We are up against the conventional thinking that says your ability to lead as President comes from longevity in Washington or proximity to the White House. But we know that real leadership is about candor, and judgment, and the ability to rally Americans from all walks of life around a common purpose – a higher purpose.
We are up against decades of bitter partisanship that cause politicians to demonize their opponents instead of coming together to make college affordable or energy cleaner; it’s the kind of partisanship where you’re not even allowed to say that a Republican had an idea – even if it’s one you never agreed with. That kind of politics is bad for our party, it’s bad for our country, and this is our chance to end it once and for all.
We are up against the idea that it’s acceptable to say anything and do anything to win an election. We know that this is exactly what’s wrong with our politics; this is why people don’t believe what their leaders say anymore; this is why they tune out. And this election is our chance to give the American people a reason to believe again.
Some interesting stats about the win:
- Hillary Clinton's support in that state has been sliding for two months from her original dominant poll position, and Obama soared over the past few days. Very important to get those late deciders.
- Holy cow on fundraising -- in one hour after Obama's win tonight his website took in over half a million dollars in donations, which seems to be the rate for the night, extraordinary.
- Obama received more votes in the primary than John McCain and Mike Huckabee combined. This surely goes to electability -- unlike Clinton, Obama may be able to peel off some Southern states for Dems.
- Rasmussen has a new poll out today (and yes, I'll want to see some others before I take it with less than a grain of salt) putting Obama, for the first time, within three percentage points of Hillary nationally.
There's a secondary narrative that's influencing the campaign, something I've written about over the past week (always nice to seem prescient), but liberal Dems are starting to turn against the Clintons (also now known as "Billary") due to their assholic campaign style of late. Left-side columnist Jonathan Chait hit the nail on the head in The Los Angeles Times today:
Something strange happened the other day. All these different people -- friends, co-workers, relatives, people on a liberal e-mail list I read -- kept saying the same thing: They've suddenly developed a disdain for Bill and Hillary Clinton. Maybe this is just a coincidence, but I think we've reached an irrevocable turning point in liberal opinion of the Clintons.
The sentiment seems to be concentrated among Barack Obama supporters. Going into the campaign, most of us liked Hillary Clinton just fine, but the fact that tens of millions of Americans are seized with irrational loathing for her suggested that she might not be a good Democratic nominee. But now that loathing seems a lot less irrational. We're not frothing Clinton haters like ... well, name pretty much any conservative. We just really wish they'd go away.
He goes on to list their lying about Obama's positions from abortion to Reagan, and even asks the most deadly question of all:
It made me wonder: Were the conservatives right about Bill Clinton all along? Maybe not right to set up a perjury trap so they could impeach him, but right about the Clintons' essential nature?
It's interesting to see the old Clinton bastion of support, African Americans, starting to turn, from Colbert I. King in the Washington Post:
Who would have thought, eight years ago, that the country might get back Billary, two people reeking of self-pity and spoiling for fights with anyone who has the temerity to stand in their way?
to Obama supporters actually booing the supposed "first black President" and ostensible Democratic Party leader when his face appeared on the Jumbotron.
And it's hard to say he doesn't deserve it -- if even in his reaction to Obama winning the state sounds like some nasty, knowing, dog-whistle race-baiting:
Jesse Jackson won in South Carolina twice, in '84 and '88...
Yeah. Yucky.
But maybe hope really is on the way. Brand new editorial endorsements for Barack include the San Francisco Chronicle (reprieve and renewal of our political system), The St. Louis Post-Dispatch (Obama the comet of hope vs. Bill Clinton reemerging "as the Luca Brasi of the campaign trail"), and The Harvard Crimson (with a great analysis of his policies, putting to rest any notion that he'd be a lightweight in office).
But there's one endorsement that's potentially the most significant, appearing on the very same editorial pages that endorsed his opponent just the other day.
Caroline Kennedy has endorsed Barack Obama for President on the Op-Ed page of The New York Times.
It seems that he reminds her of her father.
2 comments:
Yesterday was a regular old ass-kicking, but I think it's difficult to be sure what it means. My take is this: during the disastrous years of GWB, I think a lot of Dems developed an overly nostalgic memory of the Clintons. A lot of Dems voted for them, but many didn't like a lot about them (the lying, the weasely-ness, their self-centered decision-making, etc), and I think during the past week Bill started to remind people of these things.
Remember, too: Although the Big Dog won twice, he never polled 50%, even against the undead Bob Dole. Gore and Kerry, two fairly lackluster campaigners/candidates, received far more votes than Bill ever did.
It took just a few weeks of watching Bill and his childish,forget the truth, egocentric campaigning to make me a total Obama fan. NYS will be interesting - perhaps Hillary will not walk away with it - Caroline's op ed in the Times is BIG!!!
Post a Comment