This Was Never Going to Be Easy

During the last week or so it seems like the frustration with Obama's inability to expand his lead in the national polls has spread to pro-Obama quarters where supporters are getting nervous as the election approaches. The election is far from over; and it would be surprising if there are many people left who still think Obama has this wrapped up. However, the news is not all bad. Obama, while unable to move decisively ahead, still leads in most national polls, while the state level data still indicates that Obama will likely win the election.

Several things should be kept in mind during the last three months of this election. First, even with Bush approaching record unpopularity, the war in Iraq dragging on and the economy slouching towards depression, the notion that Barack Obama was going to cruise to victory was unrealistic. Obama himself, with characteristic understatement summed up the challenge stating that "It's a leap, electing a 46-year-old black guy named Barack Obama." It is largely because of the disastrous Bush administration that this leap is even possible.

There are more banal reasons other than race why this election was never going to be easy. Obama is in many ways, working hard to buck some reasonably strong historical trends. First, he is seeking to become first non-southern Democratic president since John Kennedy. Second, and related to that point, since Kennedy's 1960 election victory, the Democrats have run a candidate from the Northeast or the Midwest against a Republican candidate from the West or Southwest five times, and have lost all five of these elections. Electing somebody as liberal and Northern as Barack Obama was going to be difficult even if that candidate was a white Protestant with a more "American" sounding name- whatever that means.

While there are clearly reasons other than race why this election was always going to be difficult for Obama, that does not mean that race is not a factor making this an even tougher battle. McCain recently unleashed a barrage of negatives against Barack Obama for allegedly playing the race card. Obama's comment which drew the self righteous ire of the Republican campaign was, referring to how the Republicans were going to run against him, ""Well, you know, he's got a funny name and he doesn't look like all the presidents on the dollar bills and the five-dollar bills."

The controversy these innocuous, and obvious, remarks catalyzed demonstrated that race will remain an important factor, in many ways, in this campaign. As anybody who has lived in the US at any point in the last 232 years knows, race in America is complex. One of the recent complexities is that among white Americans there is a virtual consensus that racism against African Americans is a thing of the past. Anything any African American says or does to challenge this patently false assumption upsets and even angers many white Americans. This is why McCain's campaign, made the strategically clever decision to respond in such an extreme way to these comments. Successfully, painting Obama as outside the consensus on racism will weaken his appeal to white voters.

This puts Obama in the difficult situation of having to go along with the current white consensus that there is no racism anymore, while running a campaign that recognizes the racial boundaries in which he must operate. One of the ways this can be seen most clearly is in how Obama has confronted his opponents. Increasingly, on progressive blogs and websites, calls for Obama to take off the gloves and respond aggressively with attacks of his own against McCain, can be seen and heard.

The failure to do this, in my view, cost both Kerry and Gore the presidency in 2004 and 2000 respectively. Things are different, however, for Obama. Any aggressive response he makes must recognize the reality of racial politics in America. Obama can only respond to McCain's attacks in measured and conciliatory tones. If he decides to as Senator Chuck Schumer phrased it "hit back hard" Obama risks being seen or described as angry.

While some degree of anger and aggression when attacked is appropriate for most candidates, Obama cannot allow himself to be portrayed, in any way, as angry. Angry Black men do not get a lot of support from white voters, so any hint of anger on Obama's part will be just the opening through which the Republicans will drive a truck. Imagine Republican ads interspersing Obama speaking angrily or pounding his fist, interspersed with images of Reverend Wright or other angry African American figures.

Perhaps once a vice-presidential nominee is chosen, she or he, can take the lead in attacking McCain, or perhaps well known party surrogates can do this, but Obama himself must approach this issue very carefully. Obama's discipline and control on the campaign, while always impressive, are now growing tedious for some voters and losing their impact for others, but he cannot afford to abandon this discipline. This creates additional challenges for his campaign, but this was never going to be easy-and race was always going to be a factor.

Comments

[claudiam]

Absolutely, it would be great if, in America, race was not an issue. I am an avid Barack supporter and would love to see him hit back; I know that he is capable. However, I recognize the 'angry blackman' scenario. McSame is getting such a pass from the media/pundits. I am hoping for the Barack surrogates to come out and "get it done."

[caraqueno]

It does little good to pander to the segment of voters, be they Republican, independent, undecided, even Democrats, who are racist, frightened that Protestant whites wouldn't hold all of the economic, political, and social "cards" that they have held over the history of this country. Many of these people will never admit, even to themselves, how much they fear not being part of a group that holds power, even if they themselves are at the fringe of that power. The history of repression, hate, massacre, and slavery done to keep Protestant whites in charge of the United States, the use of race to retain power is open and naked.
This election is historic for the opportunity it can provide to really see how much Americans "put their money where their mouth is" about living in the greatest country in the world with all of the benefits. If this is so, any qualified African-American can run for president and/or win. Can he, really? It would hurt many Americans like hell to examine themselves and see their national culture's ugliest traits and behaviors. This is what allowed Ronald Reagan and his neocons the popularity they gained and led to the messes we have now: to allow whites, especially Southern whites, the feel-good dream that racism no longer existed, all who aspire to wealth can do so on an equal footing, and Protestant whites continue to exert primary control over the country. Blast me but ask yourself if I'm wrong?

[Heyman]

I voted for Barack Obama in the primary.
I'm a swing voter. Usually voting third party.
If Obama wants to win? Three major sticking points would win this election. Restoring our Bill Of Rights and Constitution. Lower gas prices would lower prices on many items. And stop K Street.
McCain would be afraid to speak out against his PAC money friends.
Obama would win.

[YesWeCanada]

While you make some good points, your overall argument comes across as a Bill Clinton troll. Basically you are saying that because the democrats were foolish enough to trade 16 years of Clinton baggage for 232 years of racial baggage, Obama"s only chance now is to run as John Kerry in black face. I feel that your analysis is too cynical of the 60+% of the general electorate that Obama appeals to and gives too much deference to the roughly 40% of diehard GOP voters and racists. Democrats and open minded Independents want to see some fight from the potential next President of the United States. Diehard GOP voters and racists won"t be swayed no matter what he has to say or how he campaigns.

[Keith52]

If that is true that "Diehard GOP voters and racists won"t be swayed no matter what he has to say or how he campaigns." Why make up a "fight" to win the impossible? The rest of us don't want manufactured narrative. We want to address issues. We don't want to fight a losing battle. After all does that not sound like a Republican tactic?

[YesWeCanada]

Democrats and open minded Independents want to see some fight from the potential next President of the United States. What part of that don't you get? McCain and his campaign have made a number of slanderous charges against Obama and will continue to do so. Vacuous personal attacks are not needed but the electorate expects to see some backbone from their President and VP. If you can't stand up to a fellow American that is attacking your character and policies how can you be expected to handle yourself when dealing with strong allies or strong enemies?

[YouDisgustMe]

great article...however, i have one concern.

you talk about how gore and kerry lost their but you neglect to mention that bush cheated both times

[Jenoah2008]

Bravo Mr. Mtchell ! your analysis is "on the money." You accurately describe the reality of most Black people who navigate the waters of subliminal racism to arrive at what appears to be a calm success. This is the same calm that took Black people through generations of slavery and afforded white America of the 60's the luxury of self-examination against a backdrop of generations of Black fortitude despite ghastly inhuman suffering. White reactionary norms and folkways were born in the throes of the white American democratic moral dilemma of the '60's and has been masked by an "integration" enforced by law. Many aging baby-boomers resentfully complied by developing non-verbal cues for maintaining racialism. Many spent 40 years perfecting the destruction of Black social institutions while pretending that polite physical juxtapositions of black and white people produced a non-racist world. Pundits , white and black, delude in graceful amnesia asking: Why is he not able to close the deal? Answer: "subliminal racism" anchored in "escapism." The questions are politically correct but morally dishonest and brewed from entrenched polite codes of conduct and conversation in black-white racial affairs. Your comments reflect the "faith" that keep some Black people moving forward in "hope" that, as you desire, someday a Black candidate for any position need not be so calm. Given the not-so-perfect world where the insidious "ism" of race and color subverts and quiets honest exchanges, Barak is doing miraculously well.

[nighthawk808]

"Electing somebody as liberal and Northern as Barack Obama..."

Anyone who voted for FISA has lost the right to be called liberal. If supporting an insane Republican's program to spy on Americans is what passes for liberal these days, then that word has lost all meaning.

[billw8017]

The right wing press is who calls Obama "liberal.' It is a generic cuss word for them. Obama is "too liberal" because he is the apparent Democratic nominee. In 2008 he is more liberal than Kerry who was the most liberal senator in 2004. He is more liberal than Gore, more liberal than Dukakis governor of the nation's most liberal state. The title was awarded on a basis of a dozen or so votes where Obama and Clinton disagreed on one and that is why Obama is most liberal while Clinton comes in 16-17th. If she were the nominee, she would be "most liberal."

Being liberal means being tolerant and compassionate and, presumibly, mushy minded. Who exactly on the evidence of the past several Republican administrations actually has mush for brains? Why not government with mushy personal virtues for a change?

[MFrancis]

Perhaps it is true that Barrack Obama should not respond to McCain"s personal attacks with attacks of his own. But I strongly disagree with your reasoning. You state that Obama cannot follow Senator Shumer"s advice and "hit back hard" because "[w]hile some degree of anger and aggression when attacked is appropriate for most candidates, Obama cannot allow himself to be portrayed, in any way, as angry. Angry Black men do not get a lot of support from white voters¦"

Obama, of course, needs to be careful in how he discusses and responds to racial attacks. But you have gone far beyond discussions of race, and suggested that Obama should avoid being perceived as aggressive in responding to any personal attacks. This is direct pandering to the bigotry and racism of which you speak. If Obama were to take your advice for the reasons you posit, it would take the hypothetical, and in my view, overreaching fear, that most Americans will be turned off by a black man showing aggression, and concretize these fears into reality.

Obama stands strongly for recognizing the realities of racial inequalities by challenging the very boundaries that have allowed these inequalities to persist. Suggesting that Obama needs to confine himself to the type of Black man bigoted Americans can tolerate is, in my humble estimation, debilitating, patronizing and insulting to both Obama and all Black Americans who seek to improve their social achievement in a society that has historically worked to stymie their progress.

[poliscibabe]

This is the first post I have seen to really illuminate the challenge that Barack Obama has taken on. It is a full description of the "Black Tax". We need to put a great deal of pressure on the GOP to be truthful and the MSM to provide balanced coverage of both candidates.

[billw8017]

The GOP recognizes that partizan advantage comes of animating your base and this is most dramatically done by posing and libeling your opponent. You put pressure on the GOP to be truthful by not electing them (nothing else is sufficient and its adequacy is indirect). As the purge of CBS news in 2004 proved, the Republicans have put the pressure on the MSM when they gave away the spectrum and allowed media mergers. Viacon's boss, I understand, was once a Democrat but he decided Republicans were more indulgent of his corporate interests.

Democrats can stand on their dignity or they can fight by the rules of the game. The country is done no service if the party of good government is also the party of losing campaigns. What would Jesus do? He turned the other cheek -- once. He cursed the fig tree perhaps a little unfairly. He took a whip to hand and drove the money changers out of the temple. Being sweetly reasonable is OK. You fight the big issues with what it takes.

[Einstein44]

My advice to Barack Obama would be this: Always remember the great Jackie Robinson...He endured big challenges and obstacles, but the outcome was well worth it.

[TheFoolkiller]

Barrack Obama is the JACKIE ROBINSON of presidential politics. He must feel he has to remain cool even when he's fights back. Jackie Robinson did it with his bat, speed and grace under pressure . I guess Obama feels he must be careful not to do anything to scare whites who are not comfortable with a black man running for president calling for change. That's just too must change for some
whites to handle. Hell they are already terrified of his wife because she will not play the I'm so
weak and harmless game.

PS. I'm looking for most of these simple a$$ people btw.

[live by the golden rule]

Bill Clinton was the first Democrat since Bobby Kennedy was killed to capture the working class Democrats.
Hillary Clinton captured them in the primary, but many Obama supporters who post on blogs continue to disparage these voters, many of whom are struggling economically.
It should be very simple for a Democrat to win: contrast the Republican years with the Clinton years. However, incredibly, both Al Gore and John Kerry completely failed to point out the contrast.
Al Gore could easily have pointed out how much better things were for the working class [Reagan Democrats] in Clinton's years compared to the years of Bush 41. Incredibly, he did not run on that contrast, but instead inflicted Lieberman on us and ran away from Clinton.
Kerry too did not talk about the demonstrated successes of Democratic policies. If Obama does not want to lose, he should embrace the dramatic contrast, rather, than, once again, running away from the economic record of the Clinton years. I fear that in trying to blame Democrats and Republicans equally for the mess in Washington, Obama will once again be a candidate who fails to drive home the actual evidence that Democrats are better for America than Republicans have proven to be.

[donaldw6]

Obama says plenty about the good things, and he's honest about the things that weren't so good. When you talk about the past in a critical light, the Democrats still look a lot better, and you have more confidence in the speaker because you know he's telling the truth. Just because you have to recognize problems with things like NAFTA, it doesn't mean you didn't like the budget surplus and all the economic growth.

[GrannyForObama]

To my mind, Senator Obama has demonstrated a cool tough mindedness that has stood him well throughout the campaign. He has repeatedly shown that he doesn't suffer fools gladly be they from the McCain campaign or from the media. He has managed to leave no challenge unanswered but at that the same time demonstrate that his interest is where it should be - in the larger issues that matter to us as Americans. I'm not looking for a best friend, I'm looking for an intelligent, compassionate leader. I'm not looking for someone who likes to mud wrestle, I'm looking for someone who can avoid the mud without so much as a backward glance.

Our own Pennsylvania Senator Casey has a similar low key, calm, reassuring, intelligent approach. After living through all the Republican swagger and scare tactics of the past eight years, I am hopeful that this type of leadership will prevail in November.

A granny helped to raise Senator Obama and this granny will do all she can to raise him up to the presidency! Excellent article and suggestions from posters. Thank you.

[Lexica]

Well said, Granny! As a fellow citizen of PA I agree with your assessments of Obama and Casey. The hour of truth (Election Day) approaches, and I dearly hope we wake up the next morning exhausted but deliriously happy.

[Starlight5]

Yes, thank you for such a thoughtful post.

This granny from Alabama will also do everything she can to raise Obama up to
the presidency.

[MYQUEEN7]

Obama, just stay true to yourself. Don't change. Help is on the way!

[TheFoolkiller]

I hope Obama would whether lose an election than win Mccain's way.

[carmelcat]

You'all just don't get us "undecideds" ... the fuff-ups about : Paris and Brittany, presidential profiles on money, tire inflation etc. are a waste of our time and media's resources. I am bored by Obama's talking points. A bright guy ought to be able to give me more opinion on more issues.

His inexperience and restraint (timidity?) are not presidential. As for holding the course and not creating a dust-up, well maybe he should try the Reagan style Heavy Sigh followed by comforting words of reason. Umm, No, he's not fatherly enough for that either.

He just in't ready yet. He has an intellectual passion for the oval office role, but he's not skilled at the underbelly warfare audition. It's ugly seeing him go down. I am losing hope.

[MegWe]

Carmelcat - what you cite as Obma's "flaws," Paris, Brittany, tire inflation, etc. are all the creation of the media and the Republican attack machine. You are assuming that he is "going down." What evidence do you have of this?

I totally disagree with your characterizations of this man. You obviously have not been watching and listening. How can you possibly say he is not "fatherly" if you have watched him with his daughters? Anyone with a heart can clearly see the compassion and sincerity displayed as he interacts with crowds of supporters or talks with individuals on the campaign trail. Have you really listened to him speak - longer than the "talking points" that the media offers up?

You have revealed nothing about Obama in your post, only volumes about yourself.

[jbm106]

Since when is restraint not a presidential quality? I suppose shooting from the hip is? A lot of good that has done us over the last eight years.

[WaspStings]

Who you trying to kid about being undecided. The 'tuff-ups" are McCain generated. I may or may not understand undecideds, but I sure as heck know a repug post when I see it.

[carmelcat]

You're wrong WaspStings... I am a Dem, and on occasion, a Green. I would have preferred Hillary. I am only undecided about voting and not voting.
You forget there were other choices more prepared for the fight and with broader knowledge on more issues. Anybody can restrain himself and proffer sweet generalities. Not everybody can respond on their toes with hard facts.

And to the others, you're right ... I have a life and I just see what I catch on TV, snippets. Did I miss the snippets on Blackwater, and who will be running Embassy City and the airports we built in Iraq when the troops come home? Just how much control will the Iraqi gov. have? Will the DOD still issue no-bid contracts to friends? The DOD are badder boys than the thugs of Obama's old Chicago days. Is he a warning kind of dad or a real behavior changer? Right or wrong, remember, Reagan sighed and fired all the air controlers. Does O have the courage of his convictions? Does he have courge at all? Did he ever lead men, or only debate them? What is he gonna do about the mess at the DOJ? Who would he like on the Supreme Court? etc.etc. Oh, lets hear more talk about hope and change... well, he is the one!

[donaldw6]

What Obama represents is nothing like repressed anger. His approach is based on his very positive appreciation for our common humanity, and he's simply more motivated by those feelings than by any need to avenge perceived injustices and slights. I'm amazed there isn't more open recognition of his obvious maturity, a character trait all too many of us never manage to quite acquire, and we should be more appreciative of those qualities he brings to the table and how they can help us to bridge sharp divides in the coming years.

New politics is more than just a catch phrase. Obama really does bring fresh air into the political arena, and it's quantifiable when one studies his personality and ideas. The problem is the disconnect between that approach during normal working hours, and its effectiveness against the dirty tricks of a campaign.

How much real advancement would it be if Obama regressed from this mature perspective, and started spouting off at every lie he heard? Would we be any closer to reaching the point where things might get done? A lot of the burden has to be on us and the media, not to hit back where the candidate won't, but ourselves to try and rise above the trivialities and see the big picture. If all that doesn't work, I'm prepared to fire at the GOP with everything I've got, but I'm just saying we're trying to call things negative that really aren't.

[DevilAdvocate]

yes, yes...