Dear Villagers: It’s Change and the War, Stupid

Posted by BooMan | May 11, 2008 | 13 |

In a mostly gloomy and realistic assessment of the Republicans’ chances in the 2008 election, Fred Barnes spits out this gem.

There have been some improvements in political atmospherics for Republicans. The 2006 midterm election was framed by intense voter dissatisfaction with the war in Iraq. The 2008 election won’t be. The surge of American troops in Iraq hasn’t turned the war into a Republican asset, but it’s at least blunted it as an effective Democratic talking point.

This kind of muddled thinking is widespread in the beltway. This morning on Meet the Press the assembled talking meat sticks wondered aloud what had led to Hillary’s defeat. They recited Karen Tumulty’s Five Mistakes that Clinton Made.

1. She misread the mood and tried to run as a Washington insider/incumbent when the electorate was hungry for change.

2. Her strategists didn’t have a good understanding of the nomination rules. Allegedly, chief strategist Mark Penn was actually ignorant of the proportional allocation rule and thought just winning the big states would be enough to secure the nomination.

3. She underestimated the caucus states and chose not to put resources into them because she thought her core voters would be unlikely to caucus.

4. She relied on old money for fundraising and didn’t tap into the new modes of Internet fundraising.

5. She didn’t plan ahead for a long race and was very late to set up operations in states which voted after Super Tuesday.

After running down those five items, John Harwood chimed in to say that another factor was that Obama is a gifted politician. Whereupon Jerry Seib said that Obama was just a man for his time. Chris Cillizza added that people found Clinton dishonest. And Michelle Norris said that Obama had a consistent message while Clinton did not. Nowhere did any of these ass-clowns mention that Clinton voted to authorize the war while Obama spoke out against it. Nowhere did they mention the Kyl-Lieberman amendment that Clinton supported and Obama (rhetorically) opposed. Just like Fred Barnes, they refuse to understand that the strongest themes in the Democratic campaign are those spelled out by Obama:

“I don’t want to just end the war, but I want to end the mind-set that got us into war in the first place.”- Barack Obama

“The votes hadn’t even been counted in November [2006] before we heard reports that corporations were already recruiting lobbyists with Democratic connections to carry their water in the next Congress. That’s why it’s not enough to just change the players. We have to change the game…The truth is, we cannot change the way Washington works unless we first change the way Congress works.”- Barack Obama

Clinton made a lot of blunders. But if she had not authorized the war and if she didn’t represent the way Washington works, she would be the nominee.

About The Author

BooMan

Martin Longman a contributing editor at the Washington Monthly. He is also the founder of Booman Tribune and Progress Pond. He has a degree in philosophy from Western Michigan University.

13 Comments

americanforliberty on May 11, 2008 at 4:10 pm

I find reason No. 2 to be incredibly stupid, Hillary should ask Mark Penn to refund his 5 million dollar fee. However, reason No. 6: “She thought her nomination would be a cake-walk.” and that kinda explain reasons 1-5.
AliceDem on May 11, 2008 at 4:17 pm

once this idea that people should lose their jobs because of the war, things could get dicey.
idredit on May 11, 2008 at 4:21 pm

“Nowhere did any of these ass-clowns mention that Clinton voted to authorize the war while Obama spoke out against it. Nowhere did they mention the Kyl-Lieberman amendment that Clinton supported and Obama (rhetorically) opposed.”

Kinda difficult for MSM, the empties-from-the-neck-up, to address that with a straight face when they were the cheerleaders.

The war, blended into the failing economy will the banner… a solid meme is McCain needs another 100 years for victory as his buddy, Bush, said Iraq oil would fund the war…only a trillion dollars later. Later.

Someone reminded that in 1980, we’re focused on Afghanistan and Iran. Almost 30 years later that’s the topic. What has changed?

Not the mindset.
eagleye on May 11, 2008 at 4:30 pm

Here’s an interesting article on the guy who is the strategic thinker behind Obama’s success in winning delegates.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10249.html
idredit on May 11, 2008 at 4:44 pm

what will it take to kill the Obama-Clinton joint ticket balloon?

CNNPolitics.com: Hillary to fight for the VP spot

Friends and close associates of both Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are now convinced that, assuming she loses the race for the presidential nomination, she is probably going to fight to be the vice presidential nominee on an Obama-for-president ticket.

A person close to her, with whom her campaign staff has counseled at various points, said this week, “I think the following will happen: Obama will be in a position where the party declares him the nominee by the first week in June. She’ll still be fighting with everybody — the Rules Committee, the party leaders — and arguing, ‘I’m winning these key states; I’ve got almost half the delegates. I have a whole constituency he hasn’t reached. I’ve got real differences on approach to how we win this election, and I’m going to press the hell out of this guy. … Relief for the middle class, universal health care, etc.; I’m Ms. Blue Collar, and I’m going to press my fight, because he can’t win without my being on the ticket.’ “

Another major Democratic Party figure, who supports her for president, agreed: “It’s not going to be a quiet exit. … Obama has got a terrible situation. He marches to a different drummer. He won’t want to take her on the ticket. But he might have to, even though the idea of Vice President Hillary with Bill in the background at the White House is not something — especially after what [the Clintons] have thrown at him that he relishes. I believe she’ll go for it.”

Now Clinton is going to fight for the VP slot? I thought that would be by invitation only. Silly season is never ending. Anxious to have Obama declare his running mate.

Note to Hillary:
Lady, your time chart has expired. Don’t push it.
- Joe Bourgeois on May 11, 2008 at 5:12 pm
  
  Jeralyn over at Talk Left is really dropping her shit: she’s just proposed that Obama’s ideal role for 2009 is Clinton’s Attorney General!!!!
  
  Haven’t seen any mention of the Sat Nite nailing of Clinton on any of those blogs ………
- dada on May 11, 2008 at 5:14 pm
  
  id…he can’t drive a stake thru her heart until the nomination is decided.
  
  imo, a snowball in hell has a better chance than hillary does of being on the ticket.
  
  political kabuki…the people like harold ford, who wouldn’t let it go on the msnbc nc/indiana coverage, bernstein, and the msm in general, are just trying to muddy the water.
  
  it’s annoying as hell, but l think at the end of the day, nothing but b.s. to keep the focus off the real race: ie: obama v mccain…and he’s gonna wipe the floor with st john.
  
  if you haven’t done, do check out eagleye’s link below on obama’s chief “delegate strategist”, a very interesting read.
  - idredit on May 11, 2008 at 6:39 pm
    
    I read that Politico piece on Jeffrey Berman—a masterful campaign through and through..
    
    I agree it’s annoying. Imho the Clintons are staying in just to deny Obama getting on with strategy,… smarting over being out-campaigned and doing great harm… distracting focus from McSame.
    
    Selfish. Selfish.
refinish69 on May 11, 2008 at 6:50 pm

She also discounted political activists across the nation. Here in Texas, she did not do anything but treat us as an ATM machine until Texas was in play for nomination. Here in Austin and Travis county the only events she held until right before our March primary were events where the cheap seats started at 250 or 500 dollars. Travis County and Austin have the most active political activists in the entire state. She did this not only in Texas but many other states and it hurt her.
- idredit on May 11, 2008 at 7:11 pm
  
  the tone of the Clintons’ campaign has been utterly disappointing.
  
  Here is Bill Clinton in West Virginia stoking resentment
  – Jake Tapper, ABC News blog:
  
  As Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., avoids any real campaigning in West Virginia, the former president of the United States is out there ginning up resentments.
  
  Bill Clinton has the right to say whatever he wants, of course. But he’s a smart man. Brilliant, even.
  
  He can do the math. He must know that it’s quite improbable that his wife, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., will be the Democratic presidential nominee.
  
  So what purpose does it serve for him to barnstorm a state like West Virginia and tell rural voters that Obama and his elitist political/media cabal allies are mocking Appalachia?
  
  He’s using the kind of language Democrats typically use against Republicans — as in, stuff you say when you don’t want voters to vote for the other guy under any circumstance.
  
  This is tough stuff to walk back from.
  
  [.]Per ABC News’ Sarah Amos, this is what the 42nd president of the United States said Friday in Ripley, W.Va.:
  
  “It is very interesting, from the very beginning of this race there has been a sharp divide in the vote — the people who need a president, who need to turn the economy around, who need to restore the middle class, who need to give poor people a chance to work their way into the middle class, who need to give our children a better future, who need to restore our standing in the world and the war in Iraq, but do it in a way that rebuilds our military and stands up for America’s security and standing around the world — they have been for her from the get-go.”
  
  And on and on… Ginning up the resentments and the class divide (and maybe other divisions). … His message to these voters: Obama and the media are laughing at you and think you’re stupid!!!
  
  “This is tough stuff to walk back from” is an understatement. I don’t want to read or hear any talk about a joint ticket. Over a lot of dead bodies.
  - Quentin on May 12, 2008 at 7:44 am
    
    Spitefulness, small-minded spitefulness.
azureblue on May 11, 2008 at 7:49 pm

Here is the story that will end the war:

The biggest consumer of fuel, bigger than the United Sates, is the US’s Department of Defense. All those planes, ships, land vehicles, etc., use fuel. And the oil companies know that, so they are driving up the cost of oil to gouge the country- plain and simple war profiteering.

So the meme is: End the war, and the US will have over twice the amount of fuel available, supplies will go way up, the oil companies will not be able to hide behind Bush, and the price of gas will go down.
- SqueakyRat on May 11, 2008 at 11:29 pm
  
  Uh, no. The DOD uses about 400K barrels of oil per day. The US uses about 20 million/day.

Dear Villagers: It’s Change and the War, Stupid

About The Author

BooMan

13 Comments

Recent Posts

Recent Comments