Like some kind of Change-fueled locomotive, Barack "Bringin' the Hope" Obama has surged past his presidential competitor, Hillary Clinton, in the delegate count.
However, it seems like Hillary only grows stronger whenever she's knocked down. We need only think back to one wintry eve in New Hampshire when the lady Clinton was left behind, her campaign all but dead coming out of Iowa. She's out. Everyone thought it, and many pundits explicitly said it.
Well, they were wrong. It's hard to kill a Clinton campaign, and it's a grave miscalculation to underestimate one. When Hillary Clinton cried in New Hampshire, what happened was more than the media's unfair emphasis on gender roles and issues of "sensitivity." She became the underdog, and if there's one thing women don't like to see, it's two men bullying a woman. Suddenly, Hillary was the victim of the Establishment: two big, bad men, who were bossing her around.
Obama was wise to duck the crossfire when Edwards unleashed on Clinton multiple times during debates. Instead of looking tough, Edwards looked unnecessarily cruel, at least to New Hampshire-area women, who arrived in droves at the polls, perhaps voting for Hillary's agenda, but also against the establishment that has exploited women for so long.
Now, Obama has surged to the front of the pack. In theory, this is a good thing, unless, of course, we pause to consider that Obama's entire campaign has centered around the "Yes We Can" populist message of a lone maverick pushing against the winds of the status quo. If Obama becomes the Big Man, then he may begin to represent the very establishment he's promised to change.
Obama's presence must be especially painful for Bill Clinton, once dubbed the "Comeback Kid." Like Clinton, Obama has sustained himself on the appearance of being at a great disadvantage in the world of politics. During his own presidential run, Clinton got housed in Iowa, but he later finished second in New Hampshire, which earned him his folksy title. So no one loves the position of underdog more than Bill Clinton, who has gone to excruciating lengths to paint Hillary in the same hue, saying she has "basically been running as the underdog ever since Iowa."
Underdog is a great place to be. The media attention has eased off of Hillary a little bit. In fact, McCain has officially shifted his focus to Obama like the Eye of Sauron leveling poor little Frodo.
Bill realizes the power of Underdog, and so does Obama. The underdog gets to duck the shit storm. They get to act offensively rather than defensively in the hopes of effectively striking at the exact right moment. Then, while everyone else is scrambling to pick up the pieces, they can leap ahead, and strive to stay ahead, until the election in November.
Obama has that momentum, but now he's firmly in the limelight as the leader. Can he sustain the oncoming scrutiny? Hillary is sitting pretty in her new position of underdog, but she's walking a dangerous line. She must exploit her role just enough without plunging into the abyss and losing the remaining primaries.
Whether she gets that juggling act right, only time will tell, but don't count the lady out just yet.
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
i like that she cried showed me she is a human being,too.
I hope Hilary
doesn't crumble under pressure, I don't neccesarily love her, but Barak needs to prove himself to me a little more, they were both in my area, and I heard them both speak,(I heard Barak in person, Hilary live on my local tv station,(I live in Ohio) and he said a whole lot of nothing: It makes him look likes hiding something sinister.
He holds his cards too close and I need to know more about him, Hillary ,on the other hand ,show her flaws and her good points,you either love or hate Hillary and I say this for the lady she can hold up under pressure ,and she has leadership skills
Well, I am off my soapbox now. :)
Here's hoping for a wide open convention where all the possible contenders that the MSM blew out of the contest, finally have a chance to make their voices heard, Loudly, with great conviction, and uncensored!
Bottom line..politics make for strange bedfellows. Rich white males, (many Republican cross-overs or open primaries/caucuses) higher income/educated voting for Obama; lower income/educated women voting for Clinton. Obama does better in "red" states (I don't know about you, but that is a concern as a "moderate" doesn't appeal to me as "progessive"); Clinton does better in "blue" states. (yeah, yeah..I know, party line and all, but aren't we hopefully nominating a "liberal" Democratic candidate?) Both candidates defy the punditry predictions of the last year..the BIG one being that she would be the annointed nominee by now, although serious political analysts have said all along that Clinton would have trouble getting through the primaries, but would be the eventual nominee. Exactly what do they know that we don't? Because it seems they are the ones that have been right so far. This may come down to a "brokered convention" and in that case, the SUPER delegates may know something else we don't know, eh?
There is no electable Independent, alas. Campaign reform, people..Campaign reform!! Until then, I'll support whomever the Democratic candidate is, but I would prefer one without Republican appeal..it reeks of Rovian playbook hi-jinx! McCain casting his Sauron spell on Obamacans? But, I have to say..I'm with Allison on this one. Don't count the lady out yet! (though previous posts would indicate she is neither a Clinton nor Obama supporter. I think I recall her mentioning the "N" word..that would be Nader!)
BTW?..rumour has it that the Obama camp is fueling the fire on John Edwards throwing in for Clinton..rumour also has it that the Clinton camp is fueling the fire on being "the underdog" John Edwards is throwing in for?! Huh? Whaddup with that?
Just saying, keep your eye on the pundits and don't believe everything you hear! Strange bedfellows, indeed!
Wish casting in it's purest form is the best thing I can say about this blog.
Otherwise, it is the classic and out dated politics of identity crap most Americans are trying like hell to get away from (along with many other things the old guard represents).
This blog and the other one by Erica Jong show how the Clinton supporters use gender to define everything. More importantly, Clinton only loses because the male-dominated society keeps her down. There is never a mention of how she is a deeply flawed candidate, both on substance/history and stylistically. It's all the fault of those mean old men.
Two things:
1) Guess what gang, if she gets the nomination she will be running in a general election in this same male-dominated society.
2) Although Obama is black it is quite rare for him to play up his blackness as a defensive or offensive strategy. In fact I sense none of that, whereas, on the Hillary side her gender is their major weapon.
Obama, though flawed represents the type of change that gets us out of the identity politics game and other chronic problems we have in the US political system.
In fact, the more I get to know him the more I like and the rest of the nation seems to agree. I just donated $1000 to his campaign and I'll hit the limit when my bonus check comes in at the end of Feb!
I've read a couple of Allison's posts and I don't think she's a Hillary supporter. And even if she is, I definitely am not, and I agree that you can't get rid of a Clinton very easily.
I thought there was a new antibiotic for that?
Clinton supporters are very good when the need is clear.
And it's there. :)
I have to question the motives of Senator Clinton sometimes.
She wants to "bring about real change" in Washington. But all I have seen is a return to the 50+1 style of the uniter, not the divider. Perhaps she was so far ahead that she didn't think http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18958566 would make it out.
I hope all you Clinton campaign contributors are watching your inboxes. Never know when Vin Gupta is going to send you some junk mail. He'll probably have to wait until he is done being investigated by the SEC for possible investor fraud, but hey, if Bill can pardon Marc Rich at the 11th hour, I'm sure Sen. Clinton could help out an old friend get a nice ambassadorship.
Ok ... Obviously the definition of "underdog" has changed in the past two weeks and I wasn't informed.
In a contest (sports, election, whatever) - one side is the "person/team to beat" and the other the "underdog".
We'll use this year's Super Bowl as an example. Patriots - "team to beat" and Giants - "underdog"
Now, in the 4th quarter when the Giants had the lead - that didn't mean the Patriots became the "underdog" ... it was the same contest - and therefore their roles didn't change.
In this primary cycle - we are in the middle of the 3rd quarter - just because Obama has more delegates doesn't make Hillary the "underdog" - because we are still in the same contest.
she's not the underdog- the Clintons are just hoping to play on the sympathies of the electorate (again). Recent polling shows her ahead in Ohio and Pennsylvania. For now.
Um...for anyone who did not grasp this the writer is not supporting Clinton. Obama supporters need to work harder then ever in TX and OH so that she can not spin this to her advantage.
You know something, Allison, I think you're right. Obama has slimed his way to the front of the pack and now people are going to take a look at what's going on. Obama had hoped that Hillary would be long gone from the race by now, but possibly the media will have awoken up by now to Obama's game.
It's called backlash. And when you've slimed and dismissed everyone in sight, they are generally pushed back in a moment of stunned silence at behavior so outrageous that they are dumbstruck in astonishment. So sits the situation with Obama right now.
At this very moment, you are sensing the millions of dismissed and slimed people by this outrageous Obama campaign, realiziing that they have been flim-flammed by a fast talker with a smooth line.
Well, now they know the game and after having pushed everyone way way back, they are starting to say "Wait a minute" and are just now beginning to step forward.
It will be interesting to see how Obama responds. Remember how fast Howard Dean disappeared with that scream?
I wholeheartedly agree Rich....
I have listened to the Obama speeshes and he just keeps saying the same thing over and over and over again...
when are they going to get this charlatan to FINALLY sit down and show us some of his substance instead of just retoric...
do they REALLY think he has that much to offer???
me thinks it really is TimeforachangeNOW
He's being as condescending about age now as he was to Hillary as a woman.
Frankly, I'm not impressed by this man's attitudes one bit.
I think he'll manage to get by without your support.
Obama has "slimed his way to the front of the pack"? ha ha ha ha If there's been any slime in this campaign, it's been Bill when he's been in attack dog mode. I'm sure since they're fighting to keep their heads above water, he'll go there again- and that will be great, cause that's what sent them sliding down the polls last time, too.
Obama has gotten away with dozens of slimey attacks. The media conflating any response from Clintons into a war crime has worked to his advantage.
It is interesting that Ms. Clinton wants to be both the strongest candidate and the underdog at the same time! Clinton the outcast -- and the establishment candidate! Sounds a lot like "I voted for it, but was hoping it won't pass" to me. She simply doesn't have the finesse or the political skills of Mr. Clinton; it is best to steer clear of such methods, which really put her in horrible light.
"I voted for it but hoped it wouldn't pass" is the Hillary version of "Yes I smoked it- but I didn't inhale".
I have to disagree with your characterization of Hillary "sitting pretty" as the underdog. The reality is that she must now win big victories and pretty much roll the table to win. Obama has the momentum, the delegates, the proven strategy, and he is apparently the candidate of choice for a growing number of Americans. He walked away with all of the votes in my Mother's precinct caucus in rural northeastern Washington State. This is a very conservative area. They have elected a former John Birch Society member to the state legislature. The local industry is logging and wood products related. It's not the demographic depicted as defining who supports Obama by the media.
The race for delegates is not over. However, the battle for the high ground is over, and the winner of that battle is not Hillary Clinton. I doubt that she feels good about that.
Hillary has high negatives, and 'though her base -- apparently white women, according to the media -- will rally to her aid, everybody else is prepared to defend Obama when she goes negative and ugly. Witness: South Carolina, 13 states on Super Tuesday and 8 straight this week. (That kind of payback is really hell.) She may be the underdog, but she's not Benji. She the yappy, snarling, biting pooch you reluctantly take back to dog pound. She's better when she's someone else's problem.
I am male and consider myself part of her "base" and I think you will find others that will say the same thing...
stop trying to pass this off as a "woman" thing
besides...I for one feel that my mother was a LOT smarter than my father and could balance the books a heck of a lot better...
can you say balanced budget...
I didn't think so...
is it TimeforachangeNOW...yet???
You know what? Edwards did not look cruel to me. He just talked about how hard campaigning is. Why do you go on and on about this? Next time you write about this topic (third time's the charm or is it the fourth?) could you please include the video? John Edwards doesn't have a cruel bone in his body, he is out of the race, and you will not leave him alone. What is your problem? (And don't forget that video link.)
Ha! First off I love when readers expect writers and journalists to go out of their way to appease them. Like writers have nothing better to do then find videos for angry sorta-bloggers. But since Edwards is now back up... Russ Feingold one of the only progressive senators said he loved everything Edwards said he stood for (as did I) but when John was IN the Senate he was one of the progressives biggest obstacle's. You remember he talked tough about the war now but he voted for it. The point of the piece was not to bad mouth Edwards. It is anti Hillary and an important point about what tilted votes. The only thing good to come from this comment is now a politician finally has their very own leave Brittney alone girl.
ha! actually, readers have a right to expect accuracy from journalists. it is the foundation of a free democracy jamiekilstein. and, in the blogosphere, see Daily Kos for example, you are supposed to be able to back up what you say with a link, not just get away with saying any old thing. and the issue is not about Russ Feingold for gosh sakes. it's about this writer having blogged once already about the dissing of her candidate once again blogging about the same dissing of her candidate with both blogs based at least in part on inaccurate, second-hand reporting. but if you think journalists or "writers" should not be expected to document what they say, then you are saying rant away guys, and don't worry about truth, accuracy, whatever. readers don't deserve it and shouldn't expect it. i actually don't believe you think that is the way it should be.
Allison said it: "It seems like Hillary only grows stronger whenever she's knocked down." Mark her words. Obama would be Karl Rove's punching bag if he won the nomination. Oh, and all of you who keep on saying that Hillary "cried"--she didn't. But it would have been fine if she had.
Mark these words: Just because the Republicans have gone after Hillary Clinton before doesn't mean she has built up some kind of magical immunity.
she didn't cry. But she teared up- because her dream was slipping away from her. Not because of something that involved anyone else- like say if she'd pondered the thousands that have died because of her lazy vote to support the Iraq war- no, she teared up because things weren't going her way. And then in the next second, she took a swipe at Obama, which is why those of us who haven't been drinking the Clinton kool aid weren't moved.
David Brooks spoke frankly about the presidential and...
The insta-polls, which provide viewers with a somewhat skewed but important insight into how each...
You got to give credit to the American people, who managed to get through an...
In Debate II, John McCain twice laid out the criteria for how the American...
We've come to lower our expectations for real debates in the...
They say that Senator McCain's strong suit is the town hall debate. If this was, in fact, Senator McCain's strength, he might...
Loading comments…
Posted February 13, 2008 | 05:06 PM (EST)