the lefty side of Washington has recently become one big Obama love-in. As my neighbor put it last week, "it's all Barack, all the time here." In fact, I haven't heard a negative thing about him in weeks, which is saying a lot in a city like this.
That said, I confess I haven't been too eager to follow all the hype and the plethora of other contestants. For one thing, I've been AWFULLY pre-occupied with the Anna Nicole Smith stories (this alone could make for a very long blog series from me), and for another, the full election is still a full 21 months off. I can't make a decision right now, knowing I'll have nearly 2 years to gather more information and to change my mind. Even the DC primary is a full year away.
One of my best friends recently signed up on My.BarackObama.com to support his campaign, so I decided to check out the site. I highly recommend this, as it made it abundantly clear that Obama is running the better campaign. The Web site is packed full of information and easy to use, and it even has a password-protected MySpace-style personalize-able section to encourage participation from people who normally wouldn't bother. He offers tons of professional information about himself-- past speeches, press releases, bills, etc.-- and a (obviously highly flattering) bio. I read his recent Springfield speech, since I had neglected to actually listen to the whole thing when he gave it, and, I have to admit, I got a little misty-eyed! I think he's certainly the first politician who knows how to talk to our generation-- who knows what we really want, why we've become cynical, what we want to believe is possible, and how to reassure us that despite whatever we've seen so far it really IS possible. He comes across as intelligent and straight-forward. His Web site also included a list of important issues, what he thought was wrong with them, and how he would fix them. Right there! In print! "here's how I would fix the county and the world" Hillary couldn't even answer a question in a recent interview about whether she thought Obama had enough experience for office. She couldn't even offer her own opinion, and for that, she lost major points in my book. To quote a recent headline in reference to Obama, "somebody stop him before he gets more experience!"
I think Obama's big problem will not be that he's black (or not black enough) or inexperienced, but that he is doing such a great job at courting the young, newly influential idealists that make up so much of our generation. Unfortunately, most of us don't vote. This makes me want to rail and kick and scream, but it is the truth. For many of us, our first presidential election was Bush-Gore 2000, where it became abundantly clear that our single votes didn't matter so much. On the other hand, maybe the lesson was that they DID matter and all those people who would have voted Democratic if they had ever bothered to register were actually the ones who made the vote too close to call in a timely manner and therefore dependant on a panel of judges. Or maybe it was all Katherine Harris's fault, who does well in fulfilling her role as the perfect Snidely-Whiplash-or-Cruella-DeVil-style villain.
My conclusion, then, is two-fold. First, Hillary, you have to get off your duff and start running a creative and innovative campaign. We've been fooled enough times now to not fall for the same bullshit anymore. Stop "playing it safe" and actually put some real opinions out there so you don't force us to vote for a person rather than for issues (because you'll loose). and Second, my friends, my generation, you must register to vote, and you must exercise that right whenever you can. I was always big on voting in Florida, and, since I've moved and had to forfeit most of my representation and voting rights, it's become even more important to me. Look... it takes just a few minutes, and you can do it here: http://www.declareyourself.org/index.php (just try to get past the graphics obviously meant to encourage “young, hip, urban voters”). Thank you and god speed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
I'm glad somebody brought up his site - I was totally going to add info on it on the weekend if no one had written about it. I am such an internet addict, and I *love* Obama's site. MUCH better than Hillary's or Edwards's.
Is Obama peaking too high, too early? Is there any similarities to Obama's position now and where Howard Dean was 4 years ago? Both seem to have/had the hearts of left leaning idealists during the early stages of the race.
Two years is a long time to hold this sort of momentum and adoration.
Obamania! Okay, I stole that from the Daily Show, but I have a feeling that as more people hear him speak the Obmania will indeed spread like crazy. Also, I firmly believe that once you've got the Oprah vote, there's no stopping you.
Also, that website is freaking amazing. He's always had a great Senate website so I'm not completely surprised, but still, wow.
I disagree with the comparison to Howard Dean. HD was an infatuation for the left, but Obama...that's true love, baby.
One more, I definitely feel your sentiments on Hilary, Jen. I hear her speak and I think, "get real, lady, quit trying to feed me a line of crap and take a fucking stand. And while you're at it, please do something about the hair. No one will vote for you with that haircut. Except possibly blind liberals, but there aren't a lot of those, okay." So maybe that last part crosses a line or two, but COME ON. How can she not realize how terrible her hair looks!! It's a freaking mullet for Christ's sake!!
Wow...this was really not up to my normal comment intelligence level....
I agree with Laurie's point about Dean, at least somewhat. There was a bit of hype about Dean, even to the point of being considered by some to be the front runner, but he was much, much less that universally well liked; I remember, having been a huge Dean supporter and being extremely disappointed when he was knocked out by that "scream" (which was TOTAL bullshit). I do think that Obama may be "peaking too early," but that concern is extremely small. He has definitely shown himself to be extremely capable, and he has very effectively countered any of the attacks that have come upon him thus far. The only people who are really putting forth that BS about his experience, his electability, etc. are those who seem to have a vested interest in him not getting the nomination (such as those who are in the Clinton camp).
Regarding young people voting, if you look at the polling data of the 2006 midterm election, young people came out much better than in the fast, and Obama's popularity with young people, I believe, will get young people out. But where I work, for example, I am the youngest person by several years (most are much older than I), and everyone is supporting Obama. So he's not just a "young person's" candidate.
Your description about Hillary not being able to state her own opinion about Obama's experience is one of my main reasons that I am not supporting Hillary- namely, that she is too triangulating and calculating, so much so that she doesn't seem to have a strong, principled stand on anything (and the war is the issue that, for Hillary, is a good case in point, and is what is going to do her some serious harm in the campaign).
I do tend to look with a skeptical eye at any candidate, especially one who is getting the attention that Obama gets- no one candidate should be looked at as being without flaw; that's drinking the kool aid. So I'm not the biggest fan of this rabid and seemingly obsessive following Obama has, but, I will say, it is for a good reason, I think- he is offering people hope and some good ideals etc., and hey, he's a great orator, and that counts for a lot considering what we've had for more than six years. Hell, someone who can string together a halfway competent sentence would be an improvement.
Lastly, Jen, I hope when you say you have been preoccupied with the Anna Nicole Smith story, you are joking. Or that you were preoccupied because you were disgusted with the ridiculous and immoral media circus that has been going on non-stop about this poor dead woman.
Oh, one thing I wanted to mention about Hillary:
I went and saw her speak at an event, and she was a great speaker. She speaks very well, better than people give her credit for, and she has some real charisma. And she spoke for 45 minutes or so, and she riled the crowd up (this was long before the 06 election), and when she was done, the atmosphere seemed to be that everyone felt somewhat inspired. But, and this is the point of my little anecdote, at the end, after she talked and held my undivided attention, as soon as she left the stage, I realized that I couldn't tell you one thing that she stood for, one idea that she had, one thing that she instilled in the crowd.
It was all good rhetoric, all stuff designed to get a crowd up, all stuff about what was wrong with the other side, and some very, very general stuff about electing Democrats and issues that are important to Democrats, etc. But I went away with nothing and I couldn't quote you not one thing that she said. It was extremely unsatisfying, and the only inspiration we got was wanting to take over the House and Senate. That's why I'm not for Hillary Clinton. It's mostly hollow talk and rhetoric and just complete politicking. And the problem is, she is extremely smart and she is extremely competent, maybe more so than any other candidate by far, when it comes to policy. But that does not come across, because that would mean sticking her neck out and taking a principled stand on things.
That was a lot longer than I meant it to be.
I've done a lot of reading, watching, and listening during the past week and I can see what all of the hype is about. I don't really have anything substantive to add, I think that you guys have covered it well.
I did want to point out that he is certainly the hottest candidate in a long time (ever?).
Melissa
Obama the hottest? Or Edwards? Glenn and I were just talking about that (sorta; we weren't talking about who was the "hottest"), but I think that these candidates, specifically Obama and Edwards, will get people out because they are just much more attractive candidates than we've seen in a long time. I'm sure that some of the voting patters has something to do at least in a subconscious way (or it could be a conscious way) with how the candidates look; candidates for all offices, not just president, are usually not attractive in the slightest, and many of them are blah at best, and disgusting at worst. The Democrats are just much better looking (Obama, Edwards, Pelosi, Klobuchar, Schuler, etc. etc.).
Obama is DEFINITELY a hotty. Much hotter than Edwards. Although I agree, Democrats in general are more attractive. Why is that? (however, I must admit to coveting parts of Condi's wardrobe...)
I don't think that Edwards is hot, but I guess he is more attractive than the average politician. Obama is definitely hotter than Edwards.
Melissa
Post a Comment