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

Comments

[unclejim]

everyone in the republican party will celebrate
dudio will be having dinner with ralf nader come next year if he's the democratic nominee
and will effectively hand another 4 to 8 years to the rich ppl , the hollywood ppl ,etc.
do you really want rush limbaugh teaching science for another 8 years ?

barak BABY ! listen dude ! you're going to blow it ! go for the movie career first maybe
vote democrat baby !

[zundra]

Question to everyone saying Obama can't win the south because of his race.

What gives you the idea that the people who would never vote for a Democrat even if the Republicans were killing smashing baby kittens on live tv would ever vote for a Democrat of any color?

In fact I will go so far as to say anyone racist enough not to vote for someone because of their color is not a democrat anyway. We're a party of liberals remember? You know the tolerant and intelligent ones.

So why do you continue to bring up Obama's race as a negative as if it is the the single most determining factor of his candidacy?

Maybe its the naive liberal in me but I believe most people are generally decent and good and Obama can win because he represents a positive change that this country is longing for after seven years of Bush.

[tbl92666]

Obama is cult of personality, nothing more, nothing less.

What does Obama stand for? I don't know. He's never introduced any major legislation in his VERY SHORT Senate career. Why might that be? Oh yeah, because then he might have to run on something other than being Barack Obama -- the not-too-threatening-for whitey-black-guy.

As a gay man, I don't trust him as far as I can throw him.

The one time he made a choice and stuck to it was when he made Donnie McClurkin, the ex-gay evangalista, his master of ceremonies in his South Carolina pander-fest to black christians.

That's the only thing I know about Barack Obama and I think it stinks. He's obviously against my people; actions speak louder than his words.

I've been a Dem for a long time and I want a qualified Democrat to take over the mess that Bush will be leaving. Obama isn't qualified and given the McClurkin episode, I won't vote for him.

If is is the nominee, I will not cast a vote for POTUS or I will throw my support behind Bloomberg, if he enters the race.

[Qbear]

Hillary roll of the dice


OLD Lady Luck....craps out in Iowa

[tecumseh80]

I never completely understood why the media and the powers that be felt the blogosphere was childish - I get it now.

All over the blogosphere, people are trying to argue why Obama is the wrong choice, why his win last night does not matter, and why he has not "Told Us How He Plans To Bring About Change"...etc., etc., etc.

The winner last night was the true democrats in the party - the centrists are reeling from the overwhelmingly defeat of their choice - HRC. Edwards, without the money, had a strong second through his appeal to the populist and progressive wing of the party (middle class tax breaks, farmers, working class people, etc.) - Obama, won in a remarkable race, with his appeal to the liberal wing of the party.

What do we do after this historic night - we start complaining. We, Democrats, had a great night and we still want to complain. I disagree with Arianna - the politics of fear have won. The comments to this post and many like it prove that Bush and his cronies did win in the end.

Oh, and for all those who say that Obama has not talked about how he will do what he says he will - try looking up his policy papers, voting record, and policy proposals - a stump speech is not meant to reveal policy specifics.

Obama/Edwards 08 or Edwards/Obama 08 - either way we win and win big!!!

[Dewtrell]

And those who say Obama is not electable in November really need to go back and put on their thinking caps. When just about half of the country say they're not going to vote for you no matter what (Hillary), what makes you THINK she could win in November?

According to last night, whether it is a fluke of not, it proved that Hillary does not have wide appeal. The Democrats cannot win the general election on Democratic votes alone, we need independants and new voters, and those independants and new voters overwhelmingly voted for Obama; heck, he even won women over Hillary!

What can't be disputed is that between Obama and Edwards, you had a vote against Hillary at over 60%. As far as I am concerned, if Hillary is the nominee, she is the least likely Dem to win the White House. And for those of you who keep mentioning the Southern states, you think Hillary is going to win a single Southern state? What are you smoking?

[robiform]

Great post, Arianna, except you cited Bush's "re-election" in 2004. We all know what happened in 2000--the election was stolen from a majority of Americans by Jeb Bush, Katherine Harris, and 5 members of the Supreme Court. And in 2004, there were all kinds of illegal shenanigans going on in the Ohio vote count. So, technically speaking, Bush has never won a national election! However, nice going, citizens of Iowa--you have reminded the rest of us what this country is supposed to be about!

[baghdadjoe]

Clearly, Obama won last night because of an exceedingly rare Iowa yard gnome insurrection.

Or at least that's what we're supposed to think.

After last night I am a convert. I just went over to www.barackobama.com to pony up a C note, and I urge you to do the same. We need this guy.

[thedudeabides]

arianna darling-since 1972,when the fascist george wallace was a candidate, americans have been reasonably color-blind and open-minded in terms of ascertaining the legitimacy and viability of candidates, and supporting people regardless of color who most share their values...so i am not particularly surprised that a lily-white state voted for barack...i am singularly pleased, however, that they are turning back the candidacy of the abysmal wench from wellesley and yale law school...

[gregjones]

Obama Campaign Proves
Much Less White Prejudice
than Blacks Thought !
By: Greg Peace Song Jones

One of the most incredible things that has arisen through Barack Obamas campaign has been the vision of mass numbers of white people at each of the Obama rallys showing great love and support for this credible, intelligent, gifted, strong leader....who happens to also be black. It has been incredibly eye-opening and uplifting, and it, for the first time, shows us blacks that we have actually been wrong in our assumption that most whites are prejudiced toward us. Although you do have the exceptions to the rule, the fact is....most whites ARE NOT racist toward blacks. This is a very important revelation. VERY !!!


We, as blacks have held on to our injured history, which we rightfully feel was caused by whites, to such a degree that we have never had the opportunity to see or learn that the prejudiced attitudes of whites does not exist today like it had in the past.We knew that a lot of whites like black music. We knew that millions of white women love Oprah, but we thought that was just a 'woman thing'. But we had no idea, until now, that white people of all ages could be as supportive of a black candidate as they have shown in great mass. We, as blacks have been wrong !

Of course, we as blacks will have the specific cases of injustice and prejudice as displayed through examples like Jena 6, Genarlow Wilson, Katrina and the like....and specific cases like those should be dealt with accordingly. But we must not continue to allow certain negative occurances to misdirect our minds toward thinking that these negative examples speak for the entire white race. The majority of whites of today are actually on our side !


Obama's campaign has already won by proving that whites and blacks can not only get along....but can work TOGETHER...for us all. And guess what my black family....America IS ready !!!


Visit: http://www.Blacks4Barack.homestead.com/

[Nofoolhere]

WHY THE BLACKOUT OF EDWARDS' PRESENCE IN IOWA?

Apart from the Edwards' campaign being outspent by a ratio of about six to one by Clinton and Obama, how can we understand another major reason for Edwards failure to win Iowa? That is the near complete blackout of the substance of John Edwards' Iowa caucus campaign by the mainstream print and broadcast media? That blackout helped cause him to fail to win the Iowa caucus. There was no complete representation of his speeches, no serious discussions of his platform, and any reports and accounts of his campaign were confined to fluff and trivial irrelevancies. Do you understand how this works to solidify corporate power? No corporate owned mainstream pundit or analyst has touched it.

Her is a quote from an article by Ann Kornblut in the Washington Post, with reference to a comment by a member of an Iowa caucus group:

"They've been sending me the DVDs and everything, but I haven't really watched them," [name], who works at a [name] store, said of the Edwards campaign. As for why she is no longer supporting Edwards, [name] said she hasn't heard as much about him as she has about Obama and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), adding: "I heard his wife had some issues."

This example illustrates an inability to even recognize the presence of interactive system effects, let alone understand the impact of their dynamics, e.g., the corporate media's near total news blackout of John Edwards who is the principal threat to their unchallenged abuse of corporate power which they must solidify in the coming election. This public ignorance allows them to blackout and thus distort with impunity, the importance of John Edwards as a viable candidate. This distortion can now be found to continue and include post Iowa caucus discussions.

Arianna has been suspiciously silent about this chronically abusive MSM treatment of the only candidate who poses a real threat to unaccountable corporate power.

BUT THE PUBLIC SLEEPS, AND NO FREE MIND WITH INFLUENCE SEEMS TO NOTICE. MEANWHILE, ON TO NEW HAMPSHIRE.

[kennymac]

Conclusions from Iowa? Obama is an unstoppable force of nature, a transitional figure with limitless potential, a feeling he imbues in his supporters. The 2-1 Dem turnout advantage shows a much more energized voter base than Republicans, and with a majority of Independent and even some Republican support, Obama may be unstoppable. Great night for the country. Maybe we're finally growing up.

[lip11]

I hope Obama has better security than Benazir Bhutto. He does remind me a bit of Robert Kennedy, and look what happened to him. I hope I'm wrong, of course!

[MrMurder]

Arianna,
the guys standing with Obama signs on the front pic of your mailer, what are their names?

One bears striking resemblance to one of your writers.

Has Max Follmer ever worked or volunteered for the Obama campaign?

Maybe he just looks like the guy holding up the "Change we can beleive in" sign cheering for Obama outside a polling place...

[bluesnot]

I don't want to be a rumor-monger, a la Michelle Malkin, but is it true that Obama is flying around in a plane paid for by Archer Daniels Midland?