Obama & Co. Stop Taking the Bait

You have more delegates, much more money, you're John McCain to her Mike Huckabee.

So why act as if she's on equal footing?

Because the Clintons are acting as if they are and the Obama camp is letting them. Her floating the idea of him working for her a few weeks ago was genius. Chutzpah on steroids.

This is causing real problems for Obama. The answer isn't for Hillary to quit, it's for Obama to convince her supporters to abandon her.

Hillary Clinton is still virtually tied with Obama nationwide. Pundits and Obama supporters (like me) might wish that the millions and millions of Hillary Clinton supporters get with the program but instead they are becoming more and more energized and entrenched. They, in general, are less-college-educated, blue-collar whites, the famous "Reagan Democrats," whom if Obama loses to McCain, he loses the election. Those rank-and-file white Democrats haven't gotten the message that Hillary's cause is now virtually hopeless.

Look, I'm not saying don't answer Hillary's attacks in some way but the conversation cannot be between Obama and Clinton as if they each have an equal shot. Obama needs to talk past Clinton to Clinton's supporters. Catching Clinton in overhyping her experience or making any other calculating, political moves will not peel off many of her voters. She has been in the public eye too long. The people that support her understand that she fights dirty, that her ways aren't pretty. They actually see that as her strength. It was the same with Bush and the Swiftboaters. His supporters knew Bush was playing nasty but they were afraid of being blown up by a suicide bomber in the frozen food aisle of their Super Wal-Mart so wanted a nasty man to fight a nasty enemy.

Hillary bills herself as a fighter and as long as working-class white Democrats think that she'll fight harder for them than Obama will they will support her.

What to do?

Obama needs to formulate a broadly populist message aimed squarely at the rust belt. That means that ending partisan bickering will not be job one but fighting for the little guy.

Obama needs to do what Hillary has been doing so successfully since Super Tuesday. He needs to channel his inner Edwards. That will begin to win him the working class white men.

And for all those older white women he needs to have his aides float the idea that Hillary has been such a worthy opponent, has proven to have such a large following and is such a history maker himself that when he is the nominee she will be his first choice for VP.

The fact that it is still this close, this late in the game, means that they are getting hitched whether they like it or not.

Trey Ellis is the author of Bedtime Stories: Adventures in the Land of Single-Fatherhood.

Comments

[ornery]

Barack has what is called in American Protestantism an "inner light".

A rather key concept in the indigenous American Protestant churches like the United Church of Christ.

He is superb when he speaks from within and lets his inner light shine.

Let the advisors and pundits write the footnotes and postscripts.

Hillary, on the other hand, is the Martha Stewart of politics. She knows all the 101 ways to fold napkins, the gritty details of the Farm Bill, etc. All policy details, no soul.

So, just let Barack be Barack.

[pottylikearockstar]

Other than telling Hillary's supporters to get on board or take a hike, Obama has no post-conflict plan for unification. Hillary knows this and that is why Obama's camp is desperate to convince Hillary to quit. Obama can't win the General without a post-conflict plan. The Superdelegates will have to vote for her or endure 4 more years of drought.

[shinybear]

So true and the constant goading of Obama doesn't help.

The Clinton shills have gone on and on that Obama isn't tough enough- that he's too nice to take on the Republicans.

Then when he defends himself they say he's attacking her or more "diplomatically" that BOTH candidates need to cool it when time after time it has been Clinton who instigated the attack to begin with.

Typical bullying tactics.

[tbone99]

Take on the Republicans? he wants to model his presidency after them!

[pmag88]

Currently, every politician has to play some form of the game to get elected and even then, depending on the circumstances; compromise is the order of the day. We all know this so why pretend they can somehow magically rise above it? Especially if they haven"t even been elected yet? This kind of "blind faith" doesn"t serve the interest of our party or anyone who believes in reality for that matter. So, there is no point in demonizing the Clintons or Obama or other politicians who"ve done good work under the circumstances they were, and are, faced with? We all know that trade agreements must be modified. We all know that health care needs reformed. We all know that Iraq is bleeding us dry. And we all know that none of these issues will be resolved without a democratic administration and a SOLID majority in the house and senate. So, are we going to keep bashing each other over meaningless tripe, or are we going to decide what we want and then do the work necessary to get it?

Not to say we shouldn"t point out flaws, but from the time this became a two person race a lot has been blown out of proportion.

Hillary has flatly stated that she will do everything possible to insure that her supporters vote for Barack and I can"t imagine he wouldn"t do the same. We're going to be fine.

[stringer]

Nice idea but check the responses on here. The Clinton supporters are simply not interested in engaging you on a rational basis or joining the team. I don't think they're stupid, most of them are actually quite smart, unfortunately they've just abandoned all reason, logic and mathematical skill they might have in this uselss, stubborn defense that they are determined to fight until the last dog dies. They are squarely in her camp, until this thing is over. The only way to win it is to beat her in state after state until this thing finally ends. Unfortunately there is no other way. When it's over most of them who are truly Democrats will come around. Some won't, but most will.

With regard to the working class voters who are still on the fence you're right. He needs to reach out to them, let them know he understands their problems and appeal to them. The bus trip across Pennsylvania is a good first step. Heck on the first day he got Bob Casey's support a huge first step. But your right Obama has to do more of this.

[darker]

LOOK before you leap.

IT HURTS to say that most voters have been duped, dumb asses. Screwed by Bush-Cheney-Rove.

Alas, the SAME REPUBLICAN MEDIA TACTICS are coming to SMEAR, DEMONIZE, SWIFT BOAT Obama.

THE TRICK IS ... to stop being an immature spoiled brat VOTER . DON'T BY THE republican BALONEY. IT'S ROTTEN [think: luncheon meat THAT STINKS].

BE A RESPONSIBLE ADULT.
THIS IS NOT a SPORTS event, as republicans want you to believe--"all about EMOTION". NOT. NOT.

Choose the most COMMEN-SENSE
candidate who is NOT Republicans all over again. (get it?).

[TekTami78]

Maybe I'm about to illustrate what this author was talking about here, but there is NO WAY I would vote for Hillary Clinton - on the top of the ticket or in the VP spot. Suggesting that she should be Obama's first choice for VP is insane.

Those 'rust belt Reagan Democrats' aren't going to vote for Obama, no matter who he has in the VP spot, because he's black. Scream at me for playing the race card all you want...it's the truth.

[liz]

Jim Webb, who is of and from the Reagan Democrat Mid-South demographic; who is Obama's intellectual and rhetorical equal in ways Hillary is not; who has both strong military credentials and is sensibly anti-war; who is strong and brave and honest and puts up with no BS; and who is a genuinely populist, up-by-your-bootstraps successful man, would be much more valuable to the ticket as VP than Hillary. These white guys in rust belt states are voting for Hillary because she is the lesser of two evils (black man vs. white woman) in their eyes. They would vote enthusiastically for Webb, and bring their buddies.
I know a lot of people have floated this idea. I wish I knew whether Obama would offer, or Webb would accept, so I can get on with, or get over, the dream. Much as I love Biden and Dodd, I think the Obama - Webb ticket is the closest thing we have to a true general election winner.

[ornery]

Some of them will vote for him. (I know the Reagan Democrats very well.)

They will vote for him if they see enough of his speeches.

[tbone99]

Trey, you recommend that Obama " needs to channel his inner Edwards. That will begin to win him the working class white men."

You mean he should LIE?

[Farmerette]

There's one element of this back and forth that's missing...the role of the media. Pundits and pols like to be the ones to beat up on the candidate who goofs, exaggerates or blasphemes. The rapid-responses of the '92 Clinton campaign were a sight to behold, but are now regarded as leaving the pundits out of the loop, which they do not like one little bit.
The media likes to be the first one to gasp and take to task the offending candidate or mouthy surrogate. It shows that they're paying attention and reinforces their importance in this process. While Trey's analysis here is a tad simplistic (he forgot to add "typical" to his "working class white men" and "older white women"...blech) and I want to spank him for even suggesting a team-up, it's good advice for the Obama campaign to keep quiet when the Clintons step in it (which they will with predictable regularity) and let the media bat them around (which most of them are dying to do anyhow).
It's really time for Sen. Obama to start talking about the issues without the constant responding to the Clinton bullying tactics. Up till now, he's been talking about talking about the issues. C'mon, Senator, freeze the Ice Queen out by following Trey's excellent advice to "formulate a broadly populist message aimed squarely at the rust belt".

[KitChandler]

Trey, whoever you are, are you stupid or what? Some of your ideas made sense, but offering Clinton the VP posn is idiocy.

Surely Obama has to show that he has the courage of his convictions. To choose Clinton after all the dirt she's dished, would be a slap in the face to all of us who have come to his defense. If he is unable to win without her-so be it.

So he loses becasue of dirty tricks and a biased public. Isn't this the way it's been for hundreds of years for us?

The world is watching us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[backfist64]

There's no need for Barack to craft a disengenuous campaign message in order to defeat a disengenuous opponent. If his message and campaign weren't sufficiently populist, he would have gone the way of Joe Biden or Chris Dodd (and Al Sharpton and Carol Mosely-Braun for that matter).

That said, there are few supporters of Barack's opponent who will defect--no matter what. And there are few of those so-called undecided "working-class white voters" who will jump on the Obama bandwagon, primarily because they'd rather not keep company with his supporters. As such, there's nothing that he can (or in my opinion, *should*) do to try and woo that kind of support. He's thus far run a campaign of goodwill and has stayed well within the bounds of decency, morals and ethics.

To adopt the gameplan of his opponent is to concede that his opponent is as good as or better. But then, I suspect that Mr. Ellis knows that (?)

[dill]

I agree with most of your post with the exception of Hillary as VP. Hillary would be trying to sabotage everything he did to make it appear she was the most "qualified" for the presidency with her nonexistent "35 years of experience", and how wrong everyone was to choose him over her. Plus, with her urgent need to be president, Obama might need quite a few more secret service men for protection.

[naugiedoggie]

Two wrong assumptions subsume this article. (1) Clinton's support is primarily among the unwashed masses, politely referred to as "blue-collar" or "working class" Americans. (2) The members of this group are a bunch of ignorant dumbasses that need to be reprogrammed.

Actually, Clinton's support is primarily among long-time Democrats and participants in the party process, who have put in the time and effort to advance the Party and its agenda. This group cuts across demographic lines. Support for Obama is primarily among the alienated and disaffected, who have not participated in the electoral process and are completely uninterested in participating in it. They'll vote for Obama and then disappear.

I have no interest in joining the Obama "team" -- a team composed largely of people who repudiate the Democratic Party as the carrier of progressive ideas; spew misogyny and contempt for Clinton supporters and, insofar as they think at all about the Democratic Party, simply wish to purge it of all who don't think like them. Obama as a candidate will do less to advance progressive causes (like universal healthcare, in which he does not even believe) than will Clinton.

No, Mr. Ellis, it is not about speaking past the candidate to the supporters. The Obama-bots have been doing that for him for months -- giving a sickening display of bad thinking and bad manners. It is about wrong positions on the issues. If Senator Obama wants my support, he needs to move to the left.

Thanks.

mp

[northeast73]

They'll vote for Obama and then disappear.

I have no interest in joining the Obama "team" -- a team composed largely of people who repudiate the Democratic Party as the carrier of progressive ideas; spew misogyny and contempt for Clinton supporters and, insofar as they think at all about the Democratic Party, simply wish to purge it of all who don't think like them
===============

WELL SAID!!

[oneviciouslife]

Another broad generalization about Obama supporters. Personally, I've been a member of the Democratic party since before i could vote. I campaigned for Gore in 2000 (when i was too young to vote), i went door to door in New Hampshire for Dean in 04, and i voted for Kerry when the time came. I may not have the history with the Democratic Party that you have, but that does not mean my views are worth less.

What i really want to see is an end to the infighting. I want the Democratic Party to unite under one candidate, whoever that may be. I'm gonna work as hard as i can to make sure that my guy gets the nomination, but i will always keep in mind that the other candidate, and their supporters, have value also. We are all in this together, trying to make the best decision for our country, because we care. Let's not lose sight of that and resort to tearing each other down. Please.

[KimberlyKay]

Nice one. With that nasty spew you dismissed my fiance and his entire family. They are the descendants of coal-miners. Most of them are still in unions and they support the Democratic party with what money they have, their vote and their active get out the vote effort. But, I guess my fiance's 83 year-old mother is a misogynist (and I guess I am too). And my fiance and his three brothers hate "progressive ideas." Yeah, that must be it. Your nastiness is probably created by the fact that your candidate, Senator Clinton, failed to run a very good campaign and doesn't appear very Presidential. This is NOT because she is a woman. Perhaps you should ask your candidate why she doesn't tell us why she would be a better candidate -- instead of simply focusing on insulting her opposition and calling millions of voters "delusional" (as she did) or "misogynistic" as you just did. Do think before you write such trash.

[tbone99]

Point well taken re: longtime Dems vs new voters and the alienated. Longtime Dems support a party with certain values , not a particular candidate per se. We feel quite uneasy to see Repugs, with all that represents ( cutting taxes for the wealthy over decreasing poverty, pro business rights over citizens, deregulation, privatization and outright intolerance of enviromental standards) and quantities of young people and others in their first real political commitment, joining forces..Given a candidate fairly new on the national scene certainly increases that uneasiness.

For example when JessesJjackson ran ( yes I'm a dinosaur) one of the saddest things about his campaign is not that he didn't win,( that was expected) but that he didn't leave a coalition representing his platform in the Dem party , to influence it's future .Hats off to Dean , who has fought to increase party participation in all states.These are the kind of longterm developments that are taken into account in considering a candidates nomination.

Are Obama supporters interested in investing in the Democratic Party?

[KimberlyKay]

Are you kidding? In response to that blackmail to Speaker Pelosi, Senator Obama's supporters are donating money to the DCCC. Senator Obama's supporters are canvassing in Texas for the democratic nominee for Senate Mr. Noriega -- I know because some of them knocked on my parents door outside of Austin. What are Senator Clinton's supporters doing for the party? Blackmail? Do think, this is all that I ask.

[shep1900]

Hey, nice response! I was feeling very lonely here, as a non-Obama-ite.

The constant misogyny spewing forth from the media--and his campaign--has been appalling, and depressing. People seem to think it's okay because "Hey, it's only Hillary!", but, you know, it's _not_. Racism is awful, but sexism is, too, and half of the Democratic Party seems to have forgotten that.

[KimberlyKay]

Senator Obama has not said anything sexist. His campaign hasn't said anything sexist. Senator Obama is NOT Ken Starr. Senator Clinton had high unfavorables as long ago as 1990 -- over one-half of the American people did not trust her-- this is NOT Senator Obama's fault. Do stop this nonsense. If don't want to hear another woman tell me that the use of a word that indicates the passage of time is "sexist" -- don't you know that real sexism happens everyday, everywhere and when you try to make this nonsense "sexist" you make it more difficult for a woman to establish REAL sexism? The media has been sexist -- and guess what? Senator Obama does not control the media. By the way, I am a woman, I am not young and I know what sexism is and what it is not.

[fun2bfree]

That darned un DEMOCRATIC team of Obama's--you know--Teddy Kennedy and John Kerry and Bill Bradley, and McKasskill, and Durbin, and Richardson, Dodd, Napolitano, and all those Unions that endorsed him....man, they are so NOT the REAL Democrats like naugiedoggie....

[marybanilow]

Excuse me? The Obama team repudiates the Democratic Party? The Clintons are progressive? If my memory serves me, Bill Clinton delighted in taking stances against his base: Don't Ask, Don't Tell, NAFTA, Welfare 'Reform', NAFTA, The Defense of Marriage Act, oh, and NAFTA.

And Hillary? How about a funny little thing called the "Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq"? Then there's that odd habit of praising the GOP candidate over the Democratic frontrunner. How anyone would think that she represents anything 'left' about the Democratic Party is beyond me.

[liz]

Your could add being prayer partners with Lindsey Graham, and drinking buddies with Richard Sciafe.

[northeast73]

Ah, the old "hillary supporters aint go no education" excuse.

As a 34 year old graduate-school educated male I am not a "typical" hillary supporter I suppose.

But, I must say you have one thing spot on in your article. The only reason Obama cannont nail this nomination is that a whole lot of peopel think he is full of shiiite.

Yes, the prius driving, latte sipping white folks with 6 figure jobs, no housing "crises" and no family in Iraq, taking the time for a celebrity "feel good" candidate works.

While campaigining in Ohio, Obama was on his usual "cloud 9" obama the great speak crap, and it was NOT resonating with those "core democrats". Hillary's message WAS and THAT is why she won, pure and simple. Those folks with an URGENT need for change support her. Those with a desire for change support Obama.

Also, Hillary is receiving (even in states she lost) the overwhelming support of familes with veterans of active service memebers. Why? They trust her and know she has the suppport of the military.

Iraq is not a political issue for them (like they're not embarrased when traveling in Europe) but an issue of family. They want the best CIC for their kids/friends.

So I guess Obama can TRY to win them over, but it is not likely. Pundits and media losers keep calling them undereducated and racists and yes, they too watch TV and hear these comments.

[Toonbytes07]

Care to tell us all why you support Hillary?

[Noracharles1995]

Recently, I talked politics with people I'm SURE the Obamaniacs would write off as "aint' got no education" - all fortyish, one white woman, 2 white guys, one black guy, all HRC supporters. Why? They feel she will best address their economic concerns, they believe that after the vettings of the 90s they know all they need to about her business dealings and finances, they know she has the backing of anti Iraq war but pro troop military leaders like Wes Clark, and they worry BHO is still too unknown a quantity. With Edwards, out I am now behind HRC too for all of those reasons, and I'm an MBA, latte drinking swine.

Just because someone "ain't got no educatun" doesn't mean they don't care or can't get informed and vote accordingly. Or engage in critical thinking - the older I get the better I think the school of Hard Knocks is at teaching critical thinking, and the more overrated I think the Ivy League may be in that regard. Those with the diploma from HK are watching the news and reading the paper, and figuring out who to support, just like us highbrow types. They're getting behind HRC for clear reasons they can articulate, like they did with me a couple of weeks ago.

They probably just don't eat argula on a regular basis and I for one can forgive that. There are far worse things people are doing in this election cycle ;-).

[marybanilow]

Garbage. I'm none of those things you describe (though 'm not really sure what's wrong with driving a Prius... I thought doing something about global warming is something Democrats would be for). I support Obama and am struggling, thank you very much. You complain about stereotypes and then turn around and stereotype others.

[cybersense]

....and MORE tall stories from Obama:

Obama was forced to revise his assertion that lobbyists 'won't work in my
White House.'"White House hopeful Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) was forced to
revise a critical stump line of his on Saturday -- a flat declaration that
lobbyists 'won't work in my White House' after it turned out his own written
plan says they could, with some restrictions. After being challenged on the
accuracy of what he has been saying -- in contrast to his written pledge --
at a news conference Saturday in Waterloo, Obama immediately softened what
had been his hard line in his next stump speech." [Chicago
Sun-Times,12/16/07]

[ornery]

Sure. That was immediately after he claimed he was dodging bullets on Omaha Beach, right?

[cybersense]

More emblishments from Obama:

Chicago Tribune: Obama's assertion that nobody had indications Rezko was
engaging in wrongdoing 'strains credulity.' ".Obama has been too
self-exculpatory. His assertion in network TV interviews last week that
nobody had indications Rezko was engaging in wrongdoing strains credulity:
Tribune stories linked Rezko to questionable fundraising for Gov. Rod
Blagojevich in 2004 -- more than a year before the adjacent home and
property purchases by the Obamas and the Rezkos." [Chicago Tribune
editorial, 1/27/08]

LA Times: Fellow organizers say Sen. Obama took too much credit for his
community organizing efforts. "As the 24-year-old mentor to public housing
residents, Obama says he initiated and led efforts that thrust Altgeld's
asbestos problem into the headlines, pushing city officials to call hearings
and a reluctant housing authority to start a cleanup. But others tell the
story much differently. They say Obama did not play the singular role in the
asbestos episode that he portrays in the best-selling memoir 'Dreams From My
Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance.' [Los Angeles Times, 2/19/07]

[ornery]

Disinformation alert.

Cybersense is the one "embellishing".

1. Tribune ENDORSED OBAMA.

2. I know your technique: "Al Gore claims he invented the internet" when in fact he never made such a claim. Obama never claimed "singular role". He claimed, correctly, to be part of a grass roots effort. The very nature of which is consensus and conscious parrallelism.

[cybersense]

Obama's Emblishments: He has no experience.

Sen. Obama consistently and falsely claims that he was a law professor. The
Sun-Times reported that, "Several direct-mail pieces issued for Obama's
primary [Senate] campaign said he was a law professor at the University of
Chicago. He is not. He is a senior lecturer (now on leave) at the school. In
academia, there is a vast difference between the two titles. . [Hotline Blog, 4/9/07; Chicago Sun-Times,
8/8/04]


"Obama
scolded Exelon and federal regulators for inaction and introduced a bill to
require all plant owners to notify state and local authorities immediately
of even small leaks. He has boasted of it on the campaign trail,
crowd in Iowa 'the only nuclear legislation that I've
passed.' 'I just did that last year,' he said, to murmurs of approval. A
close look at the path his legislation took tells a very different story.
While he initially fought to advance his bill, even holding up a
presidential nomination to try to force a hearing on it, Mr. Obama
eventually rewrote it to reflect changes sought by Senate Republicans,
Exelon and nuclear regulators. The new bill removed language mandating
prompt reporting and simply offered guidance to regulators, whom it charged
with addressing the issue of unreported leaks. Those revisions propelled the
bill through a crucial committee. But, contrary to Mr. Obama's comments in
Iowa, it ultimately died amid parliamentary wrangling in the full Senate."
[New York Times, 2/2/08]

[ornery]

Well, as Ronnie would say, there you go again.

U. of C. Law School put out a statment about Barack's post as Senior Lecturer. That is the same title held by Judge Richard Posner of the 7th Circuirt, who WAS a professor at U. of C. before Ronnie appointed him.

Law School said Barack offered a tenured position several times, but declined because of his public office duties.