In Tom Edsall's superb account of the furious re-strategizing going on in the Clinton campaign, he cites the remark of a Clinton operative, who said that with extended primary warfare against Obama, Hillary will be able to prove that "there is not even a second level to Obama, there is no depth." The problem with that assumption is that it defies reason. It makes no sense that a president of the Harvard Law Review who has had a meteoric rise in politics would not have "even a second level." However fast it may have unfolded, Obama's record is not one that you put together with a smile and a speech.
But the claim that Obama is all bling and no beef is also disproved by the fervent support that he has from his home base, the Chicago political community, spanning all racial and ideological types. From Hyde Park liberals to the sons of old ward-heelers, Obama seems to have won their ardor. If there's one crowd who wouldn't waste their time and money on someone with "no depth," it's Chicagoans.
As for the supposed parallel with the Mondale-Hart ten-rounder in 1984, Mondale was able to battle back because he had raised far more money than Hart had before the latter's break-through. He pummeled Hart with negative ads in post-New Hampshire states before Hart could bounce back. But this time, the outsider agent of change will have at least as much money as the candidate anointed by the party establishment.
The Clinton campaign is fantasizing if they think that a long harsh campaign will spoil the people's honeymoon with Barack Obama. It's more likely to prompt the belief that Hillary Clinton is tarnishing the party's presumptive nominee in order to cling to her own fading chances.
posted 01/06/2008 at 22:55:16
But the claim that Obama is all bling and no beef is also disproved by the fervent support that he has from his home base, the Chicago political community, spanning all racial and ideological types. From Hyde Park liberals to the sons of old ward-heelers, Obama seems to have won their ardor. If there's one crowd who wouldn't waste their time and money on someone with "no depth," it's Chicagoans.
As for the supposed parallel with the Mondale-Hart ten-rounder in 1984, Mondale was able to battle back because he had raised far more money than Hart had before the latter's break-through. He pummeled Hart with negative ads in post-New Hampshire states before Hart could bounce back. But this time, the outsider agent of change will have at least as much money as the candidate anointed by the party establishment.
The Clinton campaign is fantasizing if they think that a long harsh campaign will spoil the people's honeymoon with Barack Obama. It's more likely to prompt the belief that Hillary Clinton is tarnishing the party's presumptive nominee in order to cling to her own fading chances.
posted 01/06/2008 at 22:55:16
No comments:
Post a Comment