Why Isn't Obama Ahead by a Landslide as the Economy Collapses? The Psychodynamics of the 2008 Election Come Into Fierce Relief

Once again I've started hearing Blue Staters responding with horror and shock that Obama has not shot McCain out of the water. "How can it be," they ask, "that after 7 years of war, the dramatic and scary economic collapse, growing ecological crisis, and undermining of human rights and civil liberties that Americans are not overwhelmingly rejecting McCain who supported most of the destructive policies of the past and shows no signs of changing them should he be elected? Americans," they go on to say, "must either be stupid, extremely militaristic or racist."

If Obama understood how to answer these blue-staters and their all-too-ready-contempt for the Americans who don't agree with them, he'd have a far greater chance of winning this election. I hope the readers of this note with try to reach him with an analysis I present below of what is going wrong. Unfortunately, many of Obama's own supporters have bought into the "It's the economy, stupid"reductionist view of human needs that gives them no alternative way of understanding. Because if all that people care about is their own material well-being, then they must be irrational to even consider supporting McCain. But that's not the whole story of who we are as Americans.

I remember having these kinds of elitist thoughts myself when Reagan was first elected, but in the twenty-eight years since then I've engaged in a systematic study of the psychodynamics of American politics, and come to realize how very misguided that put-downish analysis of middle income Americans.

What I and my colleagues working on what was originally anNIMH-funded research project on stresses at work and stress in family life -- we ran groups and did interviews with over ten thousand Americans -- discovered is that for a large sector of Americans, the issues are not the issue in a presidential campaign. So they can easily agree with the liberal or progressive candidates on the issues, and hence in any polling appear to be closer to the Democrats than the Republicans, yet in the polling booth it is not those issues that determine their vote.

Instead, what shapes the consciousness of Americans are two psychodynamic issues: the level of their fear vs. the level of their hope, and the degree to which they feel recognized and respected by those who are seeking their vote. One of the terrible problems with the people who have pushed Obama to present himself as more "centrist" is that they don't understand how their role in pushing the candidate away from his own deepest truths has undermined his campaign and made him appear less authentic and hence less trust-worthy. So lets explore these issues.

The level of fear is never static. Though most of us have been subjected to an intense barrage of messages that tell us that we are surrounded by people who only care about themselves, and a world filled with terrorists who seek to destroy us, and that the only path to safety for ourselves or our country is to dominate and control others before they dominate and control us, we've also been exposed to a different set of experiences in which we've learned to recognize that many people who seem hurtful or scary can sometimes be moved by our acting in a sensitive and caring way toward them, and that love and generosity generate more security than attack and attempts to manipulate others.

Truth is that both of those voices are always in most of our heads, and that while our individual psychological history may determine that one or the other holds greater weight, at any given period a set of circumstances (e.g. 9/11 for fear or the collapse of the Soviet Union for hope) may shift social energy more in one direction than another. For that reason, static analyzes that focus on whether a given person grew up with a more patriarchal/domination oriented family or a more nurturing and cooperation oriented family are inadequate, because they fail to notice the way people can transcend their previous conditioning and move in a new direction if the fear or the hope, the domination or the love/generosity aspects of their consciousness are most effectively touched. Reinforcing the voices of hope inside us is the most important task of progressive politics, and that doesn't happen simply by saying "lets be hopeful."

Watch the Republicans and they know how to touch the voice of fear, and reinforce patriarchal/domination views while ridiculing anyone who might be "soft" or "naïve" (e.g. in believing that negotiations would be helpful with Iran or Russia or Venezuela). That same wisdom is not there with the Democrats--they seem unable to affirm that voice of hope, love and generosity in people that must be massively reinforced, particularly in the face of it being put-down and systematically ridiculed. Obama mentioned the right issues (care about others, peace, social justice, ecological sanity) but his talk, and most importantly his campaign and his ads stay away from that, imagining that they can mobilize people around some modified version of the "it's the economy, stupid" consciousness, as though Americans only care about or get scared about the economy.

Of course, they do care about the economy, and there probably will be a bump toward Obama in next week's polling. But they also care about the lack of loving connections in their lives, the level of futility and meaningless in their work, the well-being of their children, and the possibility of peace in the world.

Obama needs to help people see that these very important elements in their lives have been undermined by a society that fosters selfishness, materialism, and a "looking out for number one"consciousness that is endemic to the competitive capitalist marketplace, cheered on by the media, and brought home into personal lives in ways that undermine our capacities to sustain long-term loving relationships undermine our ability to make sacrifices for our communities, and encourages disrespectful or even self-destructive behavior in some of our children. But until Obama and other Dems present a tough and hard-nosed defense of values like generosity, caring for others, and an insistence that our well-being cannot be achieved apart from the well-being of everyone else on the planet, they will continue to be perceived as out of touch with the real worries of many Americans, and weak and afraid of their own values and unable to embody the hope that they need to stimulate in others.

Obama and many other liberals/progressives appear to not really believe in the possibility of a world of love and generosity, and that reinforces the voice of fear in many people who could be won to a politics of hope if anyone appeared to be hard and powerfully into taking those values and showing how they applied concretely in domestic and foreign policy.

An Obama campaign weakens hope (no matter how many times it uses that word) if it can't say clearly the following:

1. The economic crisis is not going to be solved solely by new economic policy wonks -- because the basic cause of our economic meltdown is the selfishness and materialism that has been fostered by a politics that says our highest obligation is to "look for number one." We need a new ethos in our economy, and institutions that will enforce that ethos, based on the notion that we have a responsibility to care for others, and that anyone running corporations, banks, insurance companies, health care institutions, food, or energy related institutions has an obligation to put the common good at the top of their agenda when making decisions, and should be held legally responsible when they instead make decisions based solely on advancing their own profits and not on the welfare of the public which they serve. We need to develop mechanisms to reward those people and those institutions that do make caring for others and social responsibility a high priority when making decisions in the board room or in the way that they conduct their economic life. And we need A New Bottom Line, so that institutions and social practices are judged rational, efficient, and productive not only when they maximize money or power, but also when they foster love and caring, kindness and generosity, ethical and ecological responsibility, and enhance our capacities to respond to the universe with awe and wonder. And if we need to bail out corporations, then we the people whose taxes are going to do this ought to have the right to own those corporations which, if the claims we are being given are true, would have collapsed without out money and gone bankrupt. Regulation, fine -- but those corporations should, if they need our money, but under our democratic control.

2. War is the wrong path to achieve security while generosity and caring for others is the right way, so while we intend to keep a strong military on our shores, we should give equal weight to an equally important strategy: showing that we genuinely care about others, repenting and paying for the damage we did to Iraq, and exploring the possibility of a new Global Marshall Plan that would dedicate 1-2% of the Gross Domestic Produce of the advanced industrial countries each year for twenty years (with the financial help of other G-8 countries) to once and for all end both domestic and global poverty, homelessness, hunger, inadequate education, inadequate health care, and repair the global environment. This is House Resolution 1078 introduced by the first Muslim in the Congress, Keith Ellison, and the details of the plan can be read here. Can we afford it? If we could afford an $85 billion to bail out AIG corporation for the sake of its

3. Saving the environment is not an optional choice but a pressing need, both because our biblical mandate to care for the planet is being undermined by Republican policies that give priority to the rich and the corporations, but also because our future and the future of our children is being undermined at this very moment by polluting our waters, our air, and the products we consume.

4. We not only need to give better pay and attention to teachers, smaller classrooms, and better facilities, but we need to give equal attention to building a new curriculum in our schools that teach how to care for others and the environment, how to communicate in a non-violent way, and teach basic values like generosity, gratitude, responsibility, respect for others, forgiveness when we've been hurt, and how to respond with awe and wonder to the grandeur and mystery of the universe are miseducating our youth.

5. We need to reject the voices in the Democratic party and in the liberal and progressive world who do not adequately understand the legitimate hunger of people for meaning and purpose in their lives that can transcend the materialism and selfishness of the competitive marketplace. There is a religio-phobia in some sectors of the Left in this country that we must challenge, even though we understand that some of it comes from a righteous indignation at the way that some elements of the religious community have forgotten the message of love and caring of the Bible or the Koran and have instead used religion asa justification for sexism, racism or homophobia. We reject that kind of interpretation of misuse of religion, but we must no longer allow ourselves to be portrayed as anti-religion or insensitive to the hunger that Americans have for a return to the traditional values of love, kindness, generosity, individual as well as social responsibility, gratitude, and forgiveness of each other's transgressions. We must affirm unequivocally that we want to strengthen families and create a world that sustains and supports loving commitments rather than only prizes the lone individual out for him or her self. And we intend to challenge overtly the elitism that leads some people in our society to dismiss others who disagree with them as on some kind of lower intellectual or spiritual level. We are populist not only economically, but also in spiritual terms, validating the spiritual hunger of the American people, and on their side in the struggle against the forces that destroy community, family and love.

The point here is that not only must Obama return to his visionary self in order to re-activate the many young people who for a while thought his campaign was about something new (but who have lost some of their excitement as Obama has made compromise after compromise with the ideology of militarism and taking care of the powerful at the expense of the powerless), but that he must do so in a way that appears to be solidly behind a progressive worldview, not apologetically trying to sneak it in bit by tiny bit while allowing the Republican worldview to dominate the ideological debate. When he gets into the television debates, for example, he should actively question the assumptions in questions raised by the television-stars who "moderate" them.

The realists will say, "first get him elected, then we'll raise these more visionary issues." But what I've learned is that it is precisely the willingness of the Republicans to tie their programs to their own value system that makes sense to ordinary people, and that if the Democrats were to start doing that also, and appearing to be hard and tough behind an alternative worldview to the militarism, selfishness and materialism that has been presented as the "common sense" of contemporary political discourse, they would be more effective and more likely to win votes in this election. Doing so would strengthen the hope part of the consciousness of everyone, whereas appearing inconsistent or weak in advocating for what I've described above (and what I call a "spiritual progressive" agenda which we've defined more fully in the Network of Spiritual Progressives' "Spiritual Covenant with America" at strengthens fear.

On the other hand, the video released by Obama on the economic crisison Sept. 17 doesn't really do much to strengthen our more hopeful side. His remedies are superficial and traditional and don't really focus much on what can be done to challenge the ethos that led us to this mess. He talks about greater levels of regulation (and so does McCain -- wow, what an interesting snoozer as they debate exactly which regulations or regulatory bodies will do the best job). He says that we shouldn't be spending money in Iraq on the war, but then he doesn't take the war is the wrong approach, but instead says "we shouldn't be spending our money there -- it should be brought home and spent here" (as though we already were spending too much abroad and needed to concentrate on taking care of ourselves more). Far from sounding visionary and hopeful, Obama sounds like an upbeat technocrat. So soon the argument will be "how much regulation is too much" and "how much spending abroad is too much" instead of about what values guide our economic and foreign policy thinking. No wonder if those are the discussions we will hear, more people will find excitement in talking about Sarah Palin! And more people will think that the message of ending wars and militarism is just utopian nonsense, and that will make them more inclined to listen to McCain who will make his case as someone more experienced in handling things from within the militarist paradigm.

In short, moving to the Center politically is counter-productive not only because it is morally incoherent but because it strengthens the very fears in people about the possibility of a world based on peace and generosity and caring, and hence strengthens the appeal of the McCain/Palin rhetoric of being tougher than anyone else on the planet. For Obama to try to compete on that terrain has proven to be a big mistake. In each area of his political agenda he needs to articulate how his specifics flow from a worldview that is fundamentally at odds with the selfishness, materialism, "looking out for number one" and militarism that has dominated national debate and which always tips in favor of Republicans or conservative Dems. If he keeps hammering at the differences in worldview, and does so in ways that employ the language of the spiritual progressives and the religious traditions of the American people, we will see the expected surge in his support because of the economic meltdown turn into a permanent and landslide-ish level victory.

The answer of liberals has typically been: "the American people are too selfish, stupid or reactionary, so Obama has to be careful and just hint at what we fully believe. They would never buy these lovely ideas that we believe in."

Here we get to the second major mistake of the Democrats, liberals and progressives. Their contempt for the American people, manifested in their unwillingness to say clearly what they really believe (e.g. that the war in Iraq is not just a tactical but a moral error, or that a budget that under funds the needy is an ethical distortion, or that allowing the marketplace to destroy the global environment is a sin not just a question of differences in economic theory) is immediately understood by the rest of the population as elitism and disrespect.

What I learned in my research was that a large group of Americans feel disrespected at work and disrespected in many of the encounters they have with others. They can feel that the Republicans are telling them their own truth--that militarism and self-interest are the key to a good world, but that Democrats are not telling their truth--that love and generosity are the key to a good world--because the Democrats disrespect them so much that they feel that "ordinary Americans" couldn't possibly respond to their message if they told it straight. It is this disrespect that gets triggered by Democrats' caution (they even pick a vice-presidential candidate like Joe Biden who has been hawkish rather than peace- and generosity-oriented whereas the Republicans pick a woman who actually embodies their values). It's not which of these sets of values are better that matters to many people as much as which choice reflects respect for the American people. To the extent that the Dems hide who they are, it's easy to tag them as elitist scum.

Look at the coming debates through this framework: how much has Obama challenged the fundamental worldview of the Right versus how much is he trying to show that he can manage the existing military and economic system within its current set of assumptions. And how much does he speak to the heart of people, not just to their heads, appealing to their better instincts while clearly defining what is wrong with the market materialist and militarist worldview.

So it comes down to this: recognizing that our well-being depends on the well-being of everyone else on the planet, affirming that love and caring are not "soft" but powerful ways of living as individuals and as a nation, rejecting fear-based ideologies (that people will always only care about themselves), and developing respect rather than dismissive elitist attitudes towards those with whom we disagree politically. Until the Democrats get this and convince everyone else that they do, the once again put themselves in danger of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

Rabbi Michael Lerner is editor of , Chair of the Network of Spiritual Progressives and author of The Left Hand of God: Taking Back our Country from the Religious Right, Healing Israel/Palestine, and The Politics of Meaning (and eight other books). He is rabbi of Beyt Tikkun synagogue which conducts High Holiday and Friday night services in San Francisco, and Torah study Saturday mornings in Berkeley. He welcomes your feedback after you've read through those two websites.

Comments

[cowboyjerkface]

Great piece Rabbi! Kudos...

[jackie4444]

What an extraordin­arily-beau­tiful piece. Most right on, very best, I have ever read on this site.
I hope someone in the Obama camp is listening.

[classicalmusicman]

Excellent points, but liberals who call out Americans are not wrong. Leftist candidates have tried for the presidency and none have gotten close. Obama is as left as they have come, and he's a moderate. America is a right of center country. Perhaps this is a failure of leaders to promote what you are saying they should promote, but people advocate along these lines all the time, usually to deaf ears.

One problem is our constitutional system which, because of the Senate, is undemocratic, unresponsive, and obstructinist. The Electoral College starts any Democratic president candidate 20-30 votes down.

But the biggest problem may be the American myth. Not only are unfettered capitalism and greed favored by the wealthy, they are is favored by much of the poor. So many believe in the American myth that they blame themselves for not achieving it, even when they have no chance to.

Obama took a lot of heat for saying Americans turn to guns and religion when times are hard. He's right, especially about religion. It is said that we should stop turning to government for help and pull ourselves up by the bootstraps, but we should stop turning to religion for help and start facing the world as people with the will to improve things on our own. Will this happen? Perhaps America is simply too young a country to understand all this. Perhaps it has not grown up. It does act like an immature adolescent much of the time.

[likeicare]

Just some suggesstions on your piece, Rabbi --

First, it's a little lengthy -- I'm a speed reader, so it was no problem for me, but the average reader might find the sloughing a little rough.

Secon, the piece seems to devolve into the same morass that the Dems are inclined to fall into whenever they try to make a simple issue complicated -- it's the message, stupid (no disrespect intended, sir, just using a figure of speech).

What the Obama campaign needs to say is, "Folks, you're being led around by the nose, and played for fools! The same people who've been scamming you for the last 8 years (at the very least!!) are asking you to give them another 4 more years to pick your bones clean!"

That's the reality in a nutshell. People will get it. Especially if they're given concrete examples of the destruction the Rethuglicans have caused to the country -- from the outrageous contempt for the Constitution, to the trillion dollar tab the US has run up on Communist China's credit card -- for our kids and grandkids to pay!!

[rgersmrk]

So the message "4 more years of the same" isn't sufficient enough? Obama has been saying exactly that for months now. He's painting McCain as Bush 2.0.

I'm not sure what else we can ask of Obama that he already hasn't done. What I do think that we need to do that the Republicans are very good at is getting 1000 percent behind their candidate no matter what.

I've seen so much doubting by left leaning bloggers and writers it's no wonder Bush won twice. Obama has done everything he can. Now it's time for the people supporting him to step up.

[anghiari]

People,

These same people have been led around by the nose for years...why would they change now?Everybody seems to believe if we could just talk to them one on one they would get it...Nope, they don't get it because that would require them to re-think their behavior for the last 20 years or so and sorry, but most people who have made terrible mistakes fear re-visiting those decisions. So they double down on their stupidity.

With respect, Rabbi, as my mother would say, honey, if you are so smart, why aren't you running for President?

I think I will hang with Obama's brilliant team...they beat the unbeatable candidate and got the nomination. They think outside the box and they are brilliant at strategy. And folks, you never telegraph your moves...

[WES80]

As an African American I am so tired of everyone tip toeing around the facts and won't just come out and admit the real reason Barak Obama isn't ahead by a landslide given the previous administrations failings. He's Black! If the state of the political race were exactly as it is today with the only difference being that Barak Obama were the biological son of two white parents, he'd be winning by a landslide hands down. I am so sick of the media refusing to consider his race as a factor. It would be nice to think that no one in this country were racist, but it's a reality! On a more positive note however, the fact of the matter is that Barak is ahead, despite the fact that he is Black which does speak positively for where the country appears to be going with respect to race relations, slowly, much too slowly, but surely.

[Softnsweet]

I agree WESB8o. Obama is doing well in spite of what people on the right are trying to do to him. I have never seen anyone in my life time running for President that is being destroyed in the media, including his wife. This is a racist issue. You know it and so do I. You piece is to long and it is rhetoric!

[FirstShirt]

"...the real reason Barak Obama isn't ahead by a landslide given the previous administrations failings. He's Black! "

First, try to get beyond the thin skin. It isn't attractive. If you don't like a black man it may have nothing to do with his skin color.

Let me suggest an alternative. The only reason he is the nominee is because he is black. Everyone tiptoes around the issue.

Lets go there. Any white freshman senator with Obama's lack of qualifications would never made it this far.

No military experience
No executive government experience
no business experience
very little legislative experience
Has not written anything of substance on the economy or government. His books are about himself.

If we are going to be color blind, then lets really do it. No more special consideration because of color. A black man has made it to the finals. Nobody gets a free ride any more.

[elroybug]

yeah right.,,,that's why Sarah Palin ( 5 colleges in 6 years for a BA degree) is thought to be just as qualified as Barack...oh yeah, no racism in this country anymore...please. And, news flash, Abraham Lincoln had the same qualifications as Barack when he ran.

You also need to look up the reesumes of a few other presidents while you're at it before spewing this nonsense. If you think George Bush, a failed businessman, D student, run away militaryman and governor to a state that doesn't even require an executive didn't just get to where he got because of color, then you're as ignorant as he is.

[SpoxLogic]

Nice try. However, you forget the following person: Jesse Jackson. Why didn't he make it as far as Obama? What about Sharpton? Made barely a blip. But, by your argument, it would follow thatt they should've both made it as the Dem nominee. That is, they are Black.
But they didn't. I wonder why?
Could it be that they couldn't inspire the White voters? And also, they never really inspired the Black voters either. Obama can.
So, I appreciate you trying to play the devil's advocate on this one. However, your argument fails, since other Blacks have tried to be the POTUS before Obama.

[allonfla]

Special consideration? YOU REALLY THINK OBAMA HAS GOTTEN SPECIAL CONSIDERATION? If Obama had made HALF the gaffes that McCain, Clinton, or Palin did, He would be OVER. Look how long Rev. Wright and Bittergate ran for in the news cycle. No other candidate this year had their gaffe last that long, not even snipergate. Obama, like other successful Blacks in this country, has had to work ten times as hard for where he is today, and not enought people, not even his so-called supporters give him enough credit. Black men are the most villanized people in this country - I dare you to tell me that ain't so - and don't give me that half-white garbage either - AND here we have one of them a breath away from the Presidency and so many people are asking why he isn't 20 points ahead? NOBODY, ABSOLUTELY NO ONE could have predicted this.

[Citizen54]

It's not about experience. It's about judgement. It's about motives.

You want experience? Look at the government we've got. Look at the people who have gotten us into the various quagmires we're in. Look at our "representatives" with 20 years in Congress. Look at the CEOs grabbing their tax-funded golden parachutes. Lots of experience.

As Miles Davis would say: So what?

[chessman]

I hope your point is not intended to be an indictment on racism ... ie, everyone who doesn't vote for Obama is a racist, buuuuuuhhht, I agree. If Obama were white (male or female), there wouldn't be all this hand-wringing. My hope, my prayer, and my (insane?) belief, is that the American people will vote for the good of the country in November.

I know it's weird, but just listening to Barack speak makes me feel better. If he wins, it will be a hard task for him. No matter what he does, he'll be scrutinized like no other President before him. I hope we who pray for his victory will likewise take up the task of keeping him in prayer for the entire eight years of his administration. He'll need it.

[Donkslayer]

You need to accept that there is a large portion of the USA that is conservative and that they're never voting for a candidate with Barack's views, regardless of race. Kerry didn't win, and he was probably less leftwing than Obama is...how do you explain that? All that anti-rich-­white-live in the hamptons bias out there?

[SpoxLogic]

Donkslayer, you have a good point. And I don't think we are saying that all the people that won't vote for Obama are racist. However, your comment also proves what Obama said earlier in the Dem Primary.
People are bitter, and when they are bitter, they tend to pull back into their core beliefs and vote taht way. Even if doing that will only make the problem worse.
That is what the conservatives are doing now. The economic house is coming down around them and they are afraid. The Republicans know how to play on that fear. So they use the tried and true code words to trigger the Pavlovic responses. "Liberal!!"; "Gonna raise your taxes" - even if it is a lie. "He's a Muslim. Can't trust him" - another lie. "He's elitist and uppity" - more lies. (See where I am going with this?)

So, they are withdrawing back into their core of conservative "values" and are gonna vote for a person who will DEFINTELY give them 4 more years of the same policies that are tearing down the house around them.

[nikky]

STUPID QUESTION MOST OF THE MEDIA IS IN THE TANK FOR MCCAIN BECAUSE THEY DO NOT WANT TO HAVE HIGHER TAXES AND THE BIG BUSINESSES WANT TO STILL OUTSOURCE AND HAVE NOONE BOTHER THEM IT IS OVIOUS

[Molly1994]

Well, here's MY feedback Rabbi though I didn't "read through" your entire post (as per your instructions) as I do have a life.
regarding the volume--less really can be more, you know!

but to your point, you seem to make a lot of generalizations and this is a dangerous thing. While the democratic culture here in SW michigan is one of hope and excitement, one can't help but shore-up against the sheer stupidity of right-wing hostility.

Forgive me, but it seems part of our liberal make-up to self-deprecate rather than address the hatred being foisted upon us by those who resent the promising young democrat who has the audacity to be black as well.

[ckfan]

Barack Obama isn't ahead by a wide margin because he's BLACK. HELLLLLLLL­LLLLLLLLO.

[FirstShirt]

Couldn't be his lack of any objective measure of competency for the job, could it? No, couldn't be. Let's blame someone else.

[SpoxLogic]

Let's not talk about competency when the GOP nominee is John McCain. Have you been watching and/or listening to McCain for the past 2 months? Oi!!

[Alecki]

continued part 2

11. They don’t want a candidate that mentions 57 states in his speeches. 50 states in the USA and 57 states in the Nation of Islam (IOC website)

12. They don’t want a candidate that fights unfair and hyjacks Michigan delegate votes from his opponent.

13. They don't want a candidate that is inexperienced, especially dealing with military issues.

14. They don’t want a candidate that considers it a loss to not to be able to attend his anti American, racist Church.

15. They don’t want a candidate that has a “non practicing” Muslim father, but avoids the entire discussion of his father.

16. They don’t’ want a candidate that won’t debate

17. They don’t’ want a candidate that misleads the youth with an ‘Obama girl and her behind in their face”

18. They don’t want a candidate that says he’s an African American and missed the MLK Remembrance Day and the Louisiana Black Caucus meeting

19. They don’t want a candidate that enjoys laughing at sexism.

20. They don't want a candidate that switches his position on gun control, FISA, the war in Iraq and abortion issues.

21. They don't want a candidate that showcases his daughters on TV shows.

22. They don’t’ want a candidate that has poor judgment..

23. They don’t' want a candidate named; Barack Hussein Obama

24. He is embarrassing.

25. He scares them to death.

[ckfan]

Oh my. I can't wait to see your 50 point list about McCain. Hmmm. Let's start with the fact that he calls himself a Christian, yet he called his wife a c**t. Then, let's go to the Keating 5. Don't forget the temperament issue. And from there, well, you get the picture.

Now, sharpen your pencil and get that list going.

[FirstShirt]

True. McCAin is a known quantity. Obama is not a known quantity. He is what he says he is. For some people that is enough. Others would like a little history to help in the judgement. Just a little experience that would show that he knows something, just anything, about running a government. He doesn't.

[lbcny]

your are not all americans thank god! pssst, replace "they" with "you".

"you" can't scare us. you are pathetic and I am educated. I sure you

are on your way to heaven.....LOL!

[respectingothers]

If Alecki is representative of why Obama isn't 20 pts ahead in the polls then it's obvious (based on this list of reasons) that it's because of racism. I find The Rabbi's points right on but don't believe his solutions cut thru the prejudice. Fear is a powerful emotion. i believe it's so deep from the culture so many were raised in as small children. the people in my life who hold tight to the republican candidate no matter how dismal the candidate is cannot have a discussion about pros and cons. they become very upset and either start raising their voice and leaving reason behind or most likely just refuse to discuss their choice. Fox news is their sole source of news. There is something about the screaming and name calling and outright lies on that channel that soothes their fears. I've been trying to figure this out for the last eight years. Why do people vote against their own self interests? It certainly seems to me they are brainwashed.

[jonathanu]

You forgot to mention that he plays golf with Satan...

[Alecki]

The reason many Americans will not vote for Obama is because they are embarrassed of him, his life, his unfair tactics and his beliefs. And they still don't know all about him. His community organizer experience and lack of military experience is not adding to his resume.

1. They don't want a candidate that has been in a twenty year relationship with Reverend Wright and the Trinity United Church of Christ.

2. They don’t’ want a candidate that has a twenty year relationship with Father Pflaeger and refers to him as his compass in life

3. They don’t want a candidate that went to a church that supports Louis Farrakhan, an anti Semitic racist, that has led a rally of 20,000 Nation of Islam members to support Obama in Chicago

4. They don't want to defend Black Liberation theology.

5. They don’t want a candidate that lies about his relationship with Tony Rezko, the Syrian Criminal that sold his property to Obama and supported his campaign.

6. They don't want a candidate that could work with a domestic terrorist, William Ayers.

7. They don’t want a candidate that Hamas supports.

8. They don’t want a candidate that Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam support

9. They don’t want a candidate that has a wife that has just now realized she was proud of our country.

10. They don’t want a candidate that denies Florida and Michigan their voices

part 1 (continued)

[ckfan]

As an American, I am embarrassed of you.

[thedirtman]

If you believe we need someone that so many people must never support, or if a candidate may not have any relationship to anyone who has ever made a mistake...

then you must oppose leadership. Period.

[deb123]

I'm old, white and female. Here's why I think Obama isn't further ahead in the polls -- and it's really quite simple. Let's say a certain white person is drowning in the middle of the ocean and two boats appear to offer rescue. One is a leaky row boat with a white man at the oars and the other is a sturdy craft with a black man at the helm. I bet there's a large group of drowning folks who would take their chances in the row boat. Prejudices die hard.

[FirstShirt]

You have summed up the differences between democrats and republicans. Democrats are always looking for a lifeboat. Republicans keep on swimming.

[Citizen54]

Yep, Republicans keep on swimming.... and those who can't swim, well, you're on your own, dude. No lifeboat for you. Damn the women and children and infirmed, because -- and here's the Republican philosophy in three little words -- I've got mine.

[sadiehawkins]

Deb you just described America. You nailed it!!

[omeo2013]

Give it time. This crisis just came about. It'll be a week or tow before the polls reflect it.

[MaryT63]

Thanks, Rabbi. Obama lost his edge when he went to the center. He got the attention of the people because he was championing the vision of hope, that we can be better than we are. This was his center, his point where he could pull his talking points, his inspirational speeches, his vision for our future. Besides having an excellant campaign team, he won the primary because of the hope message. Obama lost that when he moved to be a 'centrist'.
Democratic leaders need many training sessions on how to speak, how to frame debates. talking points, etc. from that vision of hope. The repubs certainly have seminars, etc. where they are taught how to express their 'visions'.

[wallygator]

My son asked me why I am a Democrat and what is the difference between the two parties.
To break it down you have to ask yourself how you view the world.
Is it every man for himself? Or are we all in this together?

[lbcny]

nicely put. thank you.

[Rog49Thomas]

Excellent article : not only a spot on diagnosis but a reasonably good prescription - which I suppose proves once again that if you attend the appropriate ‘schul” you could learn a lot.

Man is more than an economic animal.

I’d like to add a few words on the fear issue.

A lot of the Republican appeal is targeted at those fearful and disoriented by social change which threatens to undermine the positions labored for and gains accomplished under the rules of the old game. To change the rules to something new and unfamiliar. And to give what seem to be unfair advantages to those new entrants to the game. (Who? African Americans, women, gays).

Old ways of doing things and old beliefs are being challenged daily. Economic and military setbacks (Vietnam) challenge the view that we're #1 and most loved by God.

Refuge is sought in the old ways – in some cases honored traditions which really weren’t widely practiced in the past. Sacred talismans are grabbed on to hold back the tide. Lose a war (Vietnam) and the flag becomes a symbol. Losses are blamed on a lack of patriotism and will - not boneheaded or poorly executed campaigns. Flag burning becomes a critical issue - even though not many were burned.

The prescription is right - counter fear with hope - with determination and build a sense of community.

But the touch there has to be carefully tempered - too much idealism and one will have the