Obama Wins Iowa: Why Everyone Has a Reason to Celebrate
Even if your candidate didn't win tonight, you have reason to celebrate. We all do.
Barack Obama's stirring victory in Iowa -- down home, folksy, farm-fed, Midwestern, and 92 percent white Iowa -- says a lot about America, and also about the current mindset of the American voter.
Because tonight voters decided that they didn't want to look back. They wanted to look into the future -- as if a country exhausted by the last seven years wanted to recapture its youth.
Bush's re-election in 2004 was a monument to the power of fear and fear-mongering. Be Very Afraid was Bush/Cheney's Plans A through Z. The only card in the Rove-dealt deck. And it worked. America, its vision distorted by the mushroom clouds conjured by Bush and Cheney, made a collective sprint to the bomb shelters in our minds, our lizard brains responding to fear rather than hope.
And the Clintons -- their Hillary-as-incumbent-strategy sputtering -- followed the Bush blueprint in Iowa and played the fear card again and again and again.
Be afraid of Obama, they warned us. Be afraid of something new, something different. He might meet with our enemies. His middle name is Hussein. He went to a madrassa school. A vote for him would be like rolling the dice, the former president said on Charlie Rose.
And the people of Iowa heard him, and chose to roll the dice.
Obama's win might not have legs. Hope could give way to fear once again. But, for tonight at least, it holds a mirror up to the face of America, and we can look at ourselves with pride. This is the kind of country America was meant to be, even if you are for Clinton or Edwards -- or even Huckabee or Giuliani.
It's the kind of country we've always imagined ourselves being -- even if in the last seven years we fell horribly short: a young country, an optimistic country, a forward-looking country, a country not afraid to take risks or to dream big.
Bill Clinton has privately told friends that if Hillary didn't win, it would be because of the two weeks that followed her shaky performance in the Philadelphia debate.
But it wasn't those two weeks. Indeed, if we were to pinpoint one decisive moment, it would be Bill Clinton on Charlie Rose, arrogant and entitled, dismissive and fear-mongering. And then Bill Clinton giving us a refresher course in '90s-style truth-twisting and obfuscation -- making stuff up about always having been against the war, and about Hillary having always been for every good decision during his presidency and against every bad one, from Ireland to Sarajevo to Rwanda.
So voters in Iowa remembered the past and decided that they didn't want to go back. They wanted to move ahead. Even if that meant rolling the dice.
Again, this moment may not last. But, for tonight, I am going to savor it -- and cross my fingers that it may stand as the day that fear as a winning political tactic died. Killed by an "unlikely" candidate -- as Obama called himself again and again -- who seized the moment, and reminded America of its youth and the optimism it longs to recapture.
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
We have only just begun and the Oprah,oops,Obama supporters think they have it all wrapped up. Not by a long shot!And if people think our whole political scene will change that much with him as our leader they are dreaming. There are still many questions to be asked and answered.Clinton and Edwards are still very strong contenders and I hope to be giving my November vote to one of them.
Ok, maybe I've missed something but I haven't yet heard anyone come up with this analogy.
Yes, Iowa is white, white, white but let's remember the black man got the vote before the white woman. Men will vote for ANY man of any color before a woman in some instances. Misogyny runs deep
Is the media being too easy on Obama and too harsh on Hillary? Bill Clinton pointed out Obama's lack of experience and the media views it as sinister. But has the media really examined Obama's trackrecord. A great orator does not necessarily make a great president. Those of you who think experience does not matter should look at what happened under Bush's foreign policy. I am not against Obama but I find that the media is too easy on him and he needs to be better vetted. By the way, my 11-year old daughter likes both Hillary and Obama and she is sitting next to me as I type, so I need to appear fair and balanced (not in the Foxnews manner). Let's have real debate rather than soundbites.
I could not disagree more with the central premise of this post. Yes, Obama victory is an important because that caucus goers in Iowa can transcend racially divisive politics which is so practiced and exploited in the U.S. But this should not lead one to conclude that race does not matter. I also disagree that voting for Obama represents looking forward while voting for other candidates is looking backward. I fail to see how the author of this post has come to this conclusion. Can anyone tell me where does exactly Obama stand on a variety of issues important to Americans, such as jobs, education, social security, health insurance, etc. I would be happy to vote for people like Kucinich, Edwards, Nader because by now I am well aware of their positions. I have a sneaky fealing that Obama may not represents as much of departure from status quo as some would like you to believe. When the author says that Obama represents the future...she is basically taking a swipe at Hillary.
Nice comment, Arianna. I too felt pride that our country or at least a small segment of it, as white as could be, supported Obama. It may not be the final word on his candidacy, but it was a hopeful sign that, as a nation, we have moved forward. Even if that upward momentum does not continue through the election cycle the enthusiasm Obama has engendered is very encouraging.
Any of the Democratic candidates would be better than any of the Republicans who continue to use fear and the same tired mantras to get elected. And the experience many keep citing with respect to McCain is evidence that his presidency would just be more of the same failed policies. I'll go with the "hope" candidate and something other than what we've had for the past seven years. change
Why is everyone in the media lining up to kiss Obama's bum? He's vague, he's "missed" many key votes in the Senate, he's overly fond of platitudes (even for a politician). His victory in Iowa may be more about his coverage than his stance on the war. Among my friends & family, I only know of 2 Obama supporters; one of them is a Republican, & neither seems able to give me a strong reason.
I dunno, I'm thinking the infatuation with him is like the early days of a new romance, when everything is possible because you haven't yet figured out that this new person is just like all the others who came before....
the dems should be pulling together- we need to mobiliz e to chance the entire climate of the country.
Iowa means nothing. Long Island has more than double the voters. Two-bit western states have too much power and little to no collective intelligence. Small States domination of the US Senate is as big a reason as any for a lot of our stupid policies.
I think Hillary happens to have a realistic and workable approach to the problems facing this country. Unfortunately, this country also voted for Bush twice??!! what the hell??
Anywhose, if ya'll want to be shallow and get on the bandwagon be my guess...
I am like this atypical youth voting for Hillary Clinton, in the words of my peers, IT SUCKS!!!
Jezuz Christo why does everyone and their mom have to endorse this man?!
Read this for a change:
"I don't consider it as an anti-Clinton constituency; I consider it a pro-change constituency" for Sen. Obama, said his senior strategist, David Axelrod. "To win this election, we need to change our politics and expand our base and attract some disillusioned Republicans and attract more young people -- and all of that happened in Iowa."
Its all politics. What will be will be but what seems my lone vote is still going for hillary no matter how unattractive she is for most people...See thats something I can't stand. If your going to vote for someone soley on charm, then stay home and don't go the polls, cause the last thing this country needs is skulls and no brains...
see link for yourself:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119949573104569175.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
I don't think Iowa means much for the Dems. I am slightly leaning towards Edwards, but I would as soon vote for Kucinich, Clinton, Dodd, or Obama. Huckabee is making a populist appeal, but I doubt it will sell much outside of hardcore righties who would vote for the devil before voting for an "L" word. It's shaping up to look a lot like the '76 election, when Watergate left such a bad taste in everyone's mouth that it was all but impossible for a Republican to win the White House.
Of course, the Dems will inherit a Gordian knot of a war, an economy in shambles, environmental disaster staring us in the face, and the remnants of the Republican faithful in the media to attempt to blame it on the Dems. And the Repubs left in government will run interference against the Dems solving anything, obstructing with vetoes at every turn. Their great hope is that too little will be done by 2012 so they can try to blame the damage their vetoes do on the Dems.
In sum, the next President has a lot of work to do in the face of traitorous Republican obstructionists who would destroy this nation in pursuit of power.
I was personally pleased with the Iowa electorate breaking down the old barriers of racism, and the notion that a black man couldn't be elevated to President of the U.S. Enough Iowans think so to be a good sign. But hold on there... not so fast. There are still the evil serial e-mailers, instead of 'swiftboating' the candidate, they are now into 'swiftlynching'. Yes, I'm talking about the year old debunked serial e-mail about Obama being a "muslim trojan horse" educated in a Madrassa and here to undermine the U.S of A from within. I got several forwarded from people that really disappointed me. This horse hockey is still out there and that sort of racism and fear and loathing is not dead with this significant, but not definitive step of showing B.O. approval by Iowans in a caucus.
I think it is hilarious how the Democrats have totally abandoned Hillary. Hopefully this will get her out of the Senate too.
It is so odd to read a number of times here that Hillary is not likeable. How is it that all of the people who actually know her well, who went to college with her, and have known her all her life find her extremely likeable, even loveable, with a delightful sense of humor, a compassionate heart, and a very terrific brain. So, I think it's about time that anyone who says this BS that she's not likeable, admit finally, the truth--that people who SAY she is not likeable are merely pawns of the likes of inHannity, OReally, Newt the Beut, and Analwart Limpbone ever-flapping lying lips--the spinmeisters paid BIG BUCKS to broadcast propagand, repeating it over and over until it settles into the brain of the weak-minded of our society who are susceptible to being manipulated by characteer-assassins. Hillary is great, Hillary is actually a big package of gregarious fun, loyalty, joy, pleasantness, sincerity, genuine caring, and deep unswerving dedication to progressive Public Service to our nation. Want to do something great for AMerica today? Start of Hillary Clinton FAN CLUB!!!
Obama is old wine in a new bottle.
Obama's article in Foreign Affairs makes it very clear that if elected, he will continue America’s meddling in other nation’s affairs with military force.
“To renew American leadership in the world, we must immediately begin working to revitalize our military. A strong military is, more than anything, necessary to sustain peace. . . .
We must use this moment both to rebuild our military and to prepare it for the missions of the future. . . . We should expand our ground forces by adding 65,000 soldiers to the army and 27,000 marines. . . .
I will not hesitate to use force, unilaterally if necessary, to protect the American people or our vital interests whenever we are attacked or imminently threatened.
We must also consider using military force in circumstances beyond self-defense in order to provide for the common security that underpins global stability -- to support friends, participate in stability and reconstruction operations, or confront mass atrocities.”
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20070701faessay86401/barack-obama/renewing-american-leadership.html
The only candidate that will immediately pull out US troops from Iraq and cease American’s militarism is Ron Paul, and that’s why I’ll be voting for him next Tuesday in New Hampshire.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
