Rare Obama Misstep

The Clinton campaign is playing the Obama campaign like a fiddle. What makes this all the more amazing is the fact that they are driving the debate from the passenger seat. Obama's handlers should have told him not to take the bait and answer her VP offer. Just ignore it. Change the subject. She is acting like the frontrunner when she's not but he or she who acts like the frontrunner becomes one.

And today Obama's camp is all wrong in producing a long memo
stating Hillary overstated her foreign policy experience. And your point is...? That she's not qualified to be Commander-in-Chief either? Why not donate all your millions raised to McCain then?

What Obama should do now is lead positively, with a concrete example of how he will be a bold and visionary leader on foreign policy. He can knock her padding her resume later.

He could, for example, say what everyone knows, that there will be no peace in the greater Middle East until Israel and the Palestinians feel it is in their best interest to make peace. Peace there will make us markedly more safe here at home. The closest we have come to them reaching a settlement in years was Bill Clinton's initiative back in 2001.

If I were him I'd say once elected I'd deputize Bill Clinton as my Special Envoy to the Middle East and tell him not come back until he'd hammered out a deal they all could agree on. (Then I'd joke that I didn't just want to send him there to get him out of my hair.)

If Obama would float provocative, bold ideas like that then the Clintons would be on the defensive and he'd be acting like the frontrunner that he is.

This isn't rocket science. It's just the politics of perception.

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

Comments

[ndolomar]

considering that clinton already had offered the vp slot to gen. wesley clark somewhat shows just how "genuine" her olive branch was. obama's playing a very tough and classic game: if he responds too harshly, he fits the "angry, beligerent" stereotype; if he's too soft, he's not strong enough. i'm sure he's aware of just how high the bricks are stacked against him because his candidacy is so unprecedented. people have to remind themselves that he is a harvard-educated former professor and lawyer from chicago: the man's not stupid, nor is he naive. if anything, like hillary, he's trying to straddle the line between the success of his own candidacy and the chances of having another non-white and/or non-male follow in his footsteps. luckily for hillary, she's bouyed by a great last name; obama, well, he's just taking another, careful path.

[Ides]

Or maybe it wasn't a misstep? The fact that Obama went from 8 points down in the polls a week ago to 7 points ahead in the polls before his win in Mississippi in what MSNBC calls "The Polls Which Shall Not Be Named," it's interesting enough that people keep telling him what he needs to change when he's winning anyway among Democrats and in the primaries.

[Argoth]

So, if he is falling right into the Clinton campaign's trap, why is he doing so well? Why is he kicking her up and down over all the crap that she has been spewing? I agree that he should stay positive but you must not be paying attention since he has been very positive compared to Clinton.

[theuniversal]

I disagree. Perception is important. Clinton was trying to cast Obama as beneath him and that required a loud public blow off. I think Obama's response was perfect. The media unfortunately just parrots what campaigns say, so if the Obama campaign doesn't push back hard against all of Clinton's talking points in addition to doing some attacking of its own, the Clinton campaign will win the war of perception.

The Clinton campaign has been incredibly successful at bombarding the news with anti-Obama spin just before key contests. Obama's camp needs to expect that and release an equal barrage of messages to counter it.

[DennyCrane]

I completely disagree. First off, he had to respond to her talk of picking him as her VP. Don't you see what she was trying to do? An Obama supporter might decide to switch to Hillary if they're convinced that Obama would still be on the ticket. Obama had to address this immediately before any of his supporters defected. Second, he had to deal with her bogus claims of experience. He lost Ohio because of that 3am ad. The reason that ad was so effective is because people really believe that Hillary has more experience. By showing how padded her resume is, he makes the next 3am ad less effective.

[JakeEasy]

The problem is that Obama is not what he presents himself to be. He is not dishonest or stupid or mean. He's a politician. Everyone is running around looking for a savior, someone to be better than they are themselves. It was a niche he could fill, so as any politician who wanted a job, he stepped into the niche.

Without the aura of purity and kindness, what does he offer? If he just acts like everyone else, why does he offer better hope? I think that is why so many of the posters here are attacking Hillary. They have come to realize deep down, that their idol is just a guy, maybe a really good guy, but not really the saint or the sage they had thought. So now they don't peddle his goodness. Instead they urge him to attack and hit back and then they vilify a perfectly good candidate with MSM and neocon prose.

If we don't get both of these people together (politically and policy wise, they are twins) then we might as well give up. Either McCain will win or Obama will be an unsuccesful one-termer who won't be able to move congress enough to handle the mess the elephants left.

[AnninCA]

Well, maybe a successful one-termer is best for the country. How much damage could he do in that time, anyway?

[Edmonsky]

The suggestions were academically elegant but politically unresponsive to many of its practical realities. The game at this moment is who wins substantial super-delegates. Super-delegates can switch their allegiance back and forth depending on the politics of the moment. That is the undercurrent information that must be factored into the equation.

Hilary and her campaign has raised fundamental issue that makes Obama"s response inevitable. Obama has to answer to the satisfaction of the super-delegates that he is qualified to be the commander-in-chief as viewed from the lenses of the citizenry. Super-delegates have to support a candidate that will win in November. Furthermore, there is a general concern if Obama has the capacity to withstand Republican attacks. The only way super-delegates will know that answer depends on how Obama responds to Hilary attacks. Therefore, Obama"s joining issues with Hilary is inevitable.

If Obama were to avoid responding to Hilary"s attacks but rather elect only to stay above the fray, then, Hilary has no other option than to raise the volume to the level of crippling Obama"s political capital. Hilary"s campaign is based on her 35-years of experience. Once that 35-years experience is put under critical scrutiny, Hilary would have no option than to defend it. Obama must first get the nomination before thinking how to defeat John McCain.

[JiveTurkeyOnRye]

I disagree with you here as well. Remember what happened to John Kerry in 2004. Not responding to the swiftboats untill it was too late was a major, major error. If Obama just lets all the attacks on him sit, they will do just that, sit.

[JakeEasy]

Then how is he different? What is his appeal and his reason for running? He hasn't attacked the republicans or the neocons or the corporate world. He hasn't said how he would help people who are out of work or without insurance (that plan, please!). The reason he told people that they should support him was that he was going to do things differently. Which way do you want it?

[independentrepublicrat]

"If I were him I'd say once elected I'd deputize Bill Clinton as my Special Envoy to the Middle East and tell him not come back until he'd hammered out a deal they all could agree on. (Then I'd joke that I didn't just want to send him there to get him out of my hair.)"

That is exactly why you are not a Senator and will never be a presidential nominee. Obama should only take advice from people qualified to give it.

[lunadove]

He had to respond. They will just keep throwing attacks at him, and everytime he hits it back, people who don't follow this so closely can see that she is unwarranted. It is unfortunate. He isn't attacking, and I don't think it is a sign of weakness for him to set the record straight.
If he doesn't respod, she will keep throwing nastier mud. It will keep getting worse. This way, she's being held accountable and struggling to contain her many mixed messages from her many rogue campaigners.
As for his message, I think he's getting it out there the best he can despite the media only concentrating on any new roe started by Clinton.

[AnninCA]

I would agree that his attack memo today are pretty petty and silly. He's off-track. I haven't heard him talk about his own vision in awhile.

[frustratedinohio]

I can't tell if he takes the bait because he's inexperienced or is he just too arrogant and he can't resist responding to her. Either way this is his fatal flaw. She's playing with him the way a cat plays with a mouse before killing it. If he does manage to sneak past her and win the nomination, the republican machine will put him down fast. Could ruin him for ever runnning again.

[Shannon2008]

WRONG!!! It was a pretty obvious contradiction to say on one hand that he was not ready to be Commander and Chief and on the other hand to say that he would make a great VP. It was echoed not only by Senator Clinto but by Former President Bill Clinton. It showed that they would say anything to be nominated for the Presidency. All the talk they spewed out after Ohio turned out to be just talk. Also, I don't want to give those boneheads any amo but the one thing they might have had that resonated with voters in Ohio was the whole doublespeak on NAFTA. I don't think it was doublespeak but it did play. They probably couldn't go back to that because the Canadians are saying that it was the Clinton camp that gave the wink wink and not the Obama camp. The SNL thing and the media bias were both short term bounces. How long is SNL ever relevant? A week or two? So, having said all that, whatever message came out of Ohio is now dead in Pennsylvania, and she's back to the same old electability argument and the big state argument. These arguments haven't done well for her in the past. After Ohio, she should of argued that she's a straight talker. She blew that with her doublespeak on her own qualifications as well as the lack of Obama's qualifications. She did nothing more than turn off more superdelegates. It was another bad week for her.

[equipoise]

Five words: Remember the Swift Boat attacks..

[Silpat]

Ah, Hillary has lost the nomination, so what difference does it make? She is in fact delusional and just going through the motions at this point. lol

[Gogetter]

You're half right. The Obama campaign has to start directing the conversation. They've been in the position of responding since before the TX/OH primaries. They have to start asserting they're talking points.

But there's no way he should've let that VP thing stand. He didn't spend a lot of time throwing cold water on what was obviously a campaign tactic. The media had begun to bite, but he got them the spit it out and talk about how ridiculous the "offer" was considering some ot the things she's been saying lately. And calling on her to detail the experience that she claims puts her head and shoulders above Obama; he needed to chip away at that perception. My only criticism is that he should've used surrogates (everybody's favorite word this campaign season) to do those things.

[FreedomLoverX]

The point is not that she is not qualified "either". The point is, that she is as qualified as any other liar. She is not qualified as an honorable person. Nice job as a shill, but caters to those with little intelligence: Hillary's continuing supporters. Devisive? That's her fault. I will not vote for her. I'm sick of picking a lesser of two evils. I'd rather have someone I can feel good about. Obama should keep pointing out her lies.

[markflour]

WRONG!

Obama is right to stop HRC from tricking voters who I've heard saying ?Vote for HRC and you get 3-for-1 (counting Hillary, Bill and Obama)".

By forcing people to choose he takes away HRC's ability to grab the independents who were on the fence.

He can't let her get a foothold and most importantly pointing out that she wants him for VP proves her statements about his not being fit were crazy.

I think his moves have been brilliant!

[JavaCityGal]

I don't agree that Obama shouldn't respond to Hillary so called foreigh policy experience. The MSM, and people in general who aren't political junkies just take her at her word. Her foreign policy experience is such a lie to the American people that Obama was right to call her out on it. I actually thought that he should have called her out on it sooner. It is a delicate balance though -- between focussing the issues and not letting the Cllintons lie to people. I really wish that Clinton would stop with the kitchen sink tactics and start talking about issues. Or perhaps attacks are the only thing that she knows how to do, and she really is clueless about issues.

[XYZ]

I could agree with your comments, but there is one problem the MSM, and human psychology. The MSM will pull the rinse repeat, and lather technique on Obama, unless he shuts down the conversation. I think he did quite well with the VP assertion from the Clinton camp. The MSM like's sensational headlines, like "Hillary offers Obama VP position", then they also like "Obama rejects VP position because he's #1". Yes most of us HUFF POS know better because we try to seek out information, and know that the first headline is patently absurd. However most people don't know, and they just read the first paragraph or the headline and take it as fact. I understand your point however. Right now Obama isn't driving the MSM bus, he is at best operating the brakes. Hillary is on the steering wheel, and the MSM is controlling the gas. Obama's hope message has played out in the MSM, and is now old news. People want the MSM to tell them something they don't know, and that is what sells. This is why negative campaigns are so effective, because the stories are so brazen, and sensationalized that people cannot help but to read them. Once a campaign goes negative it's hard to drive the news bus anymore, people are naturally drawn to negatives, they are so much more exciting than positives.

[papasalas]

Good thing you don't work for the Obama campaign Ellis. There are a lot of people out there who would like to "have both candidates" and that's what Clinton was trying to hint at. That Obama would get the experience that he supposedly lacks by spending a few years as her VP. Being the younger candidate, Obama had to eliminate that thought from the voters minds and he did.

[rwilliams1961]

Obama should not respond to every claim or lie. She is throwing too many out to bother with them all. But I disagree with the author - Obama should respond to some of them.

In this case, her VP comments needed to be taken on. Done properly, they made her look presumptuous and foolish.

Her Commander-in-Chief comments also need to be addressed. Obama has to show that she, too, lacks administration level negotiating and crisis management experience. As does McCain. Few presidents do, and those that did sometimes suffered for it. Obama should point this out.

When Obama responds, and occasionally he should, the response should be in good humor, factual rather than emotional, and should be calculated to not only stop her in her tracks, but leap frog over her.

When she brings up NAFTA-Canada, point out that the conservative Canadian government appears to prefer her while multiple reporters all say the same thing: Hillary approached the Canadians re NAFTA, not Obama.

When she accuses him of waffling on Iraq, ask what kind of president would ever make a move without first consulting every expert in the know. Then, re-affirm Obama's determination to get out of Iraq immediately, within the parameters set forth by experts on the ground.

She cannot be let loose to say what she wants without comment. Only a few responses will be necessary to keep the game honest and the voters informed.

[patriotscholar]

Trey, I guarantee that about three days or so before the Pennsylvania election, the Clinton camp will practice "slash and burn" politics, making all sorts and kinds of accusations, knowing full well that true or not, there is not enough time for Obama to respond properly. It is classic Clinton bait and switch tactics and it worked fairly good before Ohio and Texas. Once they get the votes, the voters can't take them back. Obama better be prepared, and the media needs to be on its toes.

I agree with your article otherwise.

[wolfi101]

I think, Obama's responses were fine. The whole idea of the Clintons offering him the VP position was shown for what it was - Just ludicrous. Made the Clintons seem completely out of touch with reality. I think, everyone had a good laugh at their proposal.

[valleygent]

Ellis, you've got it all wrong here dude, if Barack follows your advice expect another Ohio in the very near future. I thought you just stated in an earlier Blog that he needs to fight. Make up your mind. Or go to Hillary's side, one or the other.