Barack Obama

[Joel the Attention Whore]

I was going to post something, but the guy before me posted basically what I was going to say.

[elcorazon]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0610180130oct18,1,3559589.story?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hed
Obama dips toe in 2008 waters
Toll on his family called key concern
 Advertisement
 
 
 
 
 
By Jill Zuckman, Washington Bureau. Tribune staff reporter Mitch Dudek in Chicago contributed to this report

October 18, 2006

WASHINGTON -- While Sen. Barack Obama launches the most public of book tours, with appearances on "Oprah Winfrey," the "Today" show, "Larry King Live" and "Meet the Press," he also is more intensively examining whether to run for president in 2008, reaching out to Democratic operatives and trying to reconcile the demands of a national campaign on his family.

Obama (D-Ill.) has been having quiet conversations with colleagues and friends about a prospective White House run, but a key concern is whether his wife, Michelle, would support it and whether he could manage the time away from their two young daughters.

"He has gotten the presidential bug bite," said Donna Brazile, campaign manager for Al Gore in 2000. "Barack is constantly calling, he's constantly talking to people. He's not calling me to check on the weather. I'm not saying he's in, but he's checking the water. He's having lots of conversations." Brazile said she is scheduled to talk politics with Obama shortly after Election Day.

Sen. Dick Durbin, Illinois' senior Democratic senator and a strong proponent of an Obama presidential bid, said his colleague has learned more about international affairs and the workings of the federal government in his brief Senate career than most governors who run for president. Staying in the Senate, Durbin said, will only provide opponents with more targets as Obama continues to cast votes.

"I said to him, `Do you really think sticking around the Senate for four more years and casting a thousand more votes will make you more qualified for president?'" Durbin said. "The critical element that remains that he has to face is whether he is willing to be separated from his family for longer periods of time and I think he is staring that right in the face."

`No one else of interest'

He's also drawing plenty of stares from fans who have rushed to have him sign a copy of his new book, "The Audacity of Hope." The signings kicked off Tuesday in Chicago. Applause greeted him as he entered the third floor of the Michigan Avenue Borders. Hundreds of people had formed a line starting at 6 a.m.

"For me, there's no one else of interest," said Cheryl Hammock, 60, a Gold Coast resident. "I hope he's the next president."

That is just the kind of talk that fans the speculation about him running.

But David Axelrod, Obama's political consultant, said people should not read too much into a publicity tour crafted by the senator's publisher.

"He is not initiating calls on this," Axelrod said. "People call him all the time and he gives them a respectful hearing. I really don't think he's going to focus on this question at all until after Nov. 7."

Other political professionals, however, expressed skepticism that Obama's treatise on how America can move beyond its divisions to find common ground could be considered anything but a campaign platform.

"There's a political connection between the book he's written and the campaign he will run," said Tom Rath, the Republican national committeeman in New Hampshire. "It's awfully hard to go into some of these places and do what he's doing and say it's all about the book."

Obama has drawn national attention since he delivered the keynote address at the Democratic National Convention in 2004, won his Senate seat and came to Washington. From the day of his arrival, there has been at least simmering speculation about a presidential run, and his appeal has only grown.

Just two years into a Senate career, but with a much higher and more positive profile than most senators, Obama also has been raising large amounts of money and earning other political capital by campaigning for fellow Democrats. In a 12-day period in October, he raised $2 million, aides said.

Yet the book puts the focus almost exclusively on him, providing him with millions of dollars' worth of free publicity, largely in non-confrontational, friendly forums. If the book is popular--and already it is No. 15 on the Amazon.com list--it could help him in ways that Sen. John McCain's best-selling memoir, "Faith of Our Fathers," fueled his presidential campaign in 2000.

"It takes it to the next level, it gives you a platform and it gives you a little cover for testing the presidential waters," said Dean Spiliotes, a political science professor at the New Hampshire Institute of Politics at St. Anselm College. "You can go to all the places but say, `Hey, I'm just talking about my book right now.'"

At political events too

While playing the role of senator-author one day, Obama is often headlining political events the next. On Monday, Obama flew to Indianapolis with Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) to raise money for three Democratic candidates in some of the nation's most competitive House races. Emanuel, the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said they talked about races around the country and what needed to be done over the next three weeks--not about a presidential bid.

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, said Obama has done everything Democratic leaders have asked him to, traveling to 20 or 30 states this year.

"He's the star. He is in such demand," Schumer said. "He is in greater demand than any other person that we have to offer."

And in campaigning for others, Obama is also subtly campaigning for himself.

"He's got the book, Oprah, [Tim] Russert--his time intellectually and emotionally is about the elections and about the book," Emanuel said. "That doesn't mean he's not considering it. A lot of people are talking to him. You can't go to the airport without seeing it--it's on the cover of Time."

Indeed, Obama's face fills the cover of Time magazine, with bold letters asserting "Why Barack Obama Could be the Next President." On Sunday, he will appear on "Meet the Press" with Russert, following a week of book and media appearances, including Charlie Rose, "Hannity & Colmes" and "Countdown with Keith Olbermann."

Shifting statements on future

In between, Obama will campaign for Chicago native Deval Patrick, the Democratic nominee for governor in Massachusetts, help House candidates in Philadelphia and rally for Jim Pederson for Senate in Arizona, to name just a few stops.

Obama partisans insist that the senator is simply trying to help out, and the publicity just happens to be ginned up by his publisher. But it comes when his statements about his presidential ambitions appear to be shifting substantially.

Last January, on "Meet the Press," Obama told Russert, "I will serve out my full six-year term," adding that his thinking had not changed since he took office.

"So you will not run for president or vice president in 2008?" Russert asked.

"I will not," Obama said.

In May, he told the Tribune that "there are people who think I should make an announcement tomorrow that I'm running for the presidency.

"I tell them," he said, "that I'm focusing on my job as a senator from Illinois."

Now, however, he has told Time that he will revisit the question in November.

"When the election is over and my book tour is done, I will think about how I can be most useful to the country and how I can reconcile that with being a good dad and a good husband," Obama said. "I haven't completely decided or unraveled that puzzle yet."

----------

jzuckman@tribune.com

Now he might not run, but I really don't see why if he did run, he couldn't get the nomination.  You think he's scared of Evan Bayh?

[George W. Hobbes]

His middle name is Hussein, for crying out loud. 

Hussein Osama....er....

[elcorazon]

His middle name is Hussein, for crying out loud. 

Hussein Osama....er....

now there's some in depth analysis, there.

[memphis]

More and more I believe that Obama will run. He'll be the John Edwards of 2008.

Mentioned Edwards.  Something people need to realize: he's a hardcore liberal.  Anyone who talks about two Americas - a rich one and a poor one - is bordering on socialism.

One doesn't have to be a socialist to realize there is a different set of rules for different people. Do you honestly believe everyone has an equal chance of getting ahead in life and success is determined by strictly by how smart you are or how hard you work? If not, then you at least partially agree with Edwards.

It's not hard to see this in practice either. In most big cities a drive from the inner city out into the suburbs will quickly reveal these two Americas within about 10 minutes time.

Edwards divided people into two groups: rich people who can afford everything, and poor people who can afford nothing.  What about those in between? 

In reality, there is one America, but if you had to make an argument, it would be at least partially true to say that there were four Americas:

1) Rich America.  Can afford everything they need or want.  Never have financial difficulties.

2) Comfortable America.  Can afford everything they need plus a few extras for pleasure.  People like me, doctors, and lawyers.

3) Working America.  Can afford what they need, but rarely can afford extra.  Often have financial troubles, but are never in a serious risk of being thrown out onto the streets.  Teachers, policemen, etc.

4) Poor America.  Homeless, on welfare, etc.  Can't afford the necessities.

Group one doesn't exist. Everybody (except for maybe the Buddhists) wants more than they have.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

So, the Dems could nominate either Hillary The Witch, Loser Gore, Loser Kerry...or Barack Hussein Obama!  LOL! 

As Peggy Noonan wrote the day after Bush's reelection: "I do not know what the Democratic Party spent, in toto, on the 2004 election, but what they seem to have gotten for it is Barack Obama.  Let us savor."

http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/?id=110005844

[elcorazon]

what a hack.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

what a hack.

Yeah, the witch comment went too far, so allow me to restate:

So, the Dems could nominate either Pantsuit Hillary Clinton, Loser TreeHugger Gore, Loser SwiftShifter Kerry...or Barack Hussein Obama! 
 ROFL!

 

[elcorazon]

I meant noonan, but it could certainly have applied to you as well.

[Boris]

what a hack.

Yeah, the witch comment went too far, so allow me to restate:

So, the Dems could nominate either Pantsuit Hillary Clinton, Loser TreeHugger Gore, Loser SwiftShifter Kerry...or Barack Hussein Obama! 
 ROFL!

Your raw wit and penetrating humor serves as an inspiration to us all. Thank you for your services.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Yeah, the witch comment went too far, so allow me to restate:

So, the Dems could nominate either Pantsuit Hillary Clinton, Loser TreeHugger Gore, Loser SwiftShifter Kerry...or Barack Hussein Obama! 
 ROFL!

Your raw wit and penetrating humor serves as an inspiration to us all. Thank you for your services.

I know it is hard for Dems to find humor in losing, but lose you will if you nominate any of these four.

Obama:
Barack is an Arab name.  Hussein is an Arab name.  I don't know the origin of the name Obama.  Do you think any Southern state would vote for someone named Barack?  Do you think the Jewish vote is going to go heavily to someone named Hussein?  What about the Catholic vote now that the Pope is on the Muslim hit list?  Do you think Obama is not going to be hurt from homegrown terrorism from black Muslims?  He would get KILLED in Ohio and Florida against almost any GOP potential nominee.

Kerry and Gore:
Remember, in 2000 and 2004, you Dems lost to someone who couldn’t formulate a coherent sentence.  And now you think the two losers from 2000 and 2004, Gore and Kerry, have a chance against an articulate GOP nominee in 2008?

Hillary:
The best GOP attack ad is a 30 second commercial of Hillary’s face.  Even her husband can’t stand her.  LOL!

[elcorazon]

your contempt for the voter knows no bounds. You think Jews are so dumb they won't vote for Obama because his name is derived from Arabic?

He's NOT a muslim.  People LIKE him.  Illinois is actually not all that liberal a state, even the Democrats, and he dominated in the primary even, even downstate, which is basically like Indiana.  The guy is appealing.  He may not win, but to dismiss him based merely on his name, is truly ignorant.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

your contempt for the voter knows no bounds. You think Jews are so dumb they won't vote for Obama because his name is derived from Arabic?

He's NOT a muslim.  People LIKE him.  Illinois is actually not all that liberal a state, even the Democrats, and he dominated in the primary even, even downstate, which is basically like Indiana.  The guy is appealing.  He may not win, but to dismiss him based merely on his name, is truly ignorant.

I didn't dismiss him on name only.  I could have mentioned he is also a Dem, a party that has won only 3 of the last 10 presidential races.  And I never said he was a Muslim; if he were, you and I wouldn't be having this conversation.

But don't let me dissuade you...please nominate him!

[elcorazon]

your contempt for the voter knows no bounds. You think Jews are so dumb they won't vote for Obama because his name is derived from Arabic?

He's NOT a muslim.  People LIKE him.  Illinois is actually not all that liberal a state, even the Democrats, and he dominated in the primary even, even downstate, which is basically like Indiana.  The guy is appealing.  He may not win, but to dismiss him based merely on his name, is truly ignorant.

I didn't dismiss him on name only.  I could have mentioned he is also a Dem, a party that has won only 3 of the last 10 presidential races.  And I never said he was a Muslim; if he were, you and I wouldn't be having this conversation.

But don't let me dissuade you...please nominate him!

well, I'm pretty sure anyone nominated by the Democratic Party will be a dem, and based on your keen math skills will be subject to the 3 in 10 chance you seem to ascribe to them.

No you never said he was a muslim, just that Jews won't vote for someone named Hussein, and southerners won't vote for someone named Barack.

As much as I have my issues with the American voter, I don't believe they are that stupid.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

No you never said he was a muslim, just that Jews won't vote for someone named Hussein, and southerners won't vote for someone named Barack.

As much as I have my issues with the American voter, I don't believe they are that stupid.

Well, the Dems think they are that stupid.  That's why they used the Christian term "New Covenant" during the 2004 convention.  They thought they could win Christian votes by adopting Christian terms.  But the strategy didn't work because actions speak louder than words.

I am simply pointing out that having a black Muslim name, coupled with being a Dem of African origin, is NOT a good receipe for victory in a nation wide election in 2008.

And if you want to improve upon your party's .300 record since becoming soft on national defense, then it would be wise to pick someone outside of the four horsemen of Hillary, Gore, Kerry and Obama.

Every time since 1968 that national security has been a front-burner issue ('68,'72,'80,'04), your side has lost.  And I don't see peace coming anytime soon.

[elcorazon]

There's a difference between using language that might help the public perceive you in a more favorable light (all politicians do this all the time, as do advertisers, etc.), and saying that a person's name makes him unelectable.  And, yes, even adding the other factors you mention, doesn't really change your point.

Ultimately, and I may be alone in thinking this, but I think Obama's race may very well help him as much as it hurts him.  I suspect he'll get out the black vote fairly well, and many who will run from him for the reasons you cite weren't likely Dem voters anyway.

Not sure what any of this has to do with softness on national defense, nor how accurate your theory is about these elections, but I will say this, the Republicans have certainly been more successful than the dems in presidential elections since 1968.  Maybe the country doesn't like dems; that might be true.  Not sure which Dem you think is more electable, but I think Obama's underrated in terms of his electability.

[AuH2O]

The press loves Obama because he is the embodiment of their dreams... mixed racially, culturally, politically leftist but inclined to disguise it with lots of moderate-speak.

Obama does possess above-average intelligence and speaking ability. He is highly ambitious but his overall credentials are so weak right now that you wonder if he really plans on running in 2008.

[elcorazon]

The press loves Obama because he is the embodiment of their dreams... mixed racially, culturally, politically leftist but inclined to disguise it with lots of moderate-speak.

Obama does possess above-average intelligence and speaking ability. He is highly ambitious but his overall credentials are so weak right now that you wonder if he really plans on running in 2008.

The press loves Obama because he has a pulse. The press loves Obama because he's got charisma.  The press loves Obama because people who listen to him speak are moved by him.

The press is following the story, that's all.

Obama's resume is razor thin, but really is it any thinner than W's was?  or Kennedy's or Clinton's really.  The bottom line is appealing to the voters.  Most of that is charisma, charm, etc.  Intelligence helps (although isn't required); it also helps to have themes people can relate to, but most people don't want long winded treatises on specific policies, just a feeling that the guy knows what he's doing and his heart is in the right place.

[Boris]

Your analysis is complete sh**t. You really have no idea what you're talking about.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Okay, this is complete crap. People won't vote against him based upon his name. C'mon. That's easily one of the dumbest things I've ever read. If people do vote against him in 2008, it will be because he has absolutely no experience. And how much of the public will actually know his middle name? Or even care? Do you really believe that the American people will go, "OMG his middle is Hussein! HE MUST BE A TERRORIST! HAUL HIM OFF TO GITMO!!P!1"

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Another completely invalid anaylsis. "Because they couldn't formulate a coherent sentence" is not the reason why Al Gore and John Kerry lost. Why? Because look at who their opponent was. George W. Bush is pretty much the antithesis of coherency. The reason why Gore lost was pretty much bad luck, and the reason why Kerry lost was because the GOP GOTV pretty much owned him. If the GOP GOTV is weak in 2008, which it may be if the anti-Republican fervor across the country continues,  Al Gore could easily win.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Okay, this I won't argue with. Hillary is her own worst enemy. If she is nominated, I don't expect her to win the election.

[AuH2O]

The press loves Obama because he is the embodiment of their dreams... mixed racially, culturally, politically leftist but inclined to disguise it with lots of moderate-speak.

Obama does possess above-average intelligence and speaking ability. He is highly ambitious but his overall credentials are so weak right now that you wonder if he really plans on running in 2008.

The press loves Obama because he has a pulse. The press loves Obama because he's got charisma.  The press loves Obama because people who listen to him speak are moved by him.

The press is following the story, that's all.

Obama's resume is razor thin, but really is it any thinner than W's was?  or Kennedy's or Clinton's really.  The bottom line is appealing to the voters.  Most of that is charisma, charm, etc.  Intelligence helps (although isn't required); it also helps to have themes people can relate to, but most people don't want long winded treatises on specific policies, just a feeling that the guy knows what he's doing and his heart is in the right place.

Yeah, his resume is a lot thinner than those guys.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Another completely invalid anaylsis. "Because they couldn't formulate a coherent sentence" is not the reason why Al Gore and John Kerry lost. Why? Because look at who their opponent was. George W. Bush is pretty much the antithesis of coherency.

you should reread my statement and your response

[Boris]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Another completely invalid anaylsis. "Because they couldn't formulate a coherent sentence" is not the reason why Al Gore and John Kerry lost. Why? Because look at who their opponent was. George W. Bush is pretty much the antithesis of coherency.

you should reread my statement and your response

My apologies. I'm a moron. Then yeah, you're right. My bad.

[elcorazon]

The press loves Obama because he is the embodiment of their dreams... mixed racially, culturally, politically leftist but inclined to disguise it with lots of moderate-speak.

Obama does possess above-average intelligence and speaking ability. He is highly ambitious but his overall credentials are so weak right now that you wonder if he really plans on running in 2008.

The press loves Obama because he has a pulse. The press loves Obama because he's got charisma.  The press loves Obama because people who listen to him speak are moved by him.

The press is following the story, that's all.

Obama's resume is razor thin, but really is it any thinner than W's was?  or Kennedy's or Clinton's really.  The bottom line is appealing to the voters.  Most of that is charisma, charm, etc.  Intelligence helps (although isn't required); it also helps to have themes people can relate to, but most people don't want long winded treatises on specific policies, just a feeling that the guy knows what he's doing and his heart is in the right place.

Yeah, his resume is a lot thinner than those guys.

W had been a professional partier, owned the Rangers, then inexplicably found himself to be the low-impact governor of Texas.  Never had an iota of foreign policy experience at all.  At least Obama has had to move up the ranks in politics, rather than being annointed by his daddy's cronies.

[AuH2O]

Bush was considered an underdog against Ann Richards. He wasn't "anointed" so much as Bud Selig was dragging his feet with regard to his plans, so Bush decided to run for Gov. Being a Governor is much, much more similar to the Presidency than being a legislator. Voters have strongly expressed that sentiment for decades.

The Bush family's plan was for Jeb to win in '94 and then run for President in 2000. His loss, and W's win, changed that formula. But it's factually wrong to claim W was the heir apparent all along.

[Michael Z]

Bush was considered an underdog against Ann Richards. He wasn't "anointed" so much as Bud Selig was dragging his feet with regard to his plans, so Bush decided to run for Gov. Being a Governor is much, much more similar to the Presidency than being a legislator. Voters have strongly expressed that sentiment for decades.

The Bush family's plan was for Jeb to win in '94 and then run for President in 2000. His loss, and W's win, changed that formula. But it's factually wrong to claim W was the heir apparent all along.

That's true, for a long time it was actually Jeb who was seen as the heir apparent. Wasn't George W. more or less the dark sheep, vis-a-vis his drinking and partying, at least during the 80s?