenuousness" because "surely Senator Obama knows that many in his audiences do not admire Hillary Clinton" and "condescension clouds the lofty tone." I have learnt to go check things out things out for myself. Reading your blog certainly is not descriptive of what I see. Are you a reporter? If so, do you ever paint the correct picture of any of Obama's live events? The young of today tune out and in this political season seem to be dragging their parents' generation along to a higher level. Reporters like you are to blame. Were you to report on the weather, I personally check it for myself. Imagine your reaction at the adjectives used by Obama: "And what exactly are the "shattered myths" and "broken barriers" to which Obama's very young male speechwriters are referring?" Ms. Fowler, are there no myths that have been shattered by Mrs. Clinton; No barriers that have been overcome by her? Even Mrs. Clinton made the same point herself a few weeks ago. Is it evil now that Obama has made the same point?
I am stunned and disappointed by you.
Help me understand.
Mayhil, Mayhill, Mayhill..... no matter how many runs your candiate 's team may score in the 9th inning, when that inning is over, if her total is less than that scored by the other team in innings 1 thru 8, then YOU STILL LOSE. I'm sure that it is especially sickening for you when you look back at all the mistakes made by team HRC in the first innings.... you wonder, "why couldn't she have played as strongly then as has lately"? I don't have an answer for you, other than that her total expectation of victory blinded her to the fact that she had to get in there and fight for every delegate just like the others, e.g., compete in those annoying little caucus states, (even the "red" ones like Kansas and Idaho!) Another thing-- you don't get to change the rules half way through the game.
I don't say this to be "mean". While I am a total Obama supporter, I have been shocked (not pleased) by how poorly Clinton has done. (I don't like watching train wrecks). Hanging in there now does not make her look strong..... it is just kind of sad and pathetic.
Posted May 21, 2008 | 05:50 AM (EST)