Obama is Howard Dean:
Don't Pop the Cork Yet Obama
By Reed Galen, July 3 2008
The Rose Bowl Game, Pasadena, California, January, 2006: The USC Trojans are up by two scores against the Texas Longhorns with less than seven minutes to go. Every Orangeblood in the crowd is dispirited by the likely outcome. But one sees a glimmer of hope in the form of the entire USC squad dancing in the middle of the field prior to kickoff. In their minds, they'd already won the game. The Longhorns and Vince Young had other thoughts, though, and came back to win 41-38.
Senator Barack Obama has been the presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party for a little more than three weeks. To see the way his campaign handles itself, though, one might conclude he'd wrapped up the contest months ago. While success and victory breed confidence; they also can be fertile ground for hubris and arrogance. The Obama camp has shifted into front-runner mode, with good reason, But that status is fraught with danger.
While Senator Obama has enjoyed favorable polling numbers recently, these numbers are a mirage on the electoral horizon. First of all, several national polls have shown Obama up by as much as 15 points but then another will show the race a dead heat. The truth, as with most things, is probably somewhere in the middle. While the chattering class enjoys discussing such numbers, the fact remains that Presidential race is 51 distinct elections, not a national referendum. [DC gets 3 electoral votes]
The Obama campaign noted this week that it is putting resources into 14 states that President George Bush won in 2004. The staff readily admitted that they have no realistic hope of winning the states (Texas comes to mind) and claim they aren't attempting to get the McCain campaign to shore up support. Therefore, wouldn't that money, (surely to run into the millions) be better spent in actual target states? This effort belies a budgetary insouciance that should be troubling to Obama's financial supporters. Whether or not they want to believe it, money in politics is a finite commodity - spending it on fool-hardy items simply to demonstrate 'dominance' is wasteful and a slight reflection on how a President Obama may see the country's budget as well.
Can you say, "Hillary Clinton?"
Speaking of campaign funding, Senator Obama's recent reversal on public financing for the general election caused uproar amongst the media and Republicans (how often are they on the same side?) Truth be told, very few if any voters will hold this against Senator Obama come election day; campaign finance rarely moves voters and won't this time, either. However, Obama has carried the banner of being the 'unpolitician' and doing things differently. The truth is, however, he like so many others made a decision based on the best interest of his campaign. Who can blame him, honestly? However, claiming that he's single-handedly re-created the public financing system because of the volume of his small-dollar donations is laughable. Add to that his recent decision to support the Senate's decision on FISA, and its corresponding corporate protection, is completely at odds with the stands he's taken to date on such issues. He runs the risk, like the limousine liberal set Senator Obama so ably represents, of being accused of sitting in his well-funded ivory tower and telling everyone else to, "do as I say, not as I do."
As a political organization, the Obama campaign has been hyper-organized and has avoided any major tactical or strategic errors. Discipline is a large factor in their success up to this point which is why the controversy over the "Obamadential Seal" is puzzling. For a group of people who waffled on whether or not their candidate should wear an American flag pin on his lapel, it is astonishing that they would so brazenly decide the Great Seal of the President of the United States should be no more than another graphic for their web guys to tinker with. Perhaps they'll make up their own flags as well with the now trademark Obama horizon replacing the fifty stars and wavy stripes. They can hang them behind him at events in place of Old Glory.
All of the above examples of over confidence pale in comparison to the challenges Senator Obama faces within his own party and his share of the electorate. Despite their lofty attitude since winning the nomination, the truth is that while 18 million Democrats voted for Barack Obama, 18 million also voted against him. Whether or not the campaign wants to believe it, Senator Hillary Clinton's supporters will not simply join the throngs of adoring fans that attend Obama's rallies. They will have to be wooed and convinced as if the primary were beginning all over again. Senator Obama has less than two months before his coronation in Denver. If he can't convince working-class men and upper-class women who voted for Clinton that he's worthy of them, they might stay home or worse yet, cross party lines. Because of the support she garnered during the contests, Senator Clinton must be given a prominent, prime-time speaking role at the Democratic Convention. Should she blow the roof off the place, there's no guarantee that some sizable amount of her delegates won't vote for her anyway, even in the face of sure defeat. Call President George H.W. Bush and see how a divided and divisive nominating convention works out for the fall campaign.
Lastly, Senator Obama faces the Howard Dean Dilemma. Obama has energized a vast number of young people to participate in the political process. However, as young people are wont to do, getting them to actually show up and pull the lever in November is a decidedly difficult proposition to pull off. Contrast this with the portion of the electorate who votes with far more consistency, those over 50, who may very well see far more in common with John McCain than they do the junior senator from Illinois. Barack Obama could be John F. Kennedy; or he could be chairman of the Democratic National Committee.
Reed Galen is a political strategist in California |
