New at Reason

January 7, 2008

Steve Chapman says authenticity was the real winner in Iowa last week.

Comments

|1.7.08 @ 10:35AM|#

"Obama has succeeded by preaching our essential unity"

Yes while in reality slandering his opponents and offering nothing beyond warmed over liberal conventional wisdom. Other than "Jesus is my co-pilot Huckabee", I don't think there is a bigger fake in the race than Obama.

|1.7.08 @ 10:44AM|#

It never ceases to amaze me how quickly and dependably Republican true believers come to see whichever Democrat is winning the nomination as the absolute worst candidate in the race.

Yes, in a race with Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, and Joe Biden, it is clearly Barack Obama who stands out as the biggest fake.

|1.7.08 @ 10:44AM|#

Obama's not a fake, because to be a fake you have to be a false something. I can't some up with anything that he actually represents, falsely or otherwise. Except HOPE. And AUDACITY. Yeah, that's it.

|1.7.08 @ 10:45AM|#

Back in 03, the National Review bloggers wrote about an "Anyone But Kerry" movement.

It very quickly became "Anyone But Kerry Except Dean."

You can set your watch by it.

Gilbert Martin|1.7.08 @ 10:45AM|#

Yeah, I'm still waiting for any brilliantly different insights from Obama. The "change" candidate has nothing other than the same old socialist, collectivist, ideas that the Democrat party has been preaching for the last 70 years.

|1.7.08 @ 10:49AM|#

I'm sorry that providing health insurance to poor people doesn't satisfy your urge for novelty.

Nonetheless, it would represent a major change in the lives of millions of people.

Elemenope|1.7.08 @ 10:51AM|#

joe,

You are absolutely right, and it is a part of the human psyche I have never understood. It must be about psyching oneself up for the inevitable moment where you have to vote against someone from amongst the lesser of two evils; it probably helps a great deal if you hate the guy.

Nor is Obama's policy platform particularly vague...he just doesn't get all policy wonky in stump speeches (which is, IMO, smart); he is quite detailed in his books and position papers on his priorities and likely policy prescriptions.

I also thought the comment in the article about Edwards somehow creating (rather than merely exploiting) class difference was awfully silly.

Elemenope|1.7.08 @ 10:53AM|#

Also, a transparent and accessible (and, *gasp* accountable) Federal government (online) would be a huge practical change...riding on ideas that Obama has put forward and pretty much nobody else.

Gilbert Martin|1.7.08 @ 10:53AM|#

"I'm sorry that providing health insurance to poor people doesn't satisfy your urge for novelty.

Nonetheless, it would represent a major change in the lives of millions of people."

Very funny.

The liberal Democrats have been squealing about socialized medicince for years.

There is nothing new or different about Obama sqealing about it than any of the rest of them squealing about it.

|1.7.08 @ 10:54AM|#

Democrats, on the other hand, liked John McCain much more than George Bush even back when McCain was winning.

|1.7.08 @ 10:57AM|#

I believe Edwards would win the 'Phony of the Decade' award.

I will never vote for Obama, but he does come across as a genuinly honest, likeable guy who is trying to earn your vote.

Hillary comes across as cold, calculating and as someone who deserves to be president.

lunchstealer|1.7.08 @ 10:58AM|#

I dunno. A big differentiator for Obama for me was that he was on record as against invading Iraq before we invaded Iraq. That at least differentiates him from Hillary.

Paul|1.7.08 @ 10:58AM|#

Democrats, on the other hand, liked John McCain much more than George Bush even back when McCain was winning.

Perhaps because they thought they could beat him?

I dunno, joe, you might be right, but it's pretty normal for the frontrunner to become the biggest target.

Ever play the pool game "cutthroat"? The guy who's winning is always under concentrated attack from the losers.

Paul|1.7.08 @ 10:59AM|#

That at least differentiates him from Hillary.

Yeah, that and he doesn't consider your children "his" children, if you know what I mean.

|1.7.08 @ 11:01AM|#

The American president is a figurehead. The American people do not want John Galt, or Ron Paul, or the smartest kid in the class. Historically, great men becoming president is more an exception than the norm. I would go so far as to say, anyone who had the support of a majority of H&R posters would have NO chance to become president... or even Mayor of a mid-sized city.

The American people do not want policy papers. They want charisma. They want presence. They want a person that for every nonrational reason imaginable, they trust and admire and just plain like. The presidential election is little more than nation's choice from prom king.

Gilbert Martin|1.7.08 @ 11:01AM|#

"I will never vote for Obama, but he does come across as a genuinly honest, likeable guy who is trying to earn your vote."

Well he's certainly more likeable that Edwards or Hillary. But that's not a very high hurdle to jump.

|1.7.08 @ 11:04AM|#

Paul,

I get the "cutthroat" idea. That's exactly what we're seeing in, for example, John's comment.

But you ask Perhaps because they thought they could beat him? As a Democrat, let me assure you, the dimwit from Texas was absolutely NOT seen as a bigger threat than the media-darling who could think on his feet and had a heroic military record.

|1.7.08 @ 11:09AM|#

Yeah, that and he doesn't consider your children "his" children, if you know what I mean


dont ax me, I aint da baby daddy

Bingo|1.7.08 @ 11:11AM|#

An Obama transparent federal government could end up being a big boon to future libertarian leaning candidates.

Anon|1.7.08 @ 11:13AM|#

I miss the days when joe would defend Hilary not matter what.

|1.7.08 @ 11:15AM|#

Well, dreams are always more pleasant than reality.

I miss the days when I was tagging the hottest girls on campus. That didn't actually happen, either.

lunchstealer|1.7.08 @ 11:21AM|#

I miss the days when I was tagging the hottest girls on campus. That didn't actually happen, either.

What? That was every recess for my entire fourth grade year!

Oh. tagging. Yeah, that never happened for me either.

|1.7.08 @ 11:24AM|#

Obama reminds me of the unlamented leader of Quebec's separatist Parti quebecois, Andre Boisclair. A few years ago Boisclair was chosen over Pauline Marois for the party leadership.

Never mind that Ms. Marois had ten times the experience in government that Mr. Boisclair had. Boisclair was Young--a Fresh Face, don'tcha know!--and he looked Good On TV. He was even a Minority (of a sort--he's openly gay.) The new face of the new, improved PQ! Pauline? She'd been around 30 years. Ugly, old and in the way.

Of course, Boisclair soon proved he was an empty suit with no new ideas and a complete lack of judgement. In the actual election campaign the PQ was reduced to third-party status, losing official opposition status to the right-wing populist Action democratique du Quebec. Boisclair soon resigned and Marois was appointed to the PQ leadership by acclamation.

Hillary will be back--she'll be the 2012 Democratic candidate for President, running to unseat incumbent President Mike Huckabee.

God help us all.

Rhywun|1.7.08 @ 11:28AM|#

The American people do not want policy papers. They want charisma.

I totally agree. That's why it'll be Huck v. Obama. Those are the only two with any charisma that I can see. Obama will squeak by with the usual 45-50% only because it's the Democrats' turn now.

|1.7.08 @ 11:50AM|#

Bill Clinton said he's not surprised at Huckabee's rise because "He's the only (Repubican candidate) who can give a speech or tell a joke."

Well, damn. I guess he's right.

Edward|1.7.08 @ 12:09PM|#

The best thing about this piece is the absence of a genuflection to Saint Ron Paul, The Insignificant.

|1.7.08 @ 12:14PM|#

I'm sorry that providing health insurance to poor people doesn't satisfy your urge for novelty.

Nonetheless, it would represent a major change in the lives of millions of people.

I completely agree with you on that last part, joe. Socialized medicine / single-payer would indeed represent a major change in the lives of millions of people.

|1.7.08 @ 12:25PM|#

Obama hasn't proposed single payer, nevermind socializing medicine.

Gilbert Martin|1.7.08 @ 12:33PM|#

Hah!

ANY government mandate of any type regarding healthcare counts as socialized medicine.

We already have socialized medicine with Medicare and Medicaid, as well as federal laws preventing Hospitals from refusing to treat people in emergency rooms for lack of ability to pay (unconstitutional laws, by the way). All of it counts as socialized medicine.

Obama and the other two Dem canditates want to make it significantly more socialized than it already is.

|1.7.08 @ 12:44PM|#

Huckabee is going to get hurt in the primary fight. He's also going to have to face front runner heat without melting. He could be a flavor of the month.

|1.7.08 @ 12:49PM|#

"Huckabee is going to get hurt in the primary fight. He's also going to have to face front runner heat without melting. He could be a flavor of the month."

I hope so. He has one advantage at least in the primaries, he is a nice guy and media likes him and they also figure he is the least formidable Republican candidate, so they naturally want him to win the nomination at which time the gloves will come off and they will proceed to kill him.

|1.7.08 @ 12:51PM|#

"... I will never vote for Obama, but he does come across as a genuinly honest, likeable guy..."

Yeah. As the old saying goes, if you can't be honest at least learn how to fake it.

How do you know when a politican is lying?
___________________________________
(you know the punch line.)


I admit I'm not much of a fan of Ron Paul, but at least I don't feel like I need to play "Cliche' Bingo" when he's giving a speech. He's the only candidate (Dem or Rep) about whom I would say that.

|1.7.08 @ 12:58PM|#

media likes him and they also figure he is the least formidable Republican candidate, so they naturally want him to win the nomination

I love parnoid fantasies about the liberal media conspiracy. These are the same people who spent 2000 plumping for John McCain, who was cleaning Gore's clock in every poll while Bush was getting killed. But they only write nice things about Republicans they think can't win.

|1.7.08 @ 1:00PM|#

Theres a good chance Obama would be creamed in a national election. The Swift Boaters will come out in force, and I'm not sure he can take that.

fyodor|1.7.08 @ 1:03PM|#

I hope so. He has one advantage at least in the primaries, he is a nice guy and media likes him and they also figure he is the least formidable Republican candidate, so they naturally want him to win the nomination at which time the gloves will come off and they will proceed to kill him.

I don't know if this is true in the larger picture or not, but I found notable and surprising the barrage of anti-Huckabee press I saw immediately preceding and following his Iowa victory. I came across three anti-Huckabee screeds in a couple of days without trying at all. One came from David Harsanyi, a libertarian-leaning columnist for the Denver Post, another came from George Will, who lumped him in with Edwards as a "populist", and the other came from a Rocky Mountain News editorial, which decried Huck's lack of substance and foreign policy knowledge and advocated putting a stop to his rise right away.

|1.7.08 @ 1:03PM|#

Dude won elections in Chicago.

I think he can take a punch.

|1.7.08 @ 1:15PM|#

Dude won elections in Chicago.

I think he can take a punch.

*Scary Republican Ad Voice*

"Just who is Barack Hussein Obama? Hussein's father was a Muslim *switch to video of Muslims burning things* who grew up in Indonesia, a Muslim country with a large Islamofascist population. Can we really afford to elect a President who might feel sympathy towards the Jihadist enemy? *Cut to picture of Muslims praying in Indonesia*. Barack Hussein Obama--wrong on Islamofascism, wrong for America."

Lets see if he can take that kind of punch.

|1.7.08 @ 1:15PM|#

Cesar | January 7, 2008, 1:00pm | #

Theres a good chance Obama would be creamed in a national election. The Swift Boaters will come out in force, and I'm not sure he can take that."

The political climate has changed completely in this country. I think once the nominations are done, if Obama is on the dems. ticket, his race will certainly curtail some of the swift boat type of bullshit. Kerry came across as pompous and disengenous which made the ads more believable. Obama doesn't have that problem and his ability to spin youthful indiscretion is much easier because of his race. I also think some folks will hesitate to pile on due to what will be spun as racism.
I know, it isn't PC, but that's the way politickin works. Race shouldn't be in the conversation, but I guarantee you that in Alabama at least, it is in a BIG way.

|1.7.08 @ 1:20PM|#

*Scary Republican Ad Voice*

(Cuts to picture of a pretty blonde white woman crying)

When I was only 19, Barack Hussein Obama sold me cocaine. I tried it, and got hooked. It ruined my life. If Hussein ruined my life, what do you think hes going to do for the country?

Barack Hussein Obama. Soft on Crime. Soft on Drugs. Wrong for America.

/end ad voice

x,y|1.7.08 @ 1:22PM|#

Chapman is just plain wrong. The most authentic candidate for each party didn't come close to winning Iowa. Since when did apparent authenticity as seen through the prism of a "G"od-fearing, federal-funds grabbing Iowan come to mean the same thing as authentic?

|1.7.08 @ 1:27PM|#

Cesar,

Can you say backlash?

They couldn't run that ad. They couldn't run any ad like that. Anything that effectively made that case would come across as way over-the-top.

I'm more afraid of more directly racial ads: "Barack Obama is a CORRUPT URBAN MACHINE POLITICIAN who drives a CADILLAC and has been know to associate with THUGS and CRIMINALS. He's admitted using COCAINE (not druge, COCAINE) and married THIS WOMAN. Remember WELFARE QUEENS?"

|1.7.08 @ 1:31PM|#

They couldn't run that ad. They couldn't run any ad like that. Anything that effectively made that case would come across as way over-the-top.

Joe, sure, if he was running for governor of Massachusetts. But remember Harold Ford?

|1.7.08 @ 1:32PM|#

BTW, the best thing that could happen to Obama is have Huckabee be the nominee. Huckabee is so Mr. Rogers I can't see him ever running (or even let independent groups) run ads like the above.

|1.7.08 @ 1:35PM|#

Cesar,

The server squirrels outran me. I was talking about "Hussein Obama, Islamofascist Sleeper" ad.

And don't let Huckabee's image fool you. He's a knife fighter.

Paul|1.7.08 @ 1:36PM|#

The best thing about this piece is the absence of a genuflection to Saint Ron Paul Giuliani, The Insignificant.

Fixed...

|1.7.08 @ 1:38PM|#

Heres a hilarious quote from Eric Dondero's site that is almost verbatium my Republican ad above.

Worst news of the night

Clearly, Marxist Muslim Madrassa-attending Barack HUSSEIN Obama's win on the Democrat side. This is scary for our Nation, really, really scary. Think Manchurian candidate you all.

Not that Hillary is much better. But at least she's a Real American Gal. Mis-guided yes. But she doesn't scare ya, like the prospects of an Obama Presidency. With Hillary, at least the entire Right is united against her. With Obama, we're all likely to be shuffled off into political correctness re-education camps and all of our wealth confiscated.

Expect more of that.

|1.7.08 @ 1:43PM|#

Cesar,

Wow! I am still surprised and amused that Russert used Dondero as a source on the show. Vetting apparently is a mythical beast these days. Maybe Dondero on O'Reilly will be next?

|1.7.08 @ 1:56PM|#

I can only hope that the Republicans will be stupid enough to put crap like that into the media, Cesar.

But they won't. That would be suicide for them. The public would go out of their way to punish them.

Rhywun|1.7.08 @ 1:58PM|#

Lets see if he can take that kind of punch.

What worked against the charisma-challenged Kerry could easily backfire against Obama.

Expect more of that.

Are you sure he wasn't maybe quoting Coulter? Cos I can't tell the difference.

Paul|1.7.08 @ 2:30PM|#

I'm sorry that providing health insurance to poor people doesn't satisfy your urge for novelty.

Nonetheless, it would represent a major change in the lives of millions of people.

joe,

I missed this comment earlier, but seriously though, is there any Democratic candidate that doesn't support this?

|1.7.08 @ 2:36PM|#

About ten minutes after a serious, below-the-belt attack ad, Obama would be on Oprah and Oprah would open a serious can of whoop ass on someone. Oprah would eat a group like the Swiftboaters for breakfast.

|1.7.08 @ 2:48PM|#

Huckabee is so Mr. Rogers

Thanks for fucking up a lot of childhood memories for me.
Mr. Rogers is a pushy, nannyist neo-con?
Like I said, thanks. You bitch.

|1.7.08 @ 2:50PM|#

With Obama, we're all likely to be shuffled off into political correctness re-education camps and all of our wealth confiscated.

Can't say I really disagree with that sentiment, however hyperbolic.

Paul|1.7.08 @ 3:00PM|#

So, after Hillary gave her speech after her third place finish in Iowa, do you think anyone in her campaign got fired? I would have loved to be a fly on the wall during her after-the-fact closed-door huddle.

|1.7.08 @ 3:17PM|#

Paul,

I missed this comment earlier, but seriously though, is there any Democratic candidate that doesn't support this?

No, there is not. If you actually listen or read what Obama is talking about when he invokes change, it is not novel policy initiatives. He talks primarily about his political style, and how it will allow things to get done that have been left undone.

fyodor|1.7.08 @ 3:42PM|#

If you actually listen or read what Obama is talking about when he invokes change, it is not novel policy initiatives. He talks primarily about his political style, and how it will allow things to get done that have been left undone.

So, how will his "political style" accomplish this? Actually kinda reminds me of the kinda stuff a lot of politicians say: "I'm a uniter, not a divider," "compassionate conservative", "we need a government that's as good as its people", "charm offensive", etc, etc....

Paul|1.7.08 @ 5:27PM|#

Fyodor,

I'll bite.

Given that we're not currently engaged in an armed revolution, "real change" is not going to come in an elected candidate. Change is slow, creeping, nuanced and nudged. I agree with joe. At this point, as long as Obama keeps a reasoned tone, doesn't go negative (real negative-- swift boats, media figures popping up with forged memo's etc.) he is a breath of fresh air.

I would like to remind Mr. Obama that he is up against Hillary, and she comes from the old-school Democrat crowd, meaning that negative is a very major part of the playbook. So he should be looking over his shoulder.

|1.7.08 @ 7:03PM|#

So, how will his "political style" accomplish this?

What am I, his press agent? In short, by combining a very broad public appeal with his own capacity to work across the aisle and talk people into things. But mostly, it seems to be about not actively serving as an agent of division for one's own poltical advancement - which would be quite a change from the Bush/Rove years.

"I'm a uniter, not a divider," That's probably the closest one, but I'm more impressed in the unificating skills of a guy who can talk the Chicago PD into supporting a law requiring the videotaping of suspects, than a guy who can talk conservative Democrats in Texas into passing a buget bill.