Obama Stock Is Overpriced; Sell, Sell

Sell Obamas now. They are overpriced and the forward market has gone crazy. If he becomes president in two days, the bubble will burst, I guess in the spring of next year.

From the moment four years ago when I first heard of Barack Obama and read his youthful memoir, I sensed a president in the making. Like the young Nelson Mandela in South Africa, he seemed to hold the aura of incipient national leadership. His range of sympathies, his oratory, his intelligence, his energy marked him out from the run. His embodiment of the American dream was astonishing.

Today the outside world, much of it with a direct and painful interest in American policy, wants Obama to win, by leads of 20 to 60 per cent. These people have no vote. But the narrower electorate of the United States appears also to want Obama to win, albeit by a smaller margin. The world prefers him chiefly because he is black, the latter chiefly because he is not Republican.

Neither reason is robust. To most non-Americans, black is still code for being apart from the American establishment. Any visitor these days to Europe, to Africa or to the muslim world is shocked by the depth of antipathy to America. It is beyond ideology, a visceral, often racial aversion, unrelated to any personal attachment to individual Americans or their much-envied way of life. The ugly American is reborn.

Yet the same visitor is impressed by how often he is assured that an Obama presidency would "change everything". The reason is not that Obama is anti-war or pro-Palestinian or left or right wing. It is that his origins render him the one thing he most vociferously denies, not an ordinary American.

To this world, Obama is a supposed representative of an oppressed class, however much his speech, manner and career bespeak the opposite. He is black and his name is confirmation enough. He symbolises the end of the wasp ascendancy. The reason why his candidacy still discomforts many Americans is the reason the world craves it, that Obama is somehow unreal. He is a meta-American. It is why there will be an awful unleashing of grief and fury if he is not elected.

Yet Obama is real, not just a human being but a politician. In office he knows he must do more than make fine speeches and castigate the government of the day. He must grapple with the wreckage of a world economy whose collapse is in large part due to the mismanagement of American finance, from which as a senator he cannot altogether escape blame.

He must restore credit to markets and confidence to commerce. He must bring health and welfare to a country whose poor will seem ever more "third world" as unemployment bites in the coming months. To millions of Americans he will seem as a messiah. There are millions whom he can only disappoint.

Abroad, this leader would have to end not one war but two, and bring sanity to an American diplomacy that is chaotic in an arc of instability from eastern Europe to the Himalayas. The anticipation that he will be a harbinger of peace, friendship and economic salvation is probably greater than for any American since Roosevelt. The burden of expectation is awesome and unrealistic.

The qualities of charisma and rhetoric that Obama brings to this task might be a match for it. His declared policies are not. His desire to disengage from Iraq is not appreciably different from that of the Bush administration and the Iraqi government. On the other hand, his clearly expressed wish to beef up the war in Afghanistan is reckless.

Obama has approved the bombing of targets inside Pakistan (and presumably now Syria) and proposed invasion to "secure" that country's nuclear arsenal. He has backtracked on compromise with Iran and done nothing to suggest an end to the macho provocation of Russia.

At home Obama would appear from his statements and voting records to be a conventional Democrat, essentially tax, spend and protect with tariffs. While some of this is America's business, the world economy needs a protectionist America like a bullet in the head. American markets open to world goods are vital for recovery, as is America's active participation in the easing of world trade. Obama has shown no sign of accepting this.

On all these fronts there is a more alarming prospect. It is that a Democratic president, even with an overwhelmingly Democratic congress, must beware of seeming soft or dovish or "appeasing terror". Such is politics that the more liberal the man the more illiberal he can feel compelled to behave, as was the case with Bill Clinton and Tony Blair. Obama has yet to indicate a retreat from the patriot acts or the language of George Bush's war on terror.

Any modern leader parrots the language of change. Obama proclaims himself the embodiment of a revolution in American public life. Yet his record is anything but radical. He even supports the right to bear arms. Were it not for his colour, he would be a candidate running on a conventional Democratic ticket, with few policies more constructive than those of his opponent, John McCain, on how America might now escape from its many predicaments.

None of this is an argument for not voting for Obama. In present-day Washington even modest competence might seem revolutionary. But democratic leadership is like Icarus. Its wings melt as soon as it flies close to the sun. Obama is flying close indeed.

The instant message that an Obama victory would flash round the world is not in doubt. It would transform and refresh America's image, exhilarating its friends everywhere. It would restore to that country the reins of global leadership so missing in the era of Republican xenophobia. It would be an utterly good thing.

The next message could be very different. The skills that Obama has brought to his campaign are essentially personal and organisational, not the superhuman ones that will be required of any occupant of the White House in the immediate future. The higher the anticipation, the more crippling will be the effort needed to meet it, and the greater the fall if it is not met.

The prospect of a failed Obama presidency sometime in 2009/10, whether by his doing or those of circumstance, is heartbreaking to contemplate. It would more than undo the gains secured by his election and devastate the cause he is seen as representing. The least his supporters can do is not raise the bar of expectation too high.

Comments

[STILJON]

We are not there YET. Give one day if it takes that and work for our future by voting for Senator Obama and he will continue to spend every day working for you. The polls mean nothing unless everyone votes. Its up to all of us to stand in line for as long as it takes and VOTE!!! No matter what happens on the east coast early everyone needs to make this a landslide creating a mandate of the people all across the country, so west coast stay in line till you vote. The polls are so wide in large part because of new voters. This is the largest effort ever to bring in new voters so if you dont vote you will permanently prove the belief that first time voters do not go to the polls and ensure your concerns are never pursued or listened to again. Make this time different. You could finally change the landscape of the electorate and force your ideas to be considered, expanding policies beyond the base of both parties. Every single vote counts and we cannot afford to wake up Wednesday and find out democrats lost again by only a few votes, because we thought it would be a blowout. Lets make it a landslide and prove the polls right!! Everyone take a day and change the world!!! VOTE!!!!!!!!

[ENOS]

KEEP HOPE ALIVE THERE BUDDY! AND JUST DO YOUR PART. I'LL DO MINE!!!!

[mpgilmore]

Your basic premise and assumption is SO VERY incorrect. "The world prefers him chiefly because he is black, the latter chiefly because he is not Republican. " As a member of that "world" group you so glibbly refer to, let me assure you we are not that stupid (we wouldn't have given GWB a second term). As for the expectations you say everyone has I can only speak for myself. I expect him to be a good man doing a very difficult job whose intentions are good and who has the best interests of America first and the World second. I can't ask for more than that.

[tellthetruthalways]

Thank you mpgilmore. Mr. Jenkins' assumptions are so poorly thought out it is astounding. The world is embracing Obama because he has expressed a willingness to embrace the world. Trust me, people outside this country are not hung-up on his race. In fact, to most he is half white, not black. Obama's appeal is the fact that he is intelligent, engaging and curious, all attributes not displayed by McCain or the current occupant of the White House. The world sees that and appreciates it. It is that simple.

[Sisto]

Finally America will have a President that will have alot of brains who stands for the people elected by the people! Nothing can stop Obama now, nothing! If the the Stock Market crashes because of it , so be it! Wall Street will get over it and learn there is a new sheriff in town and regulation will be the law of the land! Don't you love it! Tomarrow will be like Christmas for the Democrats!

[dehovitch2]

As the man said, image is everything, and Obama is above all, a marketing creation. People who are buying into this creation are letting themselves in for serious disappointment.

[MrChrisSEA]

If Obama is a 'marketing creation' then George W. Bush was an outright fraud.

[rucognizant]

Well he WAS!

[catchdis]

ah yes, serious disappointment . . . like, if he doesn't continue the swindling of the american people perpetrated (especially) in the last 8 years . . . yeah, we'll all be very very disappointed.

[ILibertine]

True, the number of difficult or nearly impossible matters to resolve seem overwhelming. True, the level of expectation cannot but be succeeded by disappointment. Perhaps the real question here is whether a population will stand behind a leader and lobby to influence congress toward beneficial changes, and our's is the stock to buy or sell. It's a matter of attention span and (presumably) Democratic ability to forge more of a balanced policy.

[opines]

Sane people understand that our planet has become too small, weaponry too destructive, and that the military/i­mperialist adventurism of the United States menaces all life on Earth.

The hope that Obama can persuade our nation that 'Peace on Earth' must become the goal of the 'World's Only Superpower', not an American Century attained by force-of-arms, accounts for his overwhelming worldwide support.

[British]

Although I agree with the general contention that Obama can't live up to expectations there are some VERY questionable assertions in this article.

As a fellow Brit I whould point out that Mr Jenkins seems to be promulgating Republican talking points with regards to anti-Americanism (perhaps not surprising in view of the author's great admiration for the right wing Margaret Thatcher).

The assertion that Europe has an instinctive dislike for America and that we only support Obama because is black (i.e. apart from the American establishment) is a Republican lie.

In fact all the polling shows that the US was surprisingly popular in Europe prior to Bush. Even in France approval ratings for the US were over 60%.
Figures up to 2006:
http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?ReportID=252

It is to the great credit of the US that for so many years it managed to engender affection rather than hatred despite its great power.

[Ironquill]

Thanks, your post saves me a lot of time on this tedious and misleading article. Powell hit the nail on the head, Obama is transformational, including being smart enough to start lowering expectations on Wednesday.
On the otherhand, everyone will be surprised at how fast Americans will right the ship given some intelligent leadership and new community spirit.

[British]

(Typo:would)

[cactusgal]

Kudos, British!

We have dear friends in France who echo your observations. It has only been since Bush took office that the rest of the world started having grave doubts about Americans in general. It's Bush policies that the rest of the world detests. Once America repudiates those policies by electing Barack Obama, I believe we'll regain much of our reputation abroad.

Many thanks for your post.

[Brillig]

dartagnan,

I would slap you for that "as a foreigner" comment, as most foreigners seem to know more about America than Americans themselves do...but as you are supporting my point, just a rap of the knuckles!

[SOLERSO68]

Hes begging us not to hurt the corporate class and its true, obama has never threatened harm BUT, the corporate class WILL have to stop hurting everyone else and get used to a more economically fair america, whether they like the idea or not.

[dc2nm]

Simon, I think you're in for a surprise. Obama is a bit more than the average "tax & spend" democrat. What impresses me most is his realism and ability to surround himself with brilliant people.

But I think the biggest change Obama will bring to this country is the level of engagement with the American people. He has admitted that he will use new technology to streamline government and provide better access to information. On every major initiative, he will continue to engage the public to ensure the support is there. This will be one of his greatest legacies.

[OpinionsRMine]

When Obama announced that he was running for president, many said that he wouldn't make it this far. Well, on Wednesday, we will see the first African-American president this country has ever had. It is up to all of us to turn this country around, not pin our hopes entirely on one man. What will you do to make your country better?

[Downeast]

No one would argue that what we would get from an Obama presidency may not exactly match the vision that we have fallen in love with.

There will be compromises. There will be failures. But there will also be successes.

And what is most important is that we will have (praying with fingers crossed here) someone in the White House who is:

1) intellectual and informed
2) willing to seek counsel from those who know more than he does
3) seeking unity instead of fragmentation
4) calm and studied in demeanor and in his decision making
5) articulate
6) not beholden to lobbyists for his campaign funding.

We have had none of these things for the past eight years. We have cringed every time our president has addressed the country, let alone the world. We have watched as he and his cronies have sold our country's assets to the war contractors and the oil interests who funded his political career. We have wept as he has sent our sons and daughter into the wrong country to lose their lives just so that he could "finish" the business his daddy could not.

It has been eight years of shame and fear.

Obama, at the very least, will change that.

In short, we will have HOPE and PRIDE for the first time in a very, very long time.

You can't put a price on that.

[defmonk]

Nelson Mandela, Jackie Robinson, Arthur Ashe, Tiger Woods, Lewis Hamilton..­.on and on. Black folks who ultimately break the barrier, by definition, are of tremendous character and ability. It takes so much to get there that those who do have been tested all along the way. And, tend to fulfill outrageous expectations.

[infpinfp]

To mention Althea Gibson also, who broke the Wimbledon barrier long before Arthur Ashe:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Althea_Gibson

[obriend]

Have to agree that Obama would be soft on terror. We've seen nothing from him that suggests he is capable of handling what SHOULD be the most important aspect of this election.

[jeg]

Other than him correctly identifying the fight against al quaeda as a law enforcement, rather than a military problem; Other than him correctly realizing that the war on terror never (directly) involved Iraq, that Iraq was a huge blunder that would allow al Quaeda to rebuild, recruit, and rearm; That Pakistan is only nominally our friend; And that ending the narco-terrorist symbiotic relationship in Afghanistan is an absolute requirement to bringing order to the region.

Other than that, yeah, Sen. Obama's been pretty off the mark.

[jp5472]

Your thought maybe held weight in 2004 with a non-thinking audience, but is not the central issue and has been exposed as the safety net for every campaign Republican - "terrorists, terrorists, terrorists!!!"

[stateretiree]

also abortion, abortion abortion. Like they have done anything to change that when they have had control

[Choicelady]

Since our knee-jerk response is to bomb everyone, I suppose one could say that anyone who would try to avert terrorism through honestly trying to understand another point of view and to ward off violence is 'soft'. It's the same principle as presuming Jesus was 'soft' because he turned the other cheek - without a clue to how radical and destabilizing that was to the practitioner of violence. If our only means to deal with terror is more terror, then yup, yup - Obama would be soft. But it might be radicalizing to actually figure out another means to STOP terror all together. But that would mean - gasp - we would not keep on being the world's thug and bully. Oh my - how could we LIVE with that?

[infpinfp]

If "hard on terror" means you generate new terrorists faster than you kill off terrorists, we have been there and tried that. We have pursued policies that have generated terrosist at a faster rate than ever. Something must change.

[JoeSausage]

Considering that there hasn't been a terrorist attack in America in 7 years, what are you talking about? Soft on terror? Because John McCain told you so? Yeah right! He has a lot of integrity these days. This is just fear mongering. And since the whole point of terrorism is to have Americans living in fear, doesn't that make the Republicans terrorists? They want Americans to be very afraid! So do they want the terrorists to win? Or are they just co-opting terrorist tactics, to use againt their own people?