What does Terry McAuliffe’s humiliation augur for Arlen Specter and Kristen Gillibrand? Have we figured out how to get around the Establishment, yet? I’m not sure. For one thing, Obama’s nomination was the biggest grassroots power move in memory, but now he’s the Establishment. How much of his success was attributable to his personality? How much of it was attributable to his tactics, which can now be marshaled against candidates he endorses?
I don’t really know. When Obama says ‘Boo’ does ObamaNation jump? Or does ObamaNation march to its own drummer?
We shall see.
I think ObamaNation ceased to exist, essentially, in November. Obama was the best bet to enact progressive reform, which won him the support of the movement; but, contrary to conventional wisdom, the movement values its ideals over personal admiration of the man. IOW, I don’t think he can count on his supporters suddenly accepting beltway insider centrists just because he has lined up behind them. They can defeat these candidates and still support the President when he runs in 2012 — the loyalty exists only as far as the ideals demand.
If the dynamics of this political cycle resemble at all those of FDR’s first term, then the parallel development would be for the country to move further to the left faster than even the President expected.
Specter sucks. There’s too much insider fog for me to fathom why the White House (both Obama & Biden) is backing him up. He’s ridiculously unreliable.
Gillibrand, however, has been reliable for Obama, so I can see the reasons there.
I think it would be very awkward if OFA began asking the membership (which I still am a part of) to work for allies that the White House selects. I know I would be ubcomfortabe with such a request. Working for the President’s agenda, no problem. Working for other people connected to the President, problem.
I hope it augurs the worst for Gillibrand, and for Paterson, for that matter. I think it augurs a period of concentrated low-profile efficiency serving the administration’s agenda for Arlen Specter, who will want to make sure he remains unsinkable.
I don’t really know. When Obama says ‘Boo’ does ObamaNation jump? Or does ObamaNation march to its own drummer?
We shall see.
Obama didn’t endorse anyone in the VA Governors race did he? We know that people no longer ask how high when Bill Clinton was jump. But we won’t know until Obama actually stumps for a candidate. Will Obama personally campaign for Specter? I doubt it. Besides, can you imagine that rally? Imagine Specter speaking after Obama. Talk about people running for the hills.
Hard to say. I know a number of low-information Dem voters who are pretty uniformly pleased with Obama; high-information Dems seem to be much less pleased, ranging from profound disappointment to pragmatic resignation.
Personally, endorsements don’t mean much to me no matter who they come from, though they plainly matter to some people, though how much and from whom seems to vary a lot.
As with pretty much any other politician, Obama can count on my support when I agree with him, and not when I don’t. If he wants enthusiastic support for single-payer health care, I’m all over it. If I was a PA voter and he wanted me to vote for Arlen Specter, he can kiss my ass.
Most everyone else? I don’t know. Most everyone else — or close enough that stuffing a few ballots made it seem that way — voted to elect Bush/Cheney twice. Most everyone else scares the bejesus out of me.
It may be that Clintonism doesn’t rule the roost any more.
But I think the lion’s share of success is due to Obama’s personal attributes. The man is a once-in-a-lifetime politician.
There was a huge firestorm when he talked to that newspaper in Nevada and said that he thought he could be the Democrat’s version of Ronald Reagan. The blogosphere hyperventilated, which was utterly ridiculous and showed how badly they missed the point. (You were one of the very few commentators to actually get it, which was part of what got me started reading this blog regularly.)
More and more I see how his characterization was dead-on: this is a guy who can get people to support things that otherwise they were not supporting. In Reagan’s case this was done through branding and communication skills; in Obama’s case, it’s done through bringing people into the process who otherwise were not interested in the process. In so doing we may forge some major progress.
Some of this (e.g. a new health care plan) may then become permanent (because people never give up entitlements once they get them). But I think that Obama’s coalition is not going to outlast Obama, so that we will may have a considerably harder time making a liberal coalition once he’s gone in 8 years.
On the plus side, we should be aided in this by the fact that the Republican party has had its rationale for existence completely destroyed. It may take them 15 years before anyone even listens seriously to what they have to say at the level of national politics.
FWIW, I think Obama is a remarkable guy with excellent judgment, and a remarkable politician. To the point that I am willing to consider stuff that he tells me (e.g. not releasing abuse photos) even if it goes counter to what I might’ve thought on my own — I have that much regard for him.
But in re: what the previous poster wrote: I live in PA (in Sestak’s district), and I don’t care what Obama says: I am strongly supporting Sestak over Specter in the Senate primary.
You can have great regard for someone but still analyze their motivations and conclude that they are (sometimes) not aligned with your own.
What am I missing here? When did Obama campaign for Specter against Sestak or any other real candidate? I know he went along with the “clear the field” crap, but has he taken sides now that there will be a real primary?
Obama is obligated to maintain his endorsement of Specter, but how much time he will spend on Specter’s behalf will be telling. My guess is that he’ll be too busy dealing with (crisis-at-the-time) to campaign for anyone during the primary season, so Specter will be one of many candidates that will have to do without Obama’s presence on the campaign trail. He may do some nominal campaigning for Specter – a letter of support to be published on Specter’s behalf or something along those lines – but I’d be seriously surprised if he puts his full weight behind Specter. If he does that then he will reap the whirlwind, but I doubt that we’ll see that come to pass.
As someone who is a very big fan of Gillibrand…. I hope nothing.
Once the politics of resentment cut against demographic trends ObamaNation came about. ObamaNation are the same (often reactionary) middle class strivers excluded by the GOP because they base so much of their appeal on racial resentment. Now enough of the electorate is non-white that it has become a square peg, round hole problem for the GOP.
The vanguard left always believes there is an army of millions out there ready to tear down the system. It just isn’t so. Obama heralded a modest shift to center-left.
Obama has already proven to be very careful with his political capital (see the Jim Martin runoff) and it’s very unlikely that 2008 rank and file voters are interested in party purity purges.
If the progsphere wants to tilt at windmills for 2010 I would suggest some tough Senate and Governor races. Leave the circular firing squad to the GOP.