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
Loading comments…
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
Those who are disenchanted with Obama reflect the 'cult of personality' supporters, who are more into going gaga over a candidate instead of his policies/programs. People need to realize candidates are imperfect beings just like the rest of us and shouldn't be relied on as a 'savior.' We should pick candidates with good policies and programs and who will have the leadership to get them done. Obama obviously has great policies and programs and has the organizational leadership qualities to get them done. Just don't live your life through him, you'll just get disappointed. You need to have your own life.
If your life is shallow or unsatisfying, living a better one via Obama will just be disappointing.
"Those who are disenchanted with Obama reflect the 'cult of personality' supporters" ???
Nonsense. It is not a cult of personality. We are disenchanted because of his capitulation on just about every issue, labeled by the MSM as "moving to the center", which is, like most things that come out of the MSM, a misnomer.
Today GOP is far-right, Democrat is near-right, and Green is left of center, so a more accurate phrase would be "moving to the right".
I disagree. I tend to think it's the "cult of personality" supporters who AREN'T disappointed and continue to absolve him of every flip flop, despite the fact that they villified other candidates for the same thing.
I'm disillusioned with the phrase 'Flip-flop:' it's become a shortcut around discussing 'details.'
Let's distinguish between campaign 'silly season' show vs in-office reality:
Obama as President:
1. health care for all who want or need: check
2. get out of Iraq w/in 6 months: check
3. use savings from Iraq to pay for infrastructure refresh w/c will provide new jobs and jump start economy: check
4. improve education, especially for poor schools: check
5. choose Supreme court justice who will be pro-people instead of pro-corporation and conservatives: check
6. scrap and prevent (for future presidents) Bush's expansion of executive power: check
7. start talks with Iran, Syria, Cuba, Venezuela, etc. to bring peace to the Middle East and improve relations w/ rest of world: check
8. take lead in global warming prevention and green technology w/c will also create jobs as well as save OUR environment: check
Hmmmm. Abandoning Obama means abandoning this checklist of great policies and programs. That'll be silly and bad for ALL of us.
1. "health care" is a misnomer. Actually Obama is offering INSURANCE, not care. Why have insurance in the loop? PROFIT! On whose back? The people. We don't want Obama's plan.
2. Iraq? Obama NEVER said 6 months. He said as President he would change the mission in Iraq from staying forever to leaving ASAP.
3. SAVINGS from Iraq?
4. improve education. Yes, in fact, instead of pumping money into churches to provide social services, it shoiuld be done through the schools.
5. choose Supreme court justice who will be pro-people instead of pro-corporation and conservatives: AGREED
6. scrap and prevent (for future presidents) Bush's expansion of executive power?
Oops! FISA immunity? faith-based charities?
7. start talks with Iran, Syria, Cuba, Venezuela, etc. to bring peace to the Middle East and improve relations w/ rest of world: check
8. take lead in global warming prevention and green technology w/c will also create jobs as well as save OUR environment:
OOPS! Obama supports nuclear and coal. How green is that?
And what's to guarantee that if we don't abandon Obama, he won't abandon this checklist? he's getting a good start.
You'd rather listen to people a little too anxious to magnify doubts and make *sure* we get none, instead?
The current plan is pulling out of Iraq in 16 months, not 6.
I don't know where you get 6 from, this has never been the case.
Obama as President:
1. Do an end around on gun ownership--check
2. Do an end around FISA--check
3. Do an end around "choice"--check
4. Do an end around campaign financing--check
5. Do and end around on religious, faith-based financing--check
6. Do an end around on pulling out of Iraq--check
No truer words have been spoken.
A vote for McCain in 2008 will allow the REAL winner of this year's Democratic primaries to be elected in 2012: Hillary Clinton. She won the popular vote, but due to the old-style Washington dirty tricks of giving more delegates to the candidate who won less votes (sounds like the 2000 general election, eh?), she lost the nomination to the choice of the all-powerful Washington Machine & puppet of John Kerry: Barack Obama.
Enough with the speeches, enough with the rock star routine, enough with the community organizer from Chicago and Washington outsider who is going to 'change the way Washington works' — the same line that was used by George W. Bush in 2000: he too was a Washington outsider who preached ' hope & change'.
As Jon Stewart put it, John McCain would make a great transitional President. If we're going to stay in Iraq, as Obama now states we will, then let's at least have somebody in the oval office who knows how to properly conduct a war. McCain has stood against Bush on the way the war has been handled from the very beginning. Let McCain have his shot at it...then in 2012, if McCain is proven wrong, Clinton can come in and put an end to it as she promised.
Perfect! An absolute piece of beauty.
Senator Obama, heed the advice or suffer the consequences of other Democrats. If you want an example, I'm one who wil not waste my vote on you.
Very odd. This guy had a slam dunk. A lot of people were starting to flood behind him, people of all views and backgrounds. Then, bam, the cold water gets thrown on everything. As soon as the DNC, Pelosi, superdelegates, got their hooks into him, it was all over. As I've thought about both sides, it's not the candidates as much as who/what the party leadership forces them to embrace.
Evil. American politics and thus America is evil. Ugly all the time now.
I have full confidence that a President Obama will act way different from 'Campaign Obama'. In the movie, 'The Contender', Jeff Bridges, the President in the movie, said that to run as President, you have to be great (once you're President) as well as petty (when you're running for the Presidency). It's rare to have both in one person, usually one cancels out the other. Obama now is in his 'petty' phase to win the Presidency. Once he's President, it's quite obvious his greatness will shine through.
Except that this ISN'T some movie the nation is watching..The concequences of our decision will impact on all of our day to day lives for years to come..
"I have full confidence that a President Obama will act way different from 'Campaign Obama'." ???
heh
Well, we can HOPE that he will act differently after he is elected. But wouldn't it be refreshing for once to have a candidate who actually says - with conviction - what he believes in? This pandering and trying to please everyone just makes candidates look weak.
I hope Obama follows Arianna's advice.
But my guess is that he will, in his inexperience, lean heavily on the DNC camp to guide him. A lot will be riding on his VP pick.
Sounds like the one thing Ariana and so many other pundits want Obama to do is, what THEY want him to do. Funny, when you think about it. Ariana, it is apparent Senator Obama is very familiar with the Kennedy "doctrine", Dr. King and others. Does he really have to jump because you give his campaign so much voice? RELAX! What has gotten Senator Obama to where he is in life is the very thing that will assure him the Presidency.....trusting himself and representing ALL of the people.
It sounds like more people like Bush's way of doing things: do what you want, without regard to the input of the people,, and stay fixed to your side--the right. American politics has been ruled too long by the "my way or the highway" politics. Change is inclusive and unfamiliar to conventional wisdom, however, Mr. Obama has to represent those people also.
Times, they are changing.
Sounds more like she wants him to do what he said he'd do.
Great points...Somewhere in that 7 is a reminder to not waffle and go back on all that you have led the rest of us to believe in you...That you will do what is right for the country and the world...Giving in is the easiest thing to do, don't give in or many of us will give up on you
It's difficult to admit we've been tricked. It was such a stunning performance. I didn't fall for it at first, but finally I really did. Not just lawn signs, but fairly large donations. I've taken my name off Obama's mailing list, I hang up on the phone calls.
It's not a comfortable feeling. It's very saddening.
I draw some measure of comfort from all the intelligent people who also thought that Obama really meant change. Let's not blame swing voters, or the mythical centrists. Ordinary voters weren't interested in FISA, nor in having an Office in the Administration devoted to religious organizations. Pundits and party hierarchy were interested. Those to whom these votes mean vast sums of taxpayer funding were waiting for this. Obama hasn't turned right; he hasn't turned center. He has turned out to be same-old. Part of the problem. Corrupt.
The Democratic Party didn't want all those new volunteers, all those unpredictable voters who wanted change. Obama showed that the numbers were alarming. Now his job is to turn off the spigot. I think he's accomplish that in record time.
We should not blame the swing voters. They are the reasonable people. Trying their best to choose the lesser evil. It's really, really difficult. I can't do it.
Good insight. Thanks. As they said 30 years ago, and probably 300 years ago, follow the money (interests).
I would add Sen. Obama's worst betrayal, so far, that of campaign finance reform. But, in that case the money wouldn't really go to a group with political influence; the ad dollars only go to the broadcast & print MSM. Coincidences abound.
He says this:
"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."
Then he ignores his base on:
FISA
NAFTA
GUNS
TROOP WITHDRAWAL
EXPANDED FAITH BASED INITIATIVES
EXPANDED DEATH PENALTY
What's left - oh, I know: universal health care and abortion.
Any minute now. Flip. Flop.
He's done nothing of the sort.
What exactly do you know of his stance on any of those subjects, and how has he changed his position on any of them.
Respond with references and quotes from the candidate backing up your claims please.
I am a lifelong Democrat, and do not disagree with Sen. Obama's handling of any of the issues you list. Indeed, I am quite satisfied with the careful manner in which he is addressing these issues and others. While I did not support his candidacy at the beginning of the primary campaign, I am now a staunch member of his base who:
Served in the armed forces with pride, while not supporting the political leadership of the day;
Believes that we should extricate ourselves from the Mid-East on our own terms in an orderly, systematic way;
Owns guns for self defense, is fully trained in their use, and would employ them to protect life or property;
Believes that without free trade the American economy will fail;
Believes that law enforcement agencies and agents should have the capability, within defined parameters of law, to take direct action to forestall crime;
Strongly believes in a moral imperative for charity, regardless of who provides the resources or directly performs it;
Believes that death is the only fitting punishment for certain crimes, and that there should be a tight limit on the time permitted for appeals in capital cases;
Believes that regulating abortion in any way is outside the purview of the federal government;
What exactly are the specific parameters that you think define Obama's base?
"Strongly believes in a moral imperative for charity, regardless of who provides the resources or directly performs it" ???
So why not let our government perform it?
Sorry, he's already got to abortion. All that's left now is health care.
I never liked Obama's health care plan. It is a sell out to insurance. I want the health care system that other modern nations have, universal (everyone is included) and single payer, our government, so that the care is FREE to the patient.
NO INSURANCE!
I'm seeing a pattern here. Once a democratic candidate becomes the presumed nominee, they suddenly become weaker candidates. I'm seeing it with Obama and I definitely saw it with Gore in 2000 (not so muchh with Kerry because he was already a one dimensional cardboard cutout of himself). It's almost as if once the party takes over, the strategize the life out of a candidate. If this is what's happening with Obama, I hope he tells all the strategists to take a hike. I for one couldn't care less about either party, I just want an honest leader who cares more about principles than he/she does about winning or the party. I had hope that Obama was that person, but my hope is fading fast.
Right on, Arianna!
Dems have winced and despaired over the spineless "Democratically-controlled" Congress since 2006. The ONLY way a Democrat can become president is if they have the courage to stick with principles. The American people know more than the pundits what will fly and when something stinks of capitulation.
A hands-across-the-aisle approach can come AFTER WINNING the election.
How far to the right can Obama drift without losing his core support? If this board is any indication then apparently as long as he offers a few platitudes and a kindly pat on the head now and then he will retain much of his base, namely the far left. If what he gains from the center and the disenchanted right more than offset those than he will lose from the left then he has made a wise political decision. On the other hand many will associate his softening stances not only FISA but Iraq, the SCOTUS decision on the second amendment, energy policy and numerous other issues with a lack of character and principle and may turn away from him on that basis. And while he may no longer be the candidate of "hope and change" he is demonstrating that he does have the ability to ":reach across the aisle" even if the act is more one of polictical expediency than true bi-partisanship Both those for and against Obama must be left somewhat breathlessby his quick change from the Obama the Idealist to Obama the Pragmatist. Where his changing of positions ultimately leads is too early to tell but there is little doubt that he is intending to leave the dance without those that brought him.
This campaign and the supporters were so smug about Hillary supporters. They'll have not,place else to go, they said. The insisted Hillary supporters will have to come home when they look at the alternative. Well right they were....but it cuts both ways. BO supportershave what they wanted. You have no place to go either. We have one choice. That's it folks.
There is always Ralph Nader. If it is principle and adherence to liberal ideology you're after then he is the man. Apparently a few are starting to feel this way because he is trending significantly up in the polls lately from what I understand.
I have no idea what this means......
I did not see him drift to the right, did you? But then, I was listening to what he had to say instead of projecting my left fantasies on his campaign.
There never was an idealist Obama running for president. I always thought that his idealism is simply the driving force behind his pragmatism. Silly me. Looks like you knew better. Or maybe not?
You seem under the impression that I am one of Obama's starry-eyed supporters. I am not, I suspected Obama of being a political opportunist, excuse me, pragmatist, from the second or third time I heard him speak. Those who believed he would always take the politically expedient path as oppossed to a principled one should not be disappointed by his latest manuevering. It is not those votes he is in danger of losing.
Absolutely right, KTM...couldn't have said it better myself
Sometimes you go to a dance with someone who won't dance. Then, you dance with somebody else.
I have no idea what this means either.
Gauging from his response yesterday, it looks like his great speech ability is now turned against the very people that got him here. He said nothing new and yet the sheepies were falling over their selves to see who could faint first. He let's this bill go through, Arianna, I'm done with this grand experiment. Peace, out.
Looks like you need to vote for Nader then. See how well that worked the first time. :-)
It is interesting to note that assassins murdered both MLK and Bobby Kennedy. It is no wonder that contemporary visionary leaders such as Sen. Obama are cautious. That being said, I agree with those persons who believe that a Democratic candidate for president can't out-moderate a Republican candidate for president. Swing voters will vote based upon their particular issues. Citizens seeking for this country to go in a different direction than that of the last 8 years, or even longer, will vote in large numbers for a visionary leader who indeed seeks to create a health care system benefiting all citizens and bring an end to a war that has created monumental and enduring international/economic complications for our nation.
The 4th of July is not the time for the Obama Campaign to retreat from its foundational tenets of change and participatory involvement. Capital punishment and protective legislation for corporate entities were not the themes of Obama's platform four to five months ago. These "moderate" principles won't garner that many new voters while such policy statements will assuredly disillusion the people who Sen. Obama has captivated by declaring that our nation can make progressive, collaborative, and compassionate changes for the better.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
