What Did He Do to be So Black and Blue? Obama and the Race Card
This year should be a perfect storm for a Democratic presidential candidate, particularly one with the rhetorical gifts of Barack Obama. McCain has literally every indicator political scientists enter into their models to predict electoral success or defeat working against him: He has repeatedly allied himself with the most unpopular president since the history of modern polling, describing Bush in 2006 as one of our greatest presidents and musing about having Dick Cheney in a McCain cabinet (two facts the Obama campaign has failed to advertise). He has embraced the most unpopular war since Vietnam. And in the summer before the election, the economy is arguably in its worst shape since the Great Depression, with American families spending a greater percentage of their income on basic necessities, home foreclosures at their zenith, and the ratio of job loss to job creation at its highest since the 1930s.
And those are just the beginning of McCain's problems. Every time he panders to the right he turns off moderates, and every time he takes a moderate position he reinforces the view on the right that he is not a "true conservative" and depresses voter turnout from his base And finally, whether the stress of tacking right and left so many times over the last two years has taken the wind out of his sails or whether he's just gotten too old and tired to take on the rigors of a presidential campaign, he has lost the sparkle that once drew many moderates and even many liberals to him, while running against the most charismatic leader to emerge on the political scene since Bill Clinton.
Yet now John McCain is tied with Obama in the Gallup polls, in a dead heat in the mid 40s for the third consecutive day.
McCain's Only Road to Victory
As I argued several weeks ago in The New Republic, with the winds so strongly blowing against him, the only road John McCain can take to Pennsylvania Avenue is one of the few pieces of infrastructure left in good repair by the Bush administration: the low road. And in the intervening weeks he has made precisely the staff changes in his campaign necessary to turn that road into a superhighway, by hiring a team of Rove acolytes, and has begun to implement exactly the strategies characteristic of a Rove campaign. And they are working.
1. Attack his opponent's great strength. For Kerry, it was his military heroism. For Obama, it is his charisma. This week McCain, with a strong assist from the media and an Obama campaign apparently on vacation, turned an extraordinary foreign success into Paris Hilton celebrity and an illustration of how Obama is arrogant, cocky, and too big for his britches, acting like a president when he's just a nominee. (The fact is, of course, that he did exactly what McCain did, but for Obama, people showed up.)
2. Identify a wedge issue. Now that gays have lost their luster and Republicans have started to worry that too much immigrant-bashing will lead to a permanent Democratic majority as the country becomes increasingly brown, Republicans found a perfect issue in an election year in which the Democratic presidential candidate is black: affirmative action. The GOP has gotten the issue on the ballot in a handful of states, including McCain's home state of Arizona, and McCain suddenly last weekend "saw the light" and changed his position, now supporting the initiative banning affirmative action in Arizona, having previously called such efforts divisive. No one called him on it as far as I know. Now today's New York Times reports that Obama wrote as a law student in the Harvard Law Review that he was a beneficiary of affirmative action.
3. Brand Obama as effete, out of touch, outside the mainstream, different, foreign, not one of "us." This is the same strategy used effectively against every Democrat other than Clinton since Dukakis.
The Ties that Bind, the Ties that Divide
Against the perfect storm of an unpopular incumbent, an unpopular war, and an economy that has led banks to close and millions to lose their jobs and homes, McCain's campaign is creating a perfect counter-storm. Each element described above draws power on its own from the worst in our nature--the prejudice, hate, contempt, and stereotyping that have become the bread and butter of Republican campaigns for four decades, intensified since the entry of Lee Atwater and then Karl Rove onto the national scene. But just beneath the surface of each of these elements--enough below to allow plausible deniability ("there's gambling in this establishment?")--is the tie that binds them: race.
Obama's extraordinary capacity to meet with world leaders on an equal footing wasn't presidential, the story goes, even though McCain goaded him into the trip, assuming he would look and be treated like a novice. Instead, his confidence, competence, and Kennedy-like star-power became an example of his not knowing his place. (Does the term "uppity" come to mind?)
The focus on affirmative action divides the nation along racial lines by combining prejudice with legitimate grievances about the way affirmative action was implemented over the years (e.g., through quotas) and by the disastrous tendency of many on the left to drive white working class men out of the Democratic Party since 1964 (the last time white men voted Democratic nationally) by referring to them universally as privileged, when their experience of punching a timecard or working in a coal mine or an assembly plant belies that epithet and rightfully enrages them. But affirmative action is a particularly powerful tool in this election year as a stealth attack, because it activates unconscious sentiments that will likely come to an occasional conscious boil: Is Obama an affirmative action candidate, who didn't really earn his place on the ticket but was just placed there by zealous liberals (an idea unfortunately voiced consciously in the primary season by Geraldine Ferraro, and no by the words penned by his own hand as a law student)? Is he going to favor black people as president, or as described "colorfully" in a message circulating on the Internet, "paint the White House black?"
And branding Obama as different, "unknown" (despite two years of intense scrutiny and two books that reveal his inner thoughts, some of them very personal--and hardly what a 33-year-old black man aspiring to the presidency would reveal), outside the mainstream, and "not sharing our values" keeps his blackness at a heightened state of unconscious activation in the mind and brain of the voter. The purpose of the Muslim smear that began nearly two years ago on the Internet, like the purpose of conservative commentators' constantly using his middle name and Fox's repeated confusions of "Obama" and "Osama," was surely never to convince voters that he was Muslim, which its purveyors had to know would eventually be exposed as untrue (although the Obama campaign's choice to read from the Democratic playbook and let insidious attacks fester for as long as possible rather than addressing them head on didn't help with the plurality of voters convinced by them by February or the 10 percent of the population who believe them to this day, even after watching the "endless loop" of clips of Reverend Wright).
The purpose of that smear was to lay the groundwork for making Obama "them" instead of "us" (with the added benefit of connecting the unconscious dots between black and Muslim, reminding an older generation of a different kind of Muslim terrorist threat from within). And it has succeeded, creating a large percentage of the population, including many traditionally Democratic voters, who voice sentiments such as "something about him just makes me uneasy," or "I don't feel like I really know him," that bind together these nagging doubts about him with unconscious negative attitudes toward African-Americans they may consciously eschew--and mean it. The data from psychology and neuroscience are clear that even people who are consciously opposed to discrimination--which is most Americans--may hold negative unconscious attitudes toward African-Americans, reflecting the images they see on television, personal encounters, or the residues of an era past in which the only role for blacks was in low-level service jobs, and that make the image of a black president difficult, if largely unconsciously, for older white voters.
The Architecture of a Stealth Campaign
Recent history--as recent as the midterm election of 2006, when Congressman Harold Ford went down to defeat in a race-baited campaign for Senate in Tennessee against a white candidate whose stump speech and advertising centered on the question, "Who's the real Tennessean?"--suggests that Democratic "politics as usual" (i.e., when something unpleasant comes up, avoid it and talk about Social Security and Medicare) does not disarm these kinds of stealth racial appeals. Nor do facts. We can expect conservative 527 groups to unleash a series of ads that use Obama's own words and voice from his extraordinary autobiography, Dreams from my Father, against him to drive home both his differentness and his blackness. Television listeners will hear passages describing the pilgrimage he made to Africa to solidify his identity as a young man, or the fact that his father was a polygamist (perhaps that will make Mitt Romney an acceptable running mate for McCain), or that his grandfather in Africa was a convert to Islam. This is the stuff of great superficial media coverage, as each new ad unfolds, drawing endless discussions from pundits about how it will affect the average white American.
It is in this context that the McCain campaign made its impressive tactical strike this week, accusing Obama of "playing the race card" when he began inoculating voters against the racially tinged attacks that have been coming his way for two years and that right-wing media consultants have already telegraphed will be coming in full force at the appropriate moment (say, October, or during the Democratic Convention). The McCain campaign's move was intended to put Obama's campaign on the defensive, allow McCain to cry foul in the future (and win votes from incredulous and indignant whites about a black man in a position of power complaining about racism) anytime McCain brings up a racially divisive issue like affirmative action, and to "remind" voters that it was Obama who injected race into the campaign as he denounces the inevitable 527 ads to come that will play on Obama's blackness. McCain's new team has some very good chess players, and they thought several moves ahead. They were obviously waiting for this chance since Obama successfully inoculated against and foreshadowed future stealth attacks with his humorous remark a few weeks ago that "They're going to try to make you afraid of me. He's young and inexperienced and he's got a funny name. And did I mention he's black?"
McCain and his advisors know that McCain can't be the one to run ads that cross the race line, at least not blatantly the way George H.W. Bush did with the infamous Willie Horton ad. But he can lay the groundwork for those attacks, and he already has. His first ad of the general election, a biographical spot called "The American President," had all the trappings of a positive, inspirational piece. But both its name and its final line--"John McCain: The American president Americans have been waiting for"--suggest a more insidious subtext. What other kind of president is there? An un-American president? An anti-American president? An African-American president?
When you hear unusual syntax in a Republican ad, you know the goal is something other than the conscious text. Why didn't the ad end with the grammatically expectable tagline, "John McCain: The president Americans have been waiting for"? For the same reason that the "Harold, Call Me Ad" (whose creator McCain hired within weeks of the successful race-baiting ad against Harold Ford in Tennessee) ended that ad with the syntactically peculiar words (written in white against a black screen): "Harold Ford. He's just not right." (Figure out what the brain alternatives the brain is activating as it is trying to process that sentence.)
McCain's campaign has recently followed this "positive" ad with a series of attacks ads with a similar theme: "Country First," which now appears not only in his ads (which end, "John McCain: Country First") but also in his stump speeches, letters exhorting conservatives to give to his campaign, and the banners behind him as he speaks. On the surface, of course, only a paranoid could see something insidious about his advertising that he puts his country first, right? But half of branding is identifying a tagline that differentiates a "product" from its competitors, and a political campaign run by understudies of Karl Rove does not select its taglines without maximizing bang for the buck. How does that tagline distinguish the two candidates? What is the implicit contrast with Obama? Who or what would he put first as president?
Only a few weeks have passed since McCain substituted Rove operatives for the campaign team that gave him a small speech with a small audience against a putrid green background as Obama prepared to deliver a larger than life speech with a larger than life audience as the backdrop on the evening he clinched the nomination. The change is obvious, and it has yielded dividends. After an extraordinary week abroad that led Obama to surge to a 9-point lead in the polls, McCain's team managed, with the help of a relentlessly carping media (bending over backward not to be "biased" by showing people responding to Obama in ways they do not respond to McCain), to convince voters that they hadn't seen what they'd just seen with their own eyes, that everyone from European, Arab, and Israeli leaders to our own troops in Iraq were embracing Barack Obama as the breath of fresh American air that he is after eight years of bully diplomacy and revolving door military service--and to belittle the trip as mere "celebrity." Within days, Obama's lead evaporated, even though he had just answered the main question voters have consciously had about him, voiced in Hillary's 3am ad and McCain's relentless and often condescending taunts: Does he have the right stuff to be the leader of the free world?
Is There an Antidote?
The question, of course, is whether there is an antidote to what has come and what lies ahead in the racial minefield of the 2008 election. I believe there is, but it runs against the instincts of most Democratic consultants, which is to duck for cover and change the subject when uncomfortable elephants are in the room. What Obama and his team need to do more than all else is to resist the temptation to run away from talking honestly about race or speak about issues related to it euphemistically.
Most Americans are not overt racists. But virtually all of us have internalized images and ideas that we may consciously disavow--as when our hearts beat a little faster when a young black man is approaching us on a dark street. Our better angels on race are our conscious values. Most Americans consciously detest racism, and they aren't simply lying to themselves or to pollsters. The more Barack Obama can fight this battle on the conscious battlefield, where virtually all Americans oppose discrimination on the basis of arbitrary characteristics such as race, the more he will win the hearts and minds of the American people and the more they will feel they know and can trust him. The more he shows white rural voters and white working class males that he isn't afraid to talk about his color, that he isn't afraid to talk about what it was like to grow up with a white mom and white working class grandparents but to have a black face, that he understands what it's like to feel tough economic times because he's lived through those times and because he worked for years to help workers who'd seen their plant doors shutter, that he isn't afraid to talk about both affirmative action and extending it to kids from poor rural schools regardless of their color, that he isn't afraid to talk about his values and his hopes for his two children because they're the same values and hopes most Americans share for their kids, that he isn't afraid to take stands that are unpopular but is willing to talk about why he is taking them, the more he will earn their trust.
And he needs to make clear to those same voters that he understands that if they want to know who he is and wonder whether he understands people like them, that's perfectly reasonable. Sure, he may have a higher bar to cross for some because of his color--just as a white politician might at first have to prove himself to black people he wants to represent--but that that doesn't make them racists with KKK hoods in the back of their cars. He needs to learn the lessons of his own magnificent speech in Philadelphia, which, as poll number showed (contrary to media chatter), was not "over the heads" of the millions of Americans who saw an American politician, and an African-American one at that, speak openly about both prejudice and legitimate grievances on both sides, like the fear and anger of white parents whose children were bused to parts of town that would make any reasonable parent afraid, including the parents who have to rear their children there.
So how could Obama have responded to McCain's claim that his warning that the Republicans were going to try to make him out to be different, scary, and not like the faces on our currency (a great line, if you ask me) constituted "playing the race card" and "dealing from the bottom of the deck"? I won't presume to speak in Barack Obama's voice. Only he can do that, and God knows, he has an extraordinary voice, especially on this issue, as anyone knows who has read Dreams from My Father. But suppose he said something like this:
Senator McCain, I don't presume to know what's in your heart. I don't presume to know why you were in the minority even in your party in voting against the Martin Luther King holiday, any more than I presume to know what you were thinking when you and President Bush were eating birthday cake at your home in Arizona when people were hanging from the rooftops--not just black people--in New Orleans during Katrina. I don't presume to know what was in your heart when you suddenly reversed course this week from supporting affirmative action programs aimed at giving people who are willing to work hard a hand up and not a handout, to suddenly supporting a ballot initiative in your home state that would set the clock back 40 years, when you had previously described those ballot initiatives as thinly veiled efforts to divide American against American.
But I'll tell you what I do know. Your party has used race to try to divide us in every election since 1968. You have personally attacked my patriotism, and you're not going to do it again. You've spoken to me in patronizing ways that frankly a man of your limited knowledge of the issues that confront the American people--who can't even keep straight who the warring factions are in the Middle East, which is supposedly your strong suit, and who is so out of touch on the economy that his first response to the mortgage crisis was to blame it on the victims of unscrupulous lenders--has no business doing, and you will not speak to me that way again. You and your wife have attacked my character and the character of my wife, and I suggest you not try that again, because that is a road you do not want to go down. I have always assumed that you were a man of honor, but frankly, your relentlessly negative attacks on me and your indifference to the truth is starting to make a lot of Americans wonder. For a man who said he wanted to run an honorable campaign, how many weeks and how many phone calls from Karl Rove did it take you to find the low road?My comments were intended simply to warn the American people not to be taken in by efforts to paint me as different, as outside the mainstream, as not like them, as not sharing their values, because they are attempts to divide Americans in a way that is un-American. No more, no less. Do I think you or your Republican allies will use my race to try to drive that point home? It's already been done. Did Fox News ever refer to your wife as your "Baby Mama?" And what exactly did your surrogate, Terry Hill, mean last week when he described me on national television as "more politician than he is American"?
Senator, I believe we are one nation, under God, indivisible, and I will do everything in my power as president, and in this campaign, to keep it that way. I suggest you aspire to the same standard. That's what I believe it means to be an American.
The goal of a response like this is not to answer a charge that is nothing but a smokescreen for an attempt to inject race into the race under the guise of attacking such tactics. It makes McCain and the fire he is lighting the issue, and it changes the focus of media attention from Obama's statement to McCain's statement, record, and history.
It has been 40 years since such an eloquent voice has emerged on race as the voice of Barack Obama. He and his campaign should have more faith in his capacity to use it.
Drew Westen, Ph.D., is Professor of Psychology and Psychiatry at Emory University, founder of Westen Strategies, and author of "The Political Brain: The Role of Emotion in Deciding the Fate of the Nation," recently released in paperback with a new postscript on the 2008 primaries.
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
This was a very insightful article. While Obama has made some good moves since the primaries, like his successful trip overseas, it does seem to me that there's been a failure to keep up the pressure on McCain. It's fine to look statesman-like, but I think it's made Obama too much of a sitting duck. McCain and his new hired guns are having an easy time taking potshots and not having to play defense. I think if Obama came back with the kind of muscular, aggressive response that Mr. Westen outlined above, that he would put McCain back on the defensive, where a candidate with no ideas and modest abilities belongs. If Obama wants to win this race, he needs to march right up to those smug Rove-ites, take it away from them and eat their lunch while he's at it. Enough with namby-pamby Democratic advisers who always play it too safe.
I say its time to fight fire with fire. If McCain wants to play down and dirty, Obama should put out an ads implying McCains' too old, but in a "humorous" way. Forget the logical well reasoned responses. Half of the voters stop paying attention after the second sentence. McCain is basically mocking out Obama junior high school style, appealing to the stupidity of some voters. I am ashamed, but being nice won't put an end to it.
Yes, fight; but, not fight fire with fire--but rather--Fire with ICE.
With language and, and a posture, that evokes the sunlit clarity, and the refreshing and invigorating bite, of a perfect midwinter morning, with the sun blazing in a sky so blue that it takes your breath away and reflecting off a fresh fall of snow so pure that one despairs to walk on it, for the pain of marring it's perfection.
Readers of Sun Tsu will know that the key to victory is to attack the enemies strategy. McCain's Rovian hit squad is attacking Obama's strategy. We should, and will, reciprocate.
It would be a grave mistake to attack them with their own weapons, we would be PLAYING INTO THEIR STRATEGY, RATHER THAN ATTACKING IT. They own those weapons and are masters of their deployment. We must, instead, attack their own strategy, diffusing and deflecting their carefully crafted, darkly subliminal, messages with vivid clarity illuminating and countering their dark subtlelty; then, when they serve us an opening, as they surely will, bruise them with devastating flurries of COUNTER PUNCHES, thrown with the effortless grace and panache of a great master worthy of our confidence and respect.
I trust in Obama's brilliance and in Axelrod and Plouffe's deep competence. They will lay the proper trap, set the proper field of battle, and AT THE MOMENT OF OUR OWN CHOOSING, catch them frustrated, and swinging wildly, then with measured, elegant, cold, efficiency, administer the knockout blow.
I really appreciated this well thought out piece. But I think you miss one important point: Democrats don't understand advertising at the visceral level. And they don't understand the concept of being constantly on the offensive.
The Republicans don't give a hoot if all the Democrats cry about the lies in their ads. They don't care if the Democrats complain that the ads are silly or foolish. They know the ads hit their target audience at the instinctual level where logic and facts don't matter. They know they are controlling the discussion.
Obama doesn't need to answer McCain's subtle racism. He doesn't need to be on the defensive constantly. That is why the Democrats always lose. They need to attack McCain harder than he is attacking them. Use advertising to emphasize the age difference, but subtly. Stretch the truth on McCain' positions, just like the Republicans do to ours, to make important points. Mock McCain, attack his credibility and his phony "maverick" persona, tie him to Bush. Be relentless. Make him play defense until November. It's time for the Democrats to get their heads out of the sand, get their hands dirty, and FIGHT.
yes
I totally agree. The Rove types love political war. They will do or say anything or destroy anyone to win. Fear instincts are too easily manipulated by these campaign psychological terrorists, who know how to assault our nervous systems on the unconscious, instinctive level.
This election may well come down to which candidate’s team will scare the most people:
Obama is being “framed” as new, unknown, other = threat
McCain must be “framed” to stimulate memory of past trauma (Bush years, ineffective D.C.)
Well written and insightful article. I am waiting to see what Obama rolls out in the next few weeks. People seem to be forgetting that there are still three months between now and super Tuesday.
We must all prepare for a brutal, painful and RACIAL battle. African-Americans have grown accustomed to this unique part of our historical narrative. The most perverse assertions of McCain and his Rovian surrogates is Obama feels entitled and is elite. That is the biggest LIE told because there is no African-American -- living or dead -- who can claim that weave as part of their family life tapestry -- ever. We must EARN respect each and ever day. That is our legacy. We are up to it. The American system celebrates it. A Barack Obama Presidency may help us transcend and unload this burden. That African-Americans are celebrating this possibility should not come as a surprise any more than any other ethnic group finally moving into the mainstream of its community. We have collectively paid for Senator Obama to have his chance, on his own merits -- for more than 200 years. That is not a gift Senator McCain (or George W. Bush) can give -- or take away.
To paraphrase Ronald Reagan when he was heckled -- WE PAID FOR THIS MICROPHONE!
Bravo!
Superb!
renatam: The most perverse assertions of McCain and his Rovian surrogates is Obama feels entitled and is elite. That is the biggest LIE told because there is no African-American -- living or dead -- who can claim that weave as part of their family life tapestry -- ever. We must EARN respect each and ever day. That is our legacy.
It is a good strategy to remind people that African Americans can’t be elitists, like you said --ever, because it is impossible.
We will need EVERY AMERICAN functioning at full capacity in the very globally competitive 21st Century and cannof afford the luxury of elevating a few (legacies such as C- students George W. Bush and John McCain) at the expense of a growing "minority" population that includes Native Americans, Asians, Latinos -- and, African-Americans. Dynasties and oligarchies are not the American ideal - and, a major contribution of African-Americans is to fight for and force America to live up to her ideals espoused by her imperfect but genius Founding Fathers. That contribution and our ideals are about to be realized more fully in the embodiment of Senator Barack Obama. The fact the world not only knows this, but respects this -- is an asset, not a liability. They -- and many Americans -- have found this something to celebrate not denigrate at this crisis and pivotal moment in our history.
Bravo!
That is a good point about Ivy league legacies of Bush or McCain. Barack (or Michelle, who went to Princeton) should point out the lack of Ivy league legacies among blacks. They weren't legacies.
Thank you, Mr. Westin (and David Gergen) for your honest assessment -- and respecting the daily challenge of African-American professionals who have courageously run this gauntlet for generations. It is TIME to move beyond a standard where the very best talent is subjected to constant rigorous hurdles that would and do make lesser talents -- fall at the feet of the weight and toll it takes. Faustian pretense that this scenario doesn't exist is a further burden some African-American young people don't even want to try to embark on the goal of achievement w/in the context of our way of life. We are LOSING them every day to crime, drugs, etc. The STRESS is enormous and the toll for even our African-American professionals is shorter lifespans, which Medicare counts upon to keep costs down - perversely.
Well said.
Excellent commentary. Agree wholeheartedly.
renatam: which Medicare counts upon to keep costs down - perversely.
I used to work as a health care actuarial anaylst before I went back to school to become an RN. I never knew that the Medicare actuarial analyst were relying on high mortality to balance the books on Medicare. Guess I didn't get around to talking to them to much in the cities that I worked they weren't around much. You should complain about this conduct by those actuaries. They aren't allowed to do that to my knowledge. No one at Medicare is.
This is well thought out....I'm expecting some version of it possibly in the debates, live and in person in JM's face where he can't take time to formulate responses. I also expect there to come a time when the candidate and his surrogates will respond in a similar manner to slanted questions from the press, questioning specifically the basis of the query and listing a vast number of related and similar offenses at the same time....ti
Your "wisdom" may be trying to innoculate us against the racism being played, but you're missing something even bigger here and it's an uncomfortable truth that I think McCain and his camp have gotten: Obama's inexperience has allowed McCain to do this. His trip overseas may have been well and good, but Obama doesn't seem to understand a lot about timing (the trip, his announcement about drilling, for example).
And, counterintuitive though it may seem, I think that the left is doing Obama a disservice by ALSO biting the McCain apple to "prove" how "racist" McCain is - minus any real evidence other than symbolic/image. Even in the absence of "racism" it makes a lot of liberals look like "knee jerks" on affirmative action, racism, etc., and hurts Obama and Democrats.
Of course, this is exactly what McCain & Co. hope and pray for, so on that note you've just answered another prayer...
Really Mabelle. There is no precedent for what Obama is experiencing in this election. No playbook to follow and no seasoned politician to advise him on how to navigate this minefield. In the future, books will be written and historians will study what happened during this moment in our nation's history.
But for now, Obama, the pioneer, has to rely on his own intelligence and innate wisdom as well as the advice and contributions of people who are supporting his effort in manifold ways.
Obama's candidacy is a pioneering one. Obama's candidacy represents a a threat to the status quo of a segregated power structure within our society that has never been witnessed before.
It is, in some ways, more historic than Senator Clinton's candidacy because of his racial background and America's legacies of slavery and Jim Crow. White people, whether female or male, have never experienced such hardships in this country. Consequently, Clinton's candidacy was both historic and valiant but there are challenges that Obama has and will experience that Clinton could never claim under any circumstances.
I know of no politician who has had to navigate such a tightrope. Who else has had to avoid being both too black and too white at the same time?
Jezreel: White people, whether female or male, have never experienced such hardships in this country.
Good point, I know that the hardships among Whites around me are worse than any in the history of the country too. We need Obama to make this simple case to White Americans.
I also like the part where you talk about because of America's legacies of slavery and Jim Crow we need to take advantage of this candidacy at this time. People need to feel the urgency of getting this done!
McCain attacks ads were intended to get his base worked up so he could close the "enthusiasm gap." The ads in no way were intended to inspire independen
Exactly - the only thing missing (in my opinion) is a strong mention of the character and nature of the people he's brought on board to run his campaign - the same lot who made horrible ads against him & his family in 2000 and the same lot that descends from that strong legacy of "wink/nod" racism.
You're absolutely right. I took that out because the piece was getting too long, but McCain has brought together one after another of the people who've made the most race-baiting ads in American history. It doesn't speak wel of him that after he saw the "Harold, Call Me" ad, he immediately hired the guy who produced it for his presidential campaign. Took him less than 8 weeks from the time the ad aired to the time the guy was hired.
It's almost like he doesn't want to get in the middle of something and then have it interrupted by the Olympics. Which is okay, I guess, is he comes out big, and lond, and eloquent as soon as the closing ceremony ends.
But, yeah, at some point in time he either needs to start campaigning for real, or he needs to just pack it in.
What is the basis for saying the slimy Rovian tactics are working? McBush is still at exactly the same place in the Gallup tracking poll as he was way back in March -- hovering around 44 percent.
But, now Obama is also down to 44%. You obviously don't understand the intent and impact of negative advertising. It is not to boost your own ratings, it is to chop down the other guy's. This is why Democrats always lose.
The polls are unreliable. They are based upon land lines and established formulas of past voting experience.
This year is and will be different. The matter of degree is what is at stake.
McCain and his Rovian team KNOW this and are disengenously proffering polls, buttressed by a MEDIA that also KNOWS this. Consequently, the SPIN has been adopted and internalized by our Constituti
The Founding Fathers knew this and honored the PRESS profession with rights -- and RESPONSIBILITIES.
About the polls--I don't trust the polls because I don't think that a wide enough segment of the population is being contacted, especially those without land lines. However, if polling is being used, why is Mc still in the 40+% rang? Here is this "great war hero" with "25 years of experience" who has been a "maverick, not the usual republican" who is now doing the same ole "dirty tricks", even using people who dirty-tricked him, and he is only in the 40+% catagory. Pat Buchannan loves to say that Obama should be way ahead in the percentage points, what about their man? Shouldn't he be at some high 50-60 per centage points? Mc should have come out of the gate in high numbers; he got the nomination early, had time to travel the nation, and he did a "world tour".
Pat Buchanan is a Republican provacateur who must be rolling in clover now that his right wing rumors are validated by MSNBC which uses him in almost every so called "objective " political panel." Thank you for the mute button!!!!
During the primaries, Buchanan did everything he could to get Sen.Clinto
This time we MUST win back our country or we may not have our nation as our forefathers planned it for long.Or our precious Constitution.
When WalMart forces its workers to attend mandatory meetings in which they are told that electing Sen.Obama will lose their jobs for them, you know the Republicans are calling out their corporate henchmen and without conscience circumvenitng our democratic electoral process. .Some patriots.
But of course, NO ONE HAS TO SHOP AT WALMART.
A military vet for Obama for President.
People just need to know that Obama and his team won't put up with this, and they need to do it now! Right now...even 44% is too high after 8 years of the Bush crime family....
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
