Email This to a Friend
Obama on Cruise Control
When you are running against as formidable a character as John McCain, you've got to roll up your sleeves and step it up. Even with the nomination clinched, Obama still has a lot to prove, and he can't afford to relax.
Barack Obama passed another key threshold Tuesday. He has now won an absolute majority of the delegates earned in the primary and caucus season. With two weeks to go in this marathon Democratic race, he has bested the strongest brand in the Democratic Party — the Clintons — and an impressive field of, frankly, more experienced figures.
In the process, Obama, thanks both to a network of elite fundraisers drawn to his cause and, more importantly, an unprecedented Internet fundraising operation, has shattered all presidential primary fundraising records. He has raised three times as much money as the presumptive Republican nominee, America’s most famous Vietnam War hero, the estimable John McCain, who is a quarter century older than the tyro senator from Illinois.
On Tuesday night, Obama won big in Oregon, the largest state left in the Democratic contest. And he lost bigger in Kentucky, where Hillary and Bill Clinton essentially camped out for much of the past week.
Obama’s victory in Oregon, 58% to 41%, is impressive. I know the state well. In some ways, it is a second home state for me, given my late war hero dad’s wanderlust ways. Lots of small town folks there, nearly all of them white. Most don’t drink white wine. It’s much more of a beer state. Yet I knew Obama would do well there, given his post-partisan change framing and environmental rhetoric, which plays in nicely to the the classic Beaver State: “Don’t Californicate Oregon.”
Obama did surprise me when he drew a record 75,000 to his Sunday rally in Portland. God only knows how many he will draw to general election rallies, when the Dems are again united.
But Obama, in my view, made a mistake in not campaigning at all in Kentucky. While Hillary Clinton, a very strong candidate — let’s recall that, for all her campaign’s whining today about the media, she was “inevitable” to all but a few of us in the press virtually all of last year — was always going to win the Bluegrass State, she didn’t have to win it 65% to 30%.
Demographics, and branding, are proving to be destiny in the hard-fought Democratic race. Kentucky, like West Virginia, is heavily white and among the lowest ranked in America in college education, both bad indicators for Obama.
And the Clintons, no matter what they may tell themselves, and fitfully issue forth through their increasingly skeptical advisors, are on a glide path. No more attacks on Obama.
But while they are on a glide path, Obama is on a sort of cruise control.
And cruise control, in the end, does not win elections. Not when you are running against so likable and formidable a character as John McCain.
Obama should have gone into Kentucky, even though he doesn’t need to win it to beat McCain, and started addressing some obvious concerns about him. Namely, that he is too aloof, too elite, etc.
Roll up his sleeves, roll into diners, roll with folks who are unlikely to vote for him but do need to respect him if he is to be the president.
He didn’t do that.
And that was a mistake.
Obama and Chicago, as his high command is known, are betting on big dynamics in this election. They have been right as they have inexorably defeated what was supposed to be the most awesome national Democratic political machine in history, the Clintons.
The wind is certainly at their back as Democrats in what should be a bad year for Republicans. But Obama still has a lot to prove. And he didn’t go out of his way to prove it in the past week.
 |
 |
 |
Podcasts |  PJM Home |
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
24 Comments
1. Obama on Cruise Control | Cruises:[...] Jim Rentz wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerpt [...]
May 21, 2008 - 10:53 am 2. politicalreacharound:Agreed. Obama can’t let up and needs to convince undecided GE voters why they should vote for him as well as reaching out to make sure Hillary supporters don’t stay home. That being said, I am not sure where the author gets the idea of McCain being this formidable juggernaut. He has serious credibility issues (for undecideds and even many republicans) especially with women and minorities. He is a supporter of an unpopular war, a Bush backer, clueless about economics and his age is a legitimate concern as well. I would go as far as saying that he is overall a weaker candidate in the GE than he would have been in 2000. In conclusion while Obama should and will step his game up heading towards November, it is even more imperative that John McCain do the same because he is the one who trails in capturing the imagination of voters and the eye of the media.(BTW- why does Obama’s name still trigger spell checker on PJM but Romney doesn’t?)
May 21, 2008 - 12:02 pm 3. Ed Wallis:“Barack Obama passed another key threshold Tuesday. He has now won an absolute majority of the delegates earned in the primary and caucus season.”
So what. The Obamboozler has (roughly) 1600+ and Hillary has 1500+. 2029 is required to become the Democratic candidate. That’s why the DNC created “superdelegates”: to show Americans how little Democrats actually value the (small “r”) republican voting system.
“Demographics, and branding, are proving to be destiny in the hard-fought Democratic race. Kentucky, like West Virginia, is heavily white and among the lowest ranked in America in college education, both bad indicators for Obama.”
Thanks for being so open about your racist demagoguery. LOOK AT IT THIS WAY, PICK ONE: Obama’s “bitter guns ‘n religion” speech insulted more a) Oregon Democratic ideologues, or b) Kentucky Democratic voters.
“But while they (Clintons) are on a glide path, Obama is on a sort of cruise control.”
Call it “The Audacity of Hubris.” The Obamboozler simply behaves as he truly is. But PLEASE!…do suggest/recommend that he – err – change; it can only make him offer up the campaign performance equivalent of his bowling score. A charlatan can only conceal so much.
May 21, 2008 - 12:04 pm 4. New West Notes » No Muss, No Fuss — Not So Good:[...] You can see the whole thing on PJ Media. [...]
May 21, 2008 - 12:10 pm 5. Larry J:He has serious credibility issues (for undecideds and even many republicans) especially with women and minorities. He is a supporter of an unpopular war, a Bush backer, clueless about economics and his age is a legitimate concern as well.
Given what Obama has said about raising taxes, he’s far more clueless on economics than McCain. I see Obama’s youth and gross inexperience as legitimate concerns as well. What private sector experience does he have? What executive experience does he have? Other than some time in the Illinois legislature and very few years in the Senate (with virtually no accomplishments to his hame), he has almost no experience at anything.
May 21, 2008 - 1:11 pm 6. Teri Pittman:He didn’t win in the small towns. He won in the I-5 corridor. Oregon has been filling up with people from a lot of states, primarily California and has changed considerably since the 70s when we first moved in. And that large crowd? No one seems to be talking about the band that opened for him, a band that has been able to draw 10-20,000 people on their own. Couple that with a rare sunny day and just about anyone could draw a large crowd in Portland.
Obama campaigned in Oregon because he is comfortable with the folks in those cities. He did not campaign in Kentucky for the same reason he avoided West Virginia. He’s not comfortable with those voters and as pretty much indicated that he despises them. They are returning the love.
May 21, 2008 - 1:48 pm 7. Bill Bradley:Sorry. You waste time by being so wildly inaccurate. Obama is 62 delegates away from the nomination.
>Ed Wallis:
“Barack Obama passed another key threshold Tuesday. He has now won an absolute majority of the delegates earned in the primary and caucus season.”
So what. The Obamboozler has (roughly) 1600+ and Hillary has 1500+. 2029 is required to become the Democratic candidate. That’s why the DNC created “superdelegates”: to show Americans how little Democrats actually value the (small “r”) republican voting system.
May 21, 2008 - 7:01 pm 8. Bill Bradley:He doesn’t have to win in all the small towns. He did win the white vote and the working class vote in Oregon. It was a landslide.
You’re kidding yourself about how “easy” it is to draw 75,000 to a rally.
I mean, really now, it’s pretty amusing …
>Teri Pittman:
He didn’t win in the small towns. He won in the I-5 corridor. Oregon has been filling up with people from a lot of states, primarily California and has changed considerably since the 70s when we first moved in. And that large crowd? No one seems to be talking about the band that opened for him, a band that has been able to draw 10-20,000 people on their own. Couple that with a rare sunny day and just about anyone could draw a large crowd in Portland.
Obama campaigned in Oregon because he is comfortable with the folks in those cities. He did not campaign in Kentucky for the same reason he avoided West Virginia. He’s not comfortable with those voters and as pretty much indicated that he despises them. They are returning the love.
May 21, 2008 - 7:04 pm 9. Bill Bradley:May 21, 2008 – 1:48 pm
He’s the only Republican who can win and has an unmatched personal story. I do agree that the McCain of 2000 would be a stronger candidate this year.
>politicalreacharound:
Agreed. Obama can’t let up and needs to convince undecided GE voters why they should vote for him as well as reaching out to make sure Hillary supporters don’t stay home. That being said, I am not sure where the author gets the idea of McCain being this formidable juggernaut. He has serious credibility issues (for undecideds and even many republicans) especially with women and minorities. He is a supporter of an unpopular war, a Bush backer, clueless about economics and his age is a legitimate concern as well. I would go as far as saying that he is overall a weaker candidate in the GE than he would have been in 2000.
May 21, 2008 - 7:05 pm 10. Bill Bradley:Good Lord. What non-serious …
>“Demographics, and branding, are proving to be destiny in the hard-fought Democratic race. Kentucky, like West Virginia, is heavily white and among the lowest ranked in America in college education, both bad indicators for Obama.”
Thanks for being so open about your racist demagoguery. LOOK AT IT THIS WAY, PICK ONE: Obama’s “bitter guns ‘n religion” speech insulted more a) Oregon Democratic ideologues, or b) Kentucky Democratic voters.
May 21, 2008 - 7:06 pm 11. Bill Bradley:Incidentally, Obama didn’t win the California primary.
Clinton won the California primary.
Saying some people from California have moved to Oregon isn’t an excuse for Obama winning Oregon by 17 points.
>Teri Pittman:
Oregon has been filling up with people from a lot of states, primarily California and has changed considerably since the 70s when we first moved in.
May 21, 2008 - 7:26 pm 12. Ed Wallis:DELEGATES – Bwill Bwadley; I do NOT include SUPERdelegates in my count. Please learn to read and count.
May 22, 2008 - 2:33 am 13. Ed Wallis:I think YOU were referring to this: “Obama had a total of 1,963 delegates, including endorsements from party and elected officials known as superdelegates. Clinton had 1,778 delegates, according to the latest tally by the AP.
May 22, 2008 - 2:46 am 14. John Samford:17 points is a solid win, but not a landslide. Over 30 is a landslide.
No, Ohhh…..BAMA is toast. The nomination will go to the convention, where Billery will get enough delegates to keep Ohhh….BAMA from closing the deal on the first round. After that they will peel off enough delegates to win the nomination in the later rounds.
This is a good thing. Billery is no prize, but at least they aren’t stupid enough to think that people who have NEVER kept their side of a bargin are going to change and start keeping their word in negotiations.
Meanwhile, I don’t understand the Obamanics. How do they expect him to talk religious fanatics out of doing what God (Allah) has told them to do when he can’t even talk one middle aged woman into taking a summer vacation?
Of course, talking Shrillery into a summer vacation and the Mad Dog Mullahs into switching religions would be much easier then talking American voters into turning the USA into a third world country, which is what Ohhh…..BAMA has planned.
What did Dukikis get, 17 EV’s? I doubt that Ohhhh….BAMA will do that well. What is important is I doubt that the super delegates will see him doing much better.
I asked before where you expect Ohhhh…BAMA to get his EV’s and you had no answer. That, of course, was an answer.
IL., MA., WA. and DC.
http://www.electoral-vote.com/
That map is somewhat delusional.
CA, with it’s 55 EV’s and heavy Hispanic turnout will vote McCain. What does Ohhhh…..BAMA poll among Hispanics 20%? 10%? CA is about 40% Hispamic, so Big Mac starts with a 30 point lead plus the Governator in CA.
PA and NY are wrong on the map also.
Polling is one thing, an actual election is another.
While I think that the Democrats might heal their wounds by November if there was a hard-core conservative running, when the Republican candidate is really a Democrat in Republican colors, as McCain is, the Jilted Democrats will most likely stay home or vote for Big Mac (30% by exit polling).
Are you familiar with the expression, ‘Hell hath no fury’? I’m sure enough super delegates are to keep Ohhhh….BAMA at home this fall.
May 22, 2008 - 5:56 pm 15. John Samford:Then the question becomes ‘can Billery pick up money and votes from the Obamanics?’
“He is a supporter of an unpopular war, a Bush backer,” Party line talking points, none of which matter or are true.
ALL wars are unpopular. Every single one of them. That isn’t the question.
The question is ‘Is the war necessary’? The answer to that depends on if you think terrorists killing American in wholesale lots is OK or not.
Most Americans don’t.
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/05/terrorist-attacks-decline-40-during.html
Meanwhile it looks like this administration’s strategy of using Iraq as a killing ground to thin out the terrorist’s ranks is working quite well thank you.
May 22, 2008 - 6:13 pm 16. Bill Bradley:Iraq is NOT A WAR. Iraq is a campaign in a war, one that is almost won and will be 90% finished by November of this year. Iraq will elect a new government in October, which will end the ‘one man, one vote, one time’ argument that Iraq isn’t a democracy. It will also make the cut and run crowd nervous, since they have all come out at one time or another and claimed victory was impossible, which demonstrates a lack of knowledge that is downright scary. The voters will be asked if they really want someone that foolish representing them.
BTW, there are hours of soundbites of McCain fighting PRESIDENT Bush tooth and nail that give the lie to that ‘Bush backer’ stuff. Let the Demonrats try that. It reminds me of Brer Rabbit and the Briar Patch.
Nobody cares about YOUR count, my hyperpartisan whatever …
>Ed Wallis:
DELEGATES – Bwill Bwadley; I do NOT include SUPERdelegates in my count. Please learn to read and count.
May 22, 2008 – 2:33 am
May 23, 2008 - 12:42 pm 17. Bill Bradley:Sorry, you are totally wrong.
These sorts of inaccurate posts waste time for readers and myself.
>John Samford:
May 23, 2008 - 12:43 pm 18. Bill Bradley:17 points is a solid win, but not a landslide. Over 30 is a landslide.
Well, my friend, I was part of one unpopular war. My dad was part of a popular war.
You might want to read some history. All of which begain prior to 9/11.
>John Samford:
“He is a supporter of an unpopular war, a Bush backer,” Party line talking points, none of which matter or are true.
ALL wars are unpopular. Every single one of them.
May 23, 2008 - 12:45 pm 19. Bill Bradley:Totally wrong.
Obama leads McCain by 17 points in California.
>That map is somewhat delusional.
May 23, 2008 - 12:47 pm 20. John Samford:CA, with it’s 55 EV’s and heavy Hispanic turnout will vote McCain. What does Ohhhh…..BAMA poll among Hispanics 20%? 10%? CA is about 40% Hispamic, so Big Mac starts with a 30 point lead plus the Governator in CA.
“Nobody cares about YOUR count, my hyperpartisan whatever …”
It is just as valid as any other count. Remember NOBODY has ANY delegates yet. NO delegates have been ’seated’ by the RBC.
Mr. Bradley, do you have the slightest clue as to what happens during the Democratic nomination process?
Here is the rule book. Educate yourself;
http://www.democrats.org/pdfs/charter.pdf
There it is, the complete rule book in a pdf. format. Read it and weep. You will find that I’m not making this up as I go along. I leave that to Ohhhh….BAMA.
I would bet that less then 10% of democrats know what is in that Rule and Bylaws manual.
“Section 10. The Democratic Party shall not require a delegate to a Party convention or caucus to cast a vote contrary to his or her expressed preference”
“Section 3. Delegates to the National Convention shall be allocated in the Call to the Convention
consistent with the Charter.” (aka, seated)
The section on challenges is to long to cut and paste here. Technically, there are no delegates until the call to convention. That act creates the delegates, some of which are ‘pledged’ some of which are not (super).
The current trend in nice neat Conventions is a product of Television and TV producer’s anal-retentiveness. The producers want everything to run smooth so they can stay in control. It wasn’t always like that;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election%2C_1932
FDR’s first term was the result of a brokered convention.
May 23, 2008 - 2:23 pm 21. Ed Wallis:we will see a LOT more of them in the future.
That is because the internet has relaxed the grip of the MSM on the convention and the ratings from the ‘08 democratic convention will be thru the roof. They will make O.J. and his Bronco look like Hockey re-runs.
As a conservative, I’m more concerned about the bounce the Donks will get from having 75% of the planet Earth watching the convention then any actions on the part of 3 mediocre candidates.
Modern communications mean anyone on this planet can watch. Most of them will be interested.
When POTUS farts, people in Lusaka know what he had for lunch. There are a lot of net savy 3rd worlders that feel they should have a say in who the American President is. I tell them, ‘get in line’.
“Mr. Samford,” thank you for the additional, useful information. To offer such to this author, however, is throwing pearls before swine – one wearing an Obama cheerleader outfit. That’s why I don’t even bother responding to the childish “YOUR count” tantrums. But your helpful thoughts will enlighten other readers here.
May 24, 2008 - 3:59 am 22. dan:it is my impression that obama has won several very close races, and lost nearly every major large state; this must be attriubted, ultimately, to the fact that he scores between 80% – 92% of the black vote every time. this is surely enough to tip the balance in many contests. it also my impression that obama has won several victories on the basis of the caucus structure, which his campaign wisely focused on – but caucuses are not primaries, and not general elections. it is also my impression that, despite the much-increased turnouts this primary season, there is still a much, much larger number of people who haven’t voted yet and don’t really seem to care about this stuff. and then there are those persistent polls that show a large percentage of hillary voters plan to vote mccain in the general election. while at first those might have been taken with a grain of salt, their repetition increasingly suggests that they indicate exactly what they seem to suggest.
these facts augur poorly for obama and democratic fortunes in general. of course, they are counterbalanced by obama’s personal charisma, and his often pragmatic leftism, and his dovish foreign policy certainly resonates with a very large number of voters. but it is my impression that obama faces weaknesses that have a reasonable chance of subjecting him to a rather large defeat.
be that as it may, it could be a close race, and of course obama could win. i do think the length of the democratic race – though not the supposed vitriol, which i personally find mild to non-existent – has hurt the dems’ chances vs. mccain because mccain will likely be able to slip obama’s charge of “bush 2.0″ by a simple and powerful appeal to pragmatism: we are in iraq now, we are in afghanistan now, there surely is a conspiracy of militant jihadis and certain governments to undermine the international system and attack us and europe, any withdraw now, even if clearly forced by domestic politics, will be, without question, perceived as a world-historical victory for these antagonists by all the wrong people. to do so would simply be irresponsible stewardship of the national interests and by extension of the international system, which relies as decisively on american strength as it does on american fairness. all this is quite obvious, in my opinion, and most of the ardent bush-haters that i know are not blind to these facts, as long as presents them gently enough. mccain seems capable of doing so. and this foreign policy disagreement is the clearest divide between the candidates.
however much it is possible that obama will win, i believe he will lose, for the same reasons bush won in 2004.
May 24, 2008 - 8:28 am 23. Ed Wallis:“dan”: interesting thoughts! But, is it not also possible that there is a “clinton 2.0″ factor on the Democrat’s side…naturally with Hillary…but also with The Great Socialist Obambooozler?! I see too many alignments – hopefully too many – to be overseen by the Republicans in the general election.
May 24, 2008 - 3:57 pm 24. John Samford:The polls are up, the polls are down, why am I not surprised by that?
May 25, 2008 - 9:08 amThe General election will turn on Ohhh……BAMA being able to recapture Billery voters. I don’t think he will. McCain is closer to Clinton then Ohhhh……BAMA is. Less of a jump there.
Democratic party flacks just see the labels and go no farther. Voters think otherwise, which is why the exit polls look so bad for Ohhhhhh…..BAMA.
If Big Mac wins all the States billery won, then it will be a landslide.
You might even hear the Mandate word bandied about.
Speaking of words, anybody heard “Quagmire” lately? I haven’t heard it since Ohhhh….BAMA’s campaign got stuck 10 meters from the finish line.
I wonder why? NOT!