iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Seven Things Barack Obama Should Do to Keep from Blowing It


ASPEN - I took part in an interesting panel last night at the Aspen Ideas Festival, discussing the ins and outs of Barack Obama and John McCain with David Brooks, Stuart Rothenberg, Jim Wallis, Jonathan Capehart, Amy Goodman, and Jonathan Alter moderating.

I was particularly interested in the takes of Brooks and Rothenberg. They were smart, knowledgeable, eloquent... and utterly wrong.

Brooks was even-handed with both candidates. He suggested that McCain's biggest failing was his weakness as a manager (I said I was far more concerned with the disastrous direction in which he wants to lead the country). And he criticized Obama for lacking the "Senatorial skills" of either McCain or Hillary Clinton. (In an unrelated riff, Brooks let the audience know that, based on an off-the-record conversation with President Bush, he could categorically assure us that we would not be bombing Iran.)

Towards the end of the panel we were all asked whom the nominees should pick as their VP. One of Brooks' recommendations for Obama was Tom Daschle because the former-Senator understands how to get things done. In Brooks World, the presidency is all about keeping the machinery greased and the cogs of government running smoothly. It's leadership as McDonald's management: keep serving up the tried and true, with maximum efficiency.

Rothenberg -- astute, detailed, and supremely confident -- dipped into his political analyst's bag and pulled out a steaming chunk of conventional wisdom, echoing his recent declaration that "This whole election is about swing voters. Whoever wins them, will win the election." Where have we heard that before? Oh, yeah, that's right -- from countless inside-the-Beltway pundits and Democratic strategists in every election the Democrats have lost, going back a generation.

But, as we've seen, Barack Obama is not immune to the seductive call of the Conventional Wisdom sirens. And it's a call that's only going to get louder. He'll hear it from the chorus of pundits standing outside his window -- folks like The New Republic's Noam Scheiber, who today counseled Obama that being labeled a "typical politician" is a very good thing for him because it will assure wary voters that he won't do anything rash.

He'll hear it from some of the advisors inside his campaign. Folks like the aforementioned Daschle, for whom caution is part of his political DNA. Don't forget, as Senate Majority Leader, Daschle had gone along with the president's desire to hold the vote authorizing war with Iraq before the 2002 elections because he and many other Democrats believed an early vote could help shift the focus off the war and onto the economy, which they felt was their strong suit. And we saw how well that strategy turned out. Daschle was also the poster child for Democratic spinelessness on the war, going from supporting the use of force to questioning it to ultimately supporting it with his vote because he felt it was crucial for America "to speak with one voice at this critical time." And we know how well that turned out, too.

Obama will also hear the siren call from inside his own head. According to Brooks, Obama's overriding personal characteristic is caution.

So, to counter the conventional wisdom pundits, the cautious campaign advisers, and his own inner cautiousness, I'm offering Obama the following suggestions for staying true to the vision and message that took him from longshot "unlikely candidate" to presidential frontrunner -- and for avoiding the fate of the many before him who fell prey to the misguided belief that the path to the White House runs down the middle of the road.

1) Load up your Kindle with passages from leaders who were looking to fundamentally change the country and following an inner compass, not the latest focus-group results. Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King would be a good place to start.

"Some men see things as they are and ask, 'Why?' I dream of things that never were and ask, 'Why not?'" (RFK)
"There comes a time when one must take the position that is neither safe nor politic nor popular, but he must do it because conscience tells him it is right." (King)

2) Load up your iPod with passages from your own speeches. They've inspired others; now let them re-ignite the inspirational leader in you.

"This campaign can't only be about me. It must be about us - it must be about what we can do together. This campaign must be the occasion, the vehicle, of your hopes, and your dreams. It will take your time, your energy, and your advice - to push us forward when we're doing right, and to let us know when we're not. This campaign has to be about reclaiming the meaning of citizenship, restoring our sense of common purpose, and realizing that few obstacles can withstand the power of millions of voices calling for change.... That's why I'm in this race. Not just to hold an office, but to gather with you to transform a nation."

3) Get your campaign to give you a printout of the names of the over 1.5 million people who have donated to your campaign (at an average of $197 each). Give that list a read every day; feel the heft. And remember -- sorry, Stu Rothenberg -- that the tried-and-untrue swing voter strategy is what has led to the Democratic Party's prolonged identity crisis. Forget the fence sitters. Instead, continue to speak to those who have turned their backs on the electoral process -- those who are struggling without health care, without decent schools, without jobs, without hope.

4) Tape to your mirror the poll results from July 2004, where Kerry was up by six, and June of 1988, where Dukakis was up by 15... and don't get complacent.

5) Go to YouTube and watch the concession speeches of Kerry, Gore, and Hillary Clinton, each of whom decided to run to the middle in an attempt to attract undecided swing voters.

6) Don't let the daily petty squabbles of the campaign distract you from the core message that this campaign is not a referendum on John McCain's war record or the level of your patriotism -- but rather on the future of America. Are we a nation driven by hope and promise or a nation driven by fear?

When Bobby Kennedy was agonizing over whether or not to run in 1968, he told one of his advisors: "People are selfish. But they can also be compassionate and generous, and they care about the country. But not when they feel threatened. That's why this is such a crucial time. We can go in either direction. But if we don't make a choice soon, it will be too late to turn things around. I think people are willing to make the right choice. But they need leadership. They're hungry for leadership." Forty years later, we are starving for it. Real leadership, not a poll-driven facsimile. Not swing-state, swing-voter leadership. Leadership defined by an ability to capture our imagination and a willingness to challenge us. Leadership geared to transforming the country through the audacity of hope instead of keeping it mired in the politics of fear and division.

7) Heed the old Texas advice of Dandy Don Meredith and Molly Ivins: "You got to dance with them what brung you."

Voters longing for hope, inspiration, a new kind of politics, and fundamental change are "them that brung you" to the big dance. Don't let the pundits, the advisors, and the cowards convince you to let someone else cut in.

Follow Arianna Huffington on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ariannahuff

ASPEN - I took part in an interesting panel last night at the Aspen Ideas Festival, discussing the ins and outs of Barack Obama and John McCain with David Brooks, Stuart Rothenberg, Jim Wallis, Jonath...
ASPEN - I took part in an interesting panel last night at the Aspen Ideas Festival, discussing the ins and outs of Barack Obama and John McCain with David Brooks, Stuart Rothenberg, Jim Wallis, Jonath...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,354
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (32 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
pattio66
Here's your hat, what's your hurry?
10:03 PM on 07/06/2008
"You got to dance with them what brung you." Wiser words were never spoken - I heard them for the first time from my wise old Gramps.
07:13 PM on 07/06/2008
Arianne, do you have any idea how I can send an e-mail to Obama? I am concerned about his "centrist" positions lately, but don't know how to contact him. Thank you.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
goldnchyl
We are one
05:15 PM on 07/07/2008
http://www.barackobama.com
03:38 PM on 07/06/2008
If Senator Obama "tacks to the center" the election will be close, because he would want to win by the 50%+1 margin. You know what this means? Read Jan Knippers Black's article in Peace Review, 18:1-6: if it's close, they'll steal it. We taught Latin America how to steal elections in the '60s, '70s and '80s; now we're re-learning and reprising these lessons in places like Florida and Ohio, we're learning how to exclude "dangerous" portions of the electorate such as Black men, the elderly, poor, and the homeless. You know who Jan is, don't you Arianna? She's a tough ex-Southerner who's been down the road, and has no illusions: these Republicans and their fellow travelers will steal this election if they can; too much profit is at stake.
02:36 PM on 07/06/2008
Obama isn't running for President of the Progressive Net Root Bloggers, he is running for the President of the United States. I'm not a Democrat or a Republican, just a very very very angry U.S. Citizen. Obama isn't just like all the other politicos. Obama is from a new Generation. regards
02:30 PM on 07/06/2008
As a committed liberal—and proud of it, I am absolutely dismayed that some of our friends seem to be dissing the best candidate we have had since Adlai, HST & FDR. This guy is an intellectual, folks, AND a very good politician. As an intellectual, he knows that life is full of nuances and possibilities; as a politician, he knows that he is stuck with sound bites.

He is not an ideologue, much as you want him to be one. Remember, he very clearly said that he was against this war because it was stupid and unnecessary—but he’s not against all wars—and he has voted for money for the troops. Just because his instincts are more centrist, than you like, doesn’t mean that he is “moving to the center” for political reasons.

How about re-reading “Audacity of Hope”—that, to me, shows a very nuanced guy who is trying to work with all the people instead of the 50.1% that you seem to be angling for. As you know, the perfect is indeed the enemy of the good.

Remember that Barrack is for real change—a change in the paradigm. For the first time since Jackson, we actually seem to have the ability (through the inter-net) for a real participatory democracy. But we still need a leadership willing to include and balance the needs of all sides in our heterogeneous society. And, Barrack, our community organizer, is the guy that is committed to do just that.
02:02 PM on 07/06/2008
As a committed liberal—and proud of it, I am absolutely dismayed that Arianna and her followers seem to be dissing the best candidate we have had since Adlai, HST & FDR. This guy is an intellectual, folks, AND a very good politician. As an intellectual, he knows that life is full of nuances and possibilities; as a politician, he knows that he is stuck with sound bites.

He is not an ideologue, much as you want him to be one. Remember, he very clearly said that he was against this war because it was stupid and unnecessary—but he’s not against all wars—and he has voted for money for the troops. Just because his instincts are more centrist, than you like, doesn’t mean that he is “moving to the center” for political reasons.

How about re-reading “Audacity of Hope”—that, to me, shows a very nuanced guy who is trying to work with all the people instead of the 50.1% that you seem to be angling for. As you know, the perfect is indeed the enemy of the good.

Remember that Barrack is for real change—a change in the paradigm. For the first time since Jackson, we actually seem to have the ability (through the inter-net) for a real participatory democracy. But we still need a leadership willing to include and balance the needs of all sides in our heterogeneous society. And, Barrack, our community organizer, is the guy that is committed to do just that.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
goldnchyl
We are one
05:25 PM on 07/07/2008
nlewak, it is so true. Barrack Obama has maintained a relative stable front with so much opinion disguised as fact flying around. Don't Arianna et al realize that if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem? To question policy, of course is what this democracy is about. But it seems to me that you're jumping the gun a bit with your quick severity, AH (kind of like Hill trying to force the VP slot by withholding her endorsement) and showing very little trust in the candidate you say you support. There's no question whose side the MSM is on between the two candidates. Their loyalty can't be swayed by the most obvious flaws and blunders on Mcsame's part. If Obama could count on a small portion of that kind of loyalty (and in my opinion, well-founded trust) in the media, the tidal wave pushing him towards the White House would be phenomenal.
11:47 AM on 07/06/2008
On Democracy Now a while back, Ralph Nader said that his candidacy pulls Obama to the left while so many other forces are pulling Obama to the right. I think this is right. If Obama had to debate not just McCain, but also Nader, he couldn't move to the right to decrease McCain's margin with out also increasing Nader's margin. So I think the best way to hold Obama accountable is to support Nader's campaign--at least to help get him into the debates.

While the Commission on Presidential Debates won't let Nader into their debates, Google / YouTube are now planning a debate for September 18. The website is:

www.neworleansdebate.org

Unfortunately, right now a candidate must be at 10% in national polls to be included. Nader is doing better this year than in any previous year--he's at 6% nationally. But he will probably be excluded by this rule. Go to the debate website and click on the "Contact Us" link; tell them to make it 5%.

This would get in Nader--and also Bob Barr (Libertarian Party). This is important because if Bob Barr gets votes that might otherwise go to McCain, there is less worry about Nader getting votes that might otherwise go to Obama. But it still puts Nader into the debate where he can hold Obama's feet to the fire. Barr is also anti-war, so this also pulls Obama in that direction--and it makes it three anti-war candidates against McCain.
05:57 PM on 07/06/2008
That analysis is quite in-depth, PhiloPsych , but I must argue with your entire premise. Somehow you are under the impression that Obama couldn't win the election with the circumstances as is. I don't believe Nader's presence in the race will impact Obama negatively, in fact, I believe Nader's voters are more likely McCain's voters turned south. Bob Barr has far less appeal to the general voter than Nader, but you believe somehow his campaign could conflict with Obama. I believe this rationale is somewhat flawed for these reasons. Obama can draw the independent vote due to the sheer volume of newly registered voters across America. Independents normally prefer the candidate who is as close to unhinging the system and shrinking government as possible and none of the alternatives match that criteria. Barr has little to no name recognition while Nader, who does have some recognition, has mediocre support in spite of this being his most successful outing. Ross Perot drew 6% of the vote in the summer just like Nader and we all know what happened to Perot (or do we?). Whereas, Obama is nothing short of a phenomenon and can probably claim votes that are currently undecideds and some McCain and Nader voters as well. Good luck pushing that theory.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:39 AM on 07/06/2008
Obama is not "moving to the center" -- he is affirming that he is glib and unprincipled and that he is brazen about it. Obama was a "liberal" when he had a constituency that was anti-war, suspicious of police power, and pro-social welfare. He is proving that he will stand for nothing if it is the least bit controversial. Getting out of Iraq is going to be politically and strategically messy no matter what we do. There is no indication that Obama will get us out any faster than McCain--Why assume he will? Because he promised like he did with FISA, NAFTA and election reform? He hasn't the skill or the spine to get us out of Iraq. He is a pretty face and very good promoters. We can't have a clue what they will do if they win. Please consider that McCain may very well soften some of his positions once elected and actually get us out faster. Hard-liners often make better peace candidates -- he would have a lot less opposition from his own party and Fox News than any Democrat. At any rate we can rely upon Obama for nothing.
Spend your time and money electing 15 or 20 more liberal democrats to Congress. That will do a lot more to influence presidential policy than relying upon either candidate.
01:00 PM on 07/06/2008
Obama’s cunning capture of the centre ground
Slowly and subtly, Barack Obama is wiping out every reason to vote for McCain

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/andrew_sullivan/article4275040.ece
03:27 PM on 07/08/2008
So Barack Obama is a politician? Surprise, surprise!

Yes, Mr. Obama is a politician and a damn good one, otherwise he could never have come so far so fast.

Are I and other Obama supporters dismayed by some of his recent positions? You bet! But to even contemplate the idea that, given what's important to us, John McSame would be a better choice for President is beyond ludicrous. We are FED UP with what you Repugnantcans have given us for the last seven and a half years. We sure do not need four of eight more years of the same policies and procedures which is what we'd get Mr. Double Talk Express.

The only possiblity of undoing the damage this country and the US Constitution has suffered under this administration is an intelligent President, a Democratic President, and significant majorities in both houses of Congress.

Vote no on ALL Repugnantcans. They've earned it.
10:18 AM on 07/06/2008
"2) stick to issues America cares about. Do not get swayed by special interests looking to hijack the campaign. If you start talking gays in the military, you may as well pack it in. We don't give a flying fuck about gays in the military, never did, and the only ones who do are bible thumping zealots looking for any kind of ammo to submarine the left."

This is so offensive. Don't assume that what you don't give a flying f about is the same as everyone else. That old distinction between self and other... "special interests" here is used as a big stick to try to bully people who'd like a more equitable country for themselves whatever the reason.
10:11 AM on 07/06/2008
When more than 80% of the voters think the country is on the wrong track, the image they conjure is of an America in which Conservative senators lobby for:

More tax cuts for more hedge fund managers who will make more money moving more factories to Mexico so they can import more Mexican housekeepers to take care of more mansions and have more unemployed Americans to send to more useless wars which the hedge fund managers don't pay for because they will simply fund more public debt from China for more deficits while they visit their Park Avenue doctors and their maids get the best health care in the world on medicaid while the laid off factory workers ponder their "choices" in the world of mega corporate health insurers.

If anybody thinks this picture will change under McCain then consider that he recently reiterated his stay the course message in Iraq before boarding a flight to Colombia on the 4th of July week end where he met with the elites who will become billionaires on the latest trade deal while gutting the American middle class and the population of Colombia and the environment simultaneously.

The republican response to this critique is that democrats are for gay marriage.
03:32 PM on 07/08/2008
Hear, Hear!

Couldn't have said it better myself!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wombatone
08:57 AM on 07/06/2008
when will the dems understand that the 'great unvoted' is the left? why do the candidates continue to try and woo the right who will not vote for them anyway? we need to take a lesson from the republicans : play to your base. i think we've already lost this election, and -again- have no one to blame but ourselves. i won't be voting for mccain, but i'd have to be dragged kicking and screaming to vote for obama.
08:40 AM on 07/06/2008
Number 8: Barack, read this piece from Ariana Huffington every single day until you have digested it by memory.
06:10 AM on 07/06/2008
For Veep, Barack should pick Robert Kennedy Jr. for message, or one of the Udalls for the West.
02:38 PM on 07/06/2008
Obama should pick Sen. Jim Webb from Appalachia or Al Gore as Vice President.
10:33 AM on 07/07/2008
No to Webb or Gore. Only if Obama wants to lose should he pick them.

He's got to stick with the forward thinking vision thing to win so his VP should reflect that spirit. Jerry Brown is the ticket.

"Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean its not true" Ornette Coleman
06:07 AM on 07/06/2008
If Obama keeps moving to the center, he is going to open a space for liberals to feel justified in voting for Ralph Nader or Cynthia McKinney. That will narrow the margin between Obama and McCain and allow Diebold et al. to steal the election for McCain. If he had stayed on course, he would have won in a landslide big enough to prevent this.
02:47 AM on 07/06/2008
Arianna, I hope you sent this directly to Barack Obama!
I've been turned off lately by his actions. I'm still going to support him, but he needs to get back on track with where he was in the primaries.
04:30 PM on 07/06/2008
Remember, their is no such thing as a brave politician.