Betsy's Page

Tuesday, July 08, 2008

The minimally acceptable candidates

Rich Lowry contrasts the rhetoric of Obama's primary fight with what he's doing now.
A signature moment of Barack Obama’s primary campaign came last November in Des Moines, Iowa. He gave a speech at the Jefferson-Jackson Dinner that electrified the crowd and gave his campaign a kick that helped win the Iowa caucuses — a victory without which he wouldn’t be the Democratic nominee.

Obama declared that “the same old Washington textbook campaigns just won’t do.” Deploring “triangulating and poll-driven positions,” he said that “telling the American people what we think they want to hear instead of telling the American people what they need to hear just won’t do.” The Democratic party had been at its best, he told the crowd, when “we led, not by polls, but by principles; not by calculation, but by conviction.”

“I run for the presidency of the United States of America because that’s the party America needs us to be right now,” he vowed, staking his candidacy on the achingly idealistic premises of a new, more forthright and uncalculating politics.

What makes Obama’s “textbook” dash to the center so extraordinary is not just its speed, but how it falsifies the very essence of his candidacy. It’s as if Bill Clinton won the Democratic nomination in 1992 and announced suddenly that actually he was not a “new kind of Democrat”; or if George W. Bush, after winning his party’s nomination in 2000, forswore “compassionate conservatism”; or if John McCain, after winning the GOP nomination this year, declared in favor of a hard deadline for withdrawal from Iraq.
As Lowry and many others have indicated, what Obama is doing now is what almost all presidential nominees do after they've secured their party's nomination. Except that Obama told us that he was a new kind of politician above those sorts of calculations.

His swerve-a-day campaign this summer amuses his opponents but it won't make his supporters rethink their embrace of the man they think can win the election.
Obama is calculating shrewdly now — just as shrewdly as back when he was attacking calculation. His left-wing base won’t abandon him, and all the dewy-eyed new voters attracted by him will stay that way, so long as he continues to look and sound good. His task is to win over general-election voters in a center-right country who value hardheadedness and practicality in their presidents.

Barack Obama doesn’t need to be a messiah figure. He needn’t even be particularly admirable. In a poisonous year for Republicans, he just needs to be a minimally acceptable Democrat, and so minimally acceptable he aims to be. But we’re a long way from Des Moines.
Of course, I don't think that those young or black voters who got so excited about Obama a few months ago are going to care one bit for his new positions on abortion, FISA reform, public financing or Iraq. They are enjoying the sensation of being enthusiastic about a candidate. They're in love with the idea of loving a president. And Lowry is correct that, for the rest of the Democrats, they're happy to vote for Obama if it will put a Democrat in the White House.

And to match him on the right, John McCain is a minimally acceptable Republican. He didn't attract the majority of the votes during the primaries. He was just the last one standing as the others dropped out. Many conservatives, like me, look at John McCain as a minimally acceptable Republican. If Huckabee had won the primaries, even that would have been in doubt for me. In most elections, I have voted for the candidate I dislike the least and McCain is that guy this year. There are some things about McCain I like and I certainly admire his war record and what it reveals about his character when pressed to the extreme. Would I like him to be more eloquent and to have a greater understanding of economic issues so that he could argue for those positions without sounding as if he is missing his cue cards? Sure. But for now, he's minimally acceptable to me.
Labels: Election 2008

posted by Betsy Newmark permalink 7:22 AM 0 comments

Comments:

Rich Lowry contrasts the rhetoric of Obama's primary fight with what he's doing now.

A signature moment of Barack Obama’s primary campaign came last November in Des Moines, Iowa. He gave a speech at the Jefferson-Jackson Dinner that electrified the crowd and gave his campaign a kick that helped win the Iowa caucuses — a victory without which he wouldn’t be the Democratic nominee.

Obama declared that “the same old Washington textbook campaigns just won’t do.” Deploring “triangulating and poll-driven positions,” he said that “telling the American people what we think they want to hear instead of telling the American people what they need to hear just won’t do.” The Democratic party had been at its best, he told the crowd, when “we led, not by polls, but by principles; not by calculation, but by conviction.”

“I run for the presidency of the United States of America because that’s the party America needs us to be right now,” he vowed, staking his candidacy on the achingly idealistic premises of a new, more forthright and uncalculating politics.

What makes Obama’s “textbook” dash to the center so extraordinary is not just its speed, but how it falsifies the very essence of his candidacy. It’s as if Bill Clinton won the Democratic nomination in 1992 and announced suddenly that actually he was not a “new kind of Democrat”; or if George W. Bush, after winning his party’s nomination in 2000, forswore “compassionate conservatism”; or if John McCain, after winning the GOP nomination this year, declared in favor of a hard deadline for withdrawal from Iraq.

As Lowry and many others have indicated, what Obama is doing now is what almost all presidential nominees do after they've secured their party's nomination. Except that Obama told us that he was a new kind of politician above those sorts of calculations.

His swerve-a-day campaign this summer amuses his opponents but it won't make his supporters rethink their embrace of the man they think can win the election.

Obama is calculating shrewdly now — just as shrewdly as back when he was attacking calculation. His left-wing base won’t abandon him, and all the dewy-eyed new voters attracted by him will stay that way, so long as he continues to look and sound good. His task is to win over general-election voters in a center-right country who value hardheadedness and practicality in their presidents.

Barack Obama doesn’t need to be a messiah figure. He needn’t even be particularly admirable. In a poisonous year for Republicans, he just needs to be a minimally acceptable Democrat, and so minimally acceptable he aims to be. But we’re a long way from Des Moines.

Of course, I don't think that those young or black voters who got so excited about Obama a few months ago are going to care one bit for his new positions on abortion, FISA reform, public financing or Iraq. They are enjoying the sensation of being enthusiastic about a candidate. They're in love with the idea of loving a president. And Lowry is correct that, for the rest of the Democrats, they're happy to vote for Obama if it will put a Democrat in the White House.

And to match him on the right, John McCain is a minimally acceptable Republican. He didn't attract the majority of the votes during the primaries. He was just the last one standing as the others dropped out. Many conservatives, like me, look at John McCain as a minimally acceptable Republican. If Huckabee had won the primaries, even that would have been in doubt for me. In most elections, I have voted for the candidate I dislike the least and McCain is that guy this year. There are some things about McCain I like and I certainly admire his war record and what it reveals about his character when pressed to the extreme. Would I like him to be more eloquent and to have a greater understanding of economic issues so that he could argue for those positions without sounding as if he is missing his cue cards? Sure. But for now, he's minimally acceptable to me.

Labels: Election 2008

posted by Betsy Newmark permalink 7:22 AM 0 comments

Comments: Post a Comment

The truth about Avesil

Cheap Hosting

Atlanta Bankruptcy Attorney

Dallas Bankruptcy Attorney

Wikio

Get exclusive travel deals and book discount cheap flights

Online Bachelors Degree

Tuesday, July 08, 2008

The minimally acceptable candidates

		Betsy's Page

HOME Betsy neither necessarily uses, nor endorses, the products advertised on this site. The truth about Avesil Cheap Hosting Atlanta Bankruptcy Attorney Dallas Bankruptcy Attorney Wikio Get exclusive travel deals and book discount cheap flights Online Bachelors Degree Comments from an AP history and government teacher in Raleigh, NC. e-mail betsynewmark AT gmail.com Commissions earned from selling items through Amazon will go towards buying materials for my classes. Thank you. Site Feed		Tuesday, July 08, 2008 The minimally acceptable candidates Rich Lowry contrasts the rhetoric of Obama's primary fight with what he's doing now. A signature moment of Barack Obama’s primary campaign came last November in Des Moines, Iowa. He gave a speech at the Jefferson-Jackson Dinner that electrified the crowd and gave his campaign a kick that helped win the Iowa caucuses — a victory without which he wouldn’t be the Democratic nominee. Obama declared that “the same old Washington textbook campaigns just won’t do.” Deploring “triangulating and poll-driven positions,” he said that “telling the American people what we think they want to hear instead of telling the American people what they need to hear just won’t do.” The Democratic party had been at its best, he told the crowd, when “we led, not by polls, but by principles; not by calculation, but by conviction.” “I run for the presidency of the United States of America because that’s the party America needs us to be right now,” he vowed, staking his candidacy on the achingly idealistic premises of a new, more forthright and uncalculating politics. What makes Obama’s “textbook” dash to the center so extraordinary is not just its speed, but how it falsifies the very essence of his candidacy. It’s as if Bill Clinton won the Democratic nomination in 1992 and announced suddenly that actually he was not a “new kind of Democrat”; or if George W. Bush, after winning his party’s nomination in 2000, forswore “compassionate conservatism”; or if John McCain, after winning the GOP nomination this year, declared in favor of a hard deadline for withdrawal from Iraq. As Lowry and many others have indicated, what Obama is doing now is what almost all presidential nominees do after they've secured their party's nomination. Except that Obama told us that he was a new kind of politician above those sorts of calculations. His swerve-a-day campaign this summer amuses his opponents but it won't make his supporters rethink their embrace of the man they think can win the election. Obama is calculating shrewdly now — just as shrewdly as back when he was attacking calculation. His left-wing base won’t abandon him, and all the dewy-eyed new voters attracted by him will stay that way, so long as he continues to look and sound good. His task is to win over general-election voters in a center-right country who value hardheadedness and practicality in their presidents. Barack Obama doesn’t need to be a messiah figure. He needn’t even be particularly admirable. In a poisonous year for Republicans, he just needs to be a minimally acceptable Democrat, and so minimally acceptable he aims to be. But we’re a long way from Des Moines. Of course, I don't think that those young or black voters who got so excited about Obama a few months ago are going to care one bit for his new positions on abortion, FISA reform, public financing or Iraq. They are enjoying the sensation of being enthusiastic about a candidate. They're in love with the idea of loving a president. And Lowry is correct that, for the rest of the Democrats, they're happy to vote for Obama if it will put a Democrat in the White House. And to match him on the right, John McCain is a minimally acceptable Republican. He didn't attract the majority of the votes during the primaries. He was just the last one standing as the others dropped out. Many conservatives, like me, look at John McCain as a minimally acceptable Republican. If Huckabee had won the primaries, even that would have been in doubt for me. In most elections, I have voted for the candidate I dislike the least and McCain is that guy this year. There are some things about McCain I like and I certainly admire his war record and what it reveals about his character when pressed to the extreme. Would I like him to be more eloquent and to have a greater understanding of economic issues so that he could argue for those positions without sounding as if he is missing his cue cards? Sure. But for now, he's minimally acceptable to me. Labels: Election 2008 posted by Betsy Newmark permalink 7:22 AM 0 comments Comments: Rich Lowry contrasts the rhetoric of Obama's primary fight with what he's doing now. A signature moment of Barack Obama’s primary campaign came last November in Des Moines, Iowa. He gave a speech at the Jefferson-Jackson Dinner that electrified the crowd and gave his campaign a kick that helped win the Iowa caucuses — a victory without which he wouldn’t be the Democratic nominee. Obama declared that “the same old Washington textbook campaigns just won’t do.” Deploring “triangulating and poll-driven positions,” he said that “telling the American people what we think they want to hear instead of telling the American people what they need to hear just won’t do.” The Democratic party had been at its best, he told the crowd, when “we led, not by polls, but by principles; not by calculation, but by conviction.” “I run for the presidency of the United States of America because that’s the party America needs us to be right now,” he vowed, staking his candidacy on the achingly idealistic premises of a new, more forthright and uncalculating politics. What makes Obama’s “textbook” dash to the center so extraordinary is not just its speed, but how it falsifies the very essence of his candidacy. It’s as if Bill Clinton won the Democratic nomination in 1992 and announced suddenly that actually he was not a “new kind of Democrat”; or if George W. Bush, after winning his party’s nomination in 2000, forswore “compassionate conservatism”; or if John McCain, after winning the GOP nomination this year, declared in favor of a hard deadline for withdrawal from Iraq. As Lowry and many others have indicated, what Obama is doing now is what almost all presidential nominees do after they've secured their party's nomination. Except that Obama told us that he was a new kind of politician above those sorts of calculations. His swerve-a-day campaign this summer amuses his opponents but it won't make his supporters rethink their embrace of the man they think can win the election. Obama is calculating shrewdly now — just as shrewdly as back when he was attacking calculation. His left-wing base won’t abandon him, and all the dewy-eyed new voters attracted by him will stay that way, so long as he continues to look and sound good. His task is to win over general-election voters in a center-right country who value hardheadedness and practicality in their presidents. Barack Obama doesn’t need to be a messiah figure. He needn’t even be particularly admirable. In a poisonous year for Republicans, he just needs to be a minimally acceptable Democrat, and so minimally acceptable he aims to be. But we’re a long way from Des Moines. Of course, I don't think that those young or black voters who got so excited about Obama a few months ago are going to care one bit for his new positions on abortion, FISA reform, public financing or Iraq. They are enjoying the sensation of being enthusiastic about a candidate. They're in love with the idea of loving a president. And Lowry is correct that, for the rest of the Democrats, they're happy to vote for Obama if it will put a Democrat in the White House. And to match him on the right, John McCain is a minimally acceptable Republican. He didn't attract the majority of the votes during the primaries. He was just the last one standing as the others dropped out. Many conservatives, like me, look at John McCain as a minimally acceptable Republican. If Huckabee had won the primaries, even that would have been in doubt for me. In most elections, I have voted for the candidate I dislike the least and McCain is that guy this year. There are some things about McCain I like and I certainly admire his war record and what it reveals about his character when pressed to the extreme. Would I like him to be more eloquent and to have a greater understanding of economic issues so that he could argue for those positions without sounding as if he is missing his cue cards? Sure. But for now, he's minimally acceptable to me. Labels: Election 2008 posted by Betsy Newmark permalink 7:22 AM 0 comments Comments: Post a Comment