• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

We still have time to mess this up!

Hell hath no fury like a farmer bankrupted.

Since we are repeating ourselves, let me just say fuck that.

The Supreme Court cannot be allowed to become the ultimate, unaccountable arbiter of everything.

Let’s bury these fuckers at the polls 2 years from now.

Some judge needs to shut this circus down soon.

Live so that if you miss a day of work people aren’t hoping you’re dead.

Yeah, with this crowd one never knows.

Fear or fury? The choice is ours.

Republicans cannot even be trusted with their own money.

Tide comes in. Tide goes out. You can’t explain that.

… pundit janitors mopping up after the gop

DeSantis transforming Florida into 1930s Germany with gators and theme parks.

Trump should be leading, not lying.

People are complicated. Love is not.

“Jesus paying for the sins of everyone is an insult to those who paid for their own sins.”

American history and black history cannot be separated.

Republican also-rans: four mules fighting over a turnip.

The gop is a fucking disgrace.

You cannot love your country only when you win.

You can’t attract Republican voters. You can only out organize them.

Anne Laurie is a fucking hero in so many ways. ~ Betty Cracker

Since when do we limit our critiques to things we could do better ourselves?

We will not go quietly into the night; we will not vanish without a fight.

Mobile Menu

  • Seattle Meet-up Post
  • 2025 Activism
  • Targeted Political Fundraising
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2025 Activism
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Politics / Obama’s Momentum

Obama’s Momentum

by John Cole|  January 28, 20089:50 am| 61 Comments

This post is in: Politics

FacebookTweetEmail

I am sitting here watching Morning Joe, and I can’t help but think from the coverage that the Obama campaign is gaining a great deal of momentum. As it is right now, I have a sort of feeling of inevitability regarding the Hillary campaign. She has the super-delegates, she leads in the big states, she leads nationally, she is the establishment candidate, she has the machine and the money and knows not only where the bodies are buried but why. Hell, when the news of the Rezko arrest this morning came across the wire, the first thing I thought was “How convenient for Hillary.”

But watching the coverage this morning, I can’t help but feel that maybe the Obama campaign is reaching a sort of critical mass. A crushing win in South Carolina. Not one, but two Kennedy endorsements. Toni Morrison. Kathleen Sebelius.

Obama is running a momentum campaign, which is why people like me say things like “pretty thin gruel” when we listen to him speak. This isn’t so much a political campaign as it is a movement (which, again, explains my natural revulsion- remember, I’m the guy who hates crowds), and it is hard to not feel like, at least for right now, the movement is gaining the momentum it needs. While the Clinton campaign is about organization, brute political force, and calculating every minute detail and working the system for every ounce of advantage, the Obama campaign is going to rely on a tidal wave of support to sweep them to victory. For the first time, I see a wave beginning to form.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « In Soviet Russia, Irony Picks Up You
Next Post: Open Thread »

Reader Interactions

61Comments

  1. 1.

    dslak

    January 28, 2008 at 9:58 am

    Stop being such a damned fanboy.

  2. 2.

    John Cole

    January 28, 2008 at 10:00 am

    Actually, I am waiting for 20 fanboys to show up and vehemently argue that “OBAMA IS ORGANIZED WHY WOULD YOU SUGGEST OTHERWISE” or some such nonsense. Prissy bastards can perceive a slight out of nothing.

  3. 3.

    4tehlulz

    January 28, 2008 at 10:00 am

    The only way for Hillary to quell that wave is to tell Bill, in no uncertain terms, to STFU. It seams like every time Bill opens his mouth, he’s pissing people off and forcing them to back Obama (see Kennedy, Ted).

  4. 4.

    Punchy

    January 28, 2008 at 10:03 am

    Stop being such a damned fanboy.

    Now THAT, my friends, is fucking funny.

  5. 5.

    Wilfred

    January 28, 2008 at 10:06 am

    the Obama campaign is going to rely on a tidal wave of support to sweep them to victory. For the first time, I see a wave beginning to form.

    The Cole Call…Now I know we’re fucked.

  6. 6.

    Zifnab

    January 28, 2008 at 10:08 am

    The Cole Call…Now I know we’re fucked.

    Yeah, way to jinx it JC.

  7. 7.

    John Cole

    January 28, 2008 at 10:10 am

    The Cole Call…Now I know we’re fucked.

    I do have sort of a reverse Midas touch.

  8. 8.

    Jen

    January 28, 2008 at 10:10 am

    Adam linked to an article yesterday on this blog that was interesting…here’s the relevant part for this topic.

    As author Seth Godin, who analyzes consumer trends, explains it, “The key assumption in the analysis of typical field organizers is this: one persuaded equals 1.1 or perhaps 1.5 votes. In other words, the multiplier is very small. That’s why you need to run lots of ads and do lots of direct mail. It’s not very efficient, it’s very expensive, but you can really pile it on. The idea is that if you hit someone ten or twenty or a thousand times, sooner or later you’ll get some conversion. Obama and [Ron] Paul do different math. They assume a multiplier of three or even six. Which means that creating (and living) a story that turns people evangelical is far more efficient than hewing to the middle of the road. They assume that if they can create a passionate, raving fan, they’ll be able to translate that into a virus, an idea that spreads and scales over time. When that happens, they end up stoking the fire instead of lighting a lot of matches over and over again. Starbucks did this, believe it or not. They converted people into coffee fiends (particularly Starbucks fiends), who then converted their friends. And it happens on the net all the time.”

    I don’t know anything about campaign strategies or community organizing, but that makes some sense to me. It seems hard to get really fired up about Hillary, or Mitt. I think you could even include Huckabee’s wildfire spread in Iowa in that calculus. Now whether Obama will enough Omentum to do better than the Romentum and the Huckmentum, I don’t know.

  9. 9.

    Jen

    January 28, 2008 at 10:11 am

    It’s called the Sidam touch, when everything you touch turns to shit.

  10. 10.

    Jen

    January 28, 2008 at 10:12 am

    Sadim touch. If you can’t spell backwards, I guess that means you have the Sadim touch, too. I’ve changed my mind and am going with Hillary!

  11. 11.

    cmoreNC

    January 28, 2008 at 10:16 am

    It’s too late for HRC to put the tactics she & Bill used the past two weeks, and the sharp repudiation she received and affirmation Obama received in South Carolina back into the bottle. What the last two weeks did was to crystallize for a huge number of democrats a similar sensation of nausea and dread toward the Clintons that have long been felt not just by partisan republicans, but a huge portion of the critical independent voters who will decide this election. Whatever HRC’s positive merits and considerable talents, this recent experience brought home to lots of us that it simply isn’t worth repeating the destructive political dynamics of the last 15 years to get it. It’s not worth it, even if HRC pulls off a squeaker one-point win in the general election.

    THAT, plus Obama showed in his victory speech in South Carolina why he might just prove to be one of those rare history-transforming figures. Maybe there’s a risk that his substantive accomplishments are thinner than one would like – but it’s amply worth the risk. The alternative is to risk that HRC’s talent will be able to overcome the cynicism, spoilage, and bitterness that are the legacy so far of the Clintons. For lots of us, it SIMPLY ISN’T WORTH IT ANY MORE. Ted and Caroline Kennedy, Tomi Morrison, et al have come to exactly that conclusion, and so have we.

    Abe Lincoln didn’t exactly have a stellar record of accomplishment despite being a good orator either. And – he was from Illinois. OK, there is another candidate from Clinton’s home state – Mike “the earth was created 8000 years ago” Huckabee.

  12. 12.

    Buck

    January 28, 2008 at 10:16 am

    the Clinton campaign is about organization, brute political force, and calculating every minute detail and working the system for every ounce of advantage

    And if that loses it will be for the first time in history.

    Obamamania is lots of fun to watch. You just have to remember that Jesse Jackson won South Carolina twice.

  13. 13.

    Caidence (fmr. Chris)

    January 28, 2008 at 10:19 am

    Sully just posted something that said that even some psycho Christians are going to support Obama.

    Makes me think: maybe even nutcases will go for him, because they think that means they can stand in the same tent with the people were trying to brainwash.

    Needed proof for hypothesis: Scientology backs Obama. If they do, you know I’m right.

  14. 14.

    The Other Steve

    January 28, 2008 at 10:19 am

    Actually, I am waiting for 20 fanboys to show up and vehemently argue that “OBAMA IS ORGANIZED WHY WOULD YOU SUGGEST OTHERWISE” or some such nonsense. Prissy bastards can perceive a slight out of nothing.

    Well actually, i’ve been called by Obama three times. By Al Franken twice, by Mike Ciresi once, by Bonoff twice, Madia three times, and Hovland at least once.

    Clinton, not once.

    Which makes no sense, as the SOP for running a caucus campaign is to call prior attendees and find out who supports you.

    I don’t know who is running her phone banking, but the caucus is next week and I have to say I’m a bit surprised. It shows a lack of organization. I get the feeling she was expecting to ride a wave of inevitability through Iowa and New Hampshire and didn’t plan long term.

  15. 15.

    Jen

    January 28, 2008 at 10:20 am

    Jesse doesn’t transcend race! Obama transcends race!

    That was for you, JC.

    Seriously, though. Jesse and Obama are alike only in their skin tone, party membership, and pretty decent public speaking ability. It’s not really fair to compare them just because they’re both black candidates. This is a different ball game.

  16. 16.

    nrglaw

    January 28, 2008 at 10:20 am

    The Rezko story is only beginning its life nationally. The Chicago Tribune has been working on a story concerning, believe it or not, a questionable real estate deal as a result of which Obama and Rezko ended up owning adjacent lots in an inner city neighborhood. This was discussed on MSNBC the night after the story broke about Hillary and Rezko showing up in a photo together from a fundraiser.

    And yes, I am voting for Obama if he is the nominee.

  17. 17.

    TheFountainHead

    January 28, 2008 at 10:21 am

    I’m not so sure it’s a critical mass/tidal wave sort of movement as much as a slow awakening to the fact that the Clintons embody many of the same tactics and logical fallacies that we’ve grown to hate in Bushco, and that Obama offers at least a chance at something different. And yes, I’d expect the fanboys will come out and spit and piss about how organized he really is, because, well, he is. In fact, my father, who lives in So. Cal., said that for the first time in decades (California hasn’t been tested in a primary forever because they used to be in June and hasn’t been contested in the general in many elections) he had a presidential campaigner come to his door, for Obama. As my father put it, “If even half the people working for Obama were as good as this guy was–California is up for grabs.”

  18. 18.

    Caidence (fmr. Chris)

    January 28, 2008 at 10:22 am

    t’s too late for HRC to put the tactics she & Bill used the past two weeks, and the sharp repudiation she received and affirmation Obama received in South Carolina back into the bottle. What the last two weeks did was to crystallize for a huge number of democrats a similar sensation of nausea and dread toward the Clintons that have long been felt not just by partisan republicans, but a huge portion of the critical independent voters who will decide this election. Whatever HRC’s positive merits and considerable talents, this recent experience brought home to lots of us that it simply isn’t worth repeating the destructive political dynamics of the last 15 years to get it. It’s not worth it, even if HRC pulls off a squeaker one-point win in the general election.

    Easy there dude. It was SC he won, which is one of the larger outposts of Black People Screwed With Their Pants On. I knew a Black dude who grew up in Charleston, and he said he felt the KKK on his back, even in the city.

    Lets wait for the next primary before we get too giddy.

  19. 19.

    Wilfred

    January 28, 2008 at 10:22 am

    a similar sensation of nausea and dread toward the Clintons

    This reminds me of how much I miss Hunter S Thompson these days; he’d be having lots of fun with Hilliam, I think.

  20. 20.

    myiq2xu

    January 28, 2008 at 10:23 am

    I sure hope the Obamaniacs don’t get all butt-hurt and heart-broken when he comes up short.

  21. 21.

    The Other Steve

    January 28, 2008 at 10:26 am

    Makes me think: maybe even nutcases will go for him, because they think that means they can stand in the same tent with the people were trying to brainwash.

    I’ve been saying this for a long time, but the differences in political ideology have little to do with policy and everything to do with personality.

    The reason Obama gains crossover support, or at the very least he doesn’t generate supreme hatred, is because of the way he talks about America. He doesn’t scold, he doesn’t put us down, he talks about the country in a very optimistic fashion.

    This is why Reagan won and Carter lost.

    It’s why Clinton won over Bush and Dole. But Hillary doesn’t know how to speak in this fashion.

    It’s even why Bush won over Gore and Kerry to a degree.

    Needed proof for hypothesis: Scientology backs Obama. If they do, you know I’m right.

    I’m sure they back Huckabee, as he’s the one pushing the Fair Tax. :-)

  22. 22.

    Caidence (fmr. Chris)

    January 28, 2008 at 10:52 am

    I sure hope the Obamaniacs don’t get all butt-hurt and heart-broken when he comes up short

    “when.”

    He’s not going to. The math is entirely in his favor, and can do no worse than break even and start slugging it out with her at the convention.

    a.) We’re Post-bush. Everyone wants some new blood.
    b.) First-viable-black runs on the same fuel that first-viable-woman does
    c.) Bill’s presence helps bring independent red-staters to Obama.

    I would probably bet money that that “when” is one of the memes floating around that hurts HRC. If HRC is the already-crowned winner, then Obama never gets asked what his policy is. He never has to provide it, instead can deliver a big-tent message, and people flock to him because, well, HRC’s going to win anyways, right? “Clinton’s going win. Now that that’s settled, where’s the party at?”

    Welcome to The Underdog Effect.

  23. 23.

    Jen

    January 28, 2008 at 10:59 am

    Know what, myiq? I got to vote for the first time in 1992. I turned 18 a week before the election. I could not have been more thrilled or excited to be able to vote for Bill Clinton. I admit he looks awfully good in contrast to the current administration, but, yeah, he came up short. His combination of raw intelligence and charisma was rare and extraordinary. And for what? Welfare reform? NAFTA? Family and medical leave was probably the crowning liberal achievement of eight years in office.

    So you know what? I’m going in a different direction this year. He may break my heart. But you’re not going to hear me say, “Damn, if only I’d supported Hillary!”

    No.

  24. 24.

    Ned Raggett

    January 28, 2008 at 11:00 am

    I’ve been thinking about this a bit and in a weird way the person that Obama reminds me the most of is Peter Jackson — someone who projects an extremely affable image that resonates with a lot of folks and is quite comfortably in an envious position precisely because he’s enough of an operator to get to that point. And that’s no criticism, I actually think that’s admirable; I just wish more people would recognize the operator part of the equation!

  25. 25.

    Kevin K.

    January 28, 2008 at 11:04 am

    John, I was also watching Morning Joe this morning and a telling moment came when Scarborough brushed aside the Rezko arrest and said, in a nutshell, “They’re all dirty, so good luck using that against Obama.” Unless there’s a lot more there there than I’ve seen, I don’t think this story is going to have legs. The only plus for the Clintons is that if any Obama supporters bring up her dirt (Hsu, etc.), they can brush it aside and paint their accusers as Freepers.

  26. 26.

    Zifnab

    January 28, 2008 at 11:04 am

    He’s not going to. The math is entirely in his favor, and can do no worse than break even and start slugging it out with her at the convention.

    I wish that were true, but for now the math favors Clinton. It’s all going to ride on the youth vote and the independent vote for Obama. Older people just look at Hillary and think “Bill wasn’t so bad, but Barak just lacks experience”. As older people traditionally vote in higher numbers, Hillary carries the statistical edge.

    But independents aren’t swaying for Hillary, and young people like a young candidate – particularly a young, passionate candidate. Iowa seemed to prove that these groups would show up for Barak. New Hampshire and Nevada, however, raised the question of whether that would be enough.

    This is a pure hypothesis, but I’m betting McCain’s waxing or waning appeal will have a hard impact on Obama’s nomination chances. McCain’s got the talent for attracting the young and independent votes (because he’s a “maverick” or whatever) that Obama possesses. If McCain flubs or turns hard right and scares off the middle ground, those swing voters will likely fall into Obama’s lap. If McCain moderates himself and keeps riding the middle, he’ll continue to sap support from Barak.

    So if Romney can pull a crushing defeat in Florida and carry strong in Super Tuesday, I’m betting Obama’s chances surge as McCain’s candidacy dies out. If McCain surges, I’m betting Obama’s numbers will suffer equivalently.

  27. 27.

    Jen

    January 28, 2008 at 11:04 am

    b.) First-viable-black runs on the same fuel that first-viable-woman does

    The blood of the white male, the Jew of Liberal Fascism, perhaps?

  28. 28.

    Tim F.

    January 28, 2008 at 11:05 am

    The Cole Call…Now I know we’re fucked.

    Wha? Let’s review John’s record:

    2000: John supports Bush. Bush wins.
    2004: John supports Bush. Bush wins.
    2005: Republican insanity drives John to the Democrats.
    2006: Democrats sweep Congress.

    You can say that he sometimes backs the wrong horse, but you can’t credibly argue that John’s horses don’t win.

  29. 29.

    D-Chance.

    January 28, 2008 at 11:13 am

    John Cole wrote:

    … she has the machine and the money and knows not only where the bodies are buried but why. Hell, when the news of the Rezko arrest this morning came across the wire, the first thing I thought was “How convenient for Hillary.”

    You can take the man out of the Republicans, but you can’t take the Republican out of the man… or is this simple HDS?

  30. 30.

    Caidence (fmr. Chris)

    January 28, 2008 at 11:18 am

    The blood of the white male, the Jew of Liberal Fascism, perhaps?

    Oh, is that why the Blood Bank keeps calling me 3 times a week these days?

    /No fences in this liberal organic nazi WholeFoods concentration camp
    //Just a 14-gauge butterfly and an alcohol swab

  31. 31.

    myiq2xu

    January 28, 2008 at 11:20 am

    It’s called the Sidam touch, when everything you touch turns to shit.

    I thought it was called the “Bush Touch”

  32. 32.

    The Grand Panjandrum

    January 28, 2008 at 11:22 am

    This reminds me of how much I miss Hunter S Thompson these days; he’d be having lots of fun with Hilliam, I think.

    When Matt Taibbi writes for Rolling Stone I hear echoes of Doc Thompson without the paranoia. But, yes, he would certainly be having a lot of fun and it wouldn’t surprise me if he was an Obama Fanboy in the same way he was a Carter fanboy.

    Fear and loathing on the 2008 Campaign Trail indeed.

  33. 33.

    Caidence (fmr. Chris)

    January 28, 2008 at 11:26 am

    I wish that were true, but for now the math favors Clinton. It’s all going to ride on the youth vote and the independent vote for Obama. Older people just look at Hillary and think “Bill wasn’t so bad, but Barak just lacks experience”. As older people traditionally vote in higher numbers, Hillary carries the statistical edge.

    Bolded is the assumption that’s fueling Obama, you know.

    Older people vote in higher numbers because voting is a stupid chore that only people with free time do.

    Unless Obama make it a happy, patriotic high to vote. There ARE more young people than old people, after all. (Unless my boomer math is incorrect. But in general: # younger > # older)

    Challenge: Name the last Rock the Vote event where the kids were shouting “USA! USA!” instead of “CARSON DALY! CARSON DALY!”

  34. 34.

    The Grand Panjandrum

    January 28, 2008 at 11:28 am

    I thought it was called the “Bush Touch”

    Actually, Bush League comes to mind.

  35. 35.

    Dreggas

    January 28, 2008 at 11:28 am

    Kevin K. Says:

    John, I was also watching Morning Joe this morning and a telling moment came when Scarborough brushed aside the Rezko arrest and said, in a nutshell, “They’re all dirty, so good luck using that against Obama.” Unless there’s a lot more there there than I’ve seen, I don’t think this story is going to have legs. The only plus for the Clintons is that if any Obama supporters bring up her dirt (Hsu, etc.), they can brush it aside and paint their accusers as Freepers.

    Heh don’t you know that accusing the Clintons’ of not telling the truth is now a right wing talking point? That’s the biggest complaint of Hillary Huggers over at the great orange satan. Any time you point out that the Clintons’ either don’t tell the truth or that maybe bill clinton was a big dufus after all you get accused of being a freeper no matter how sound the arguments.

    I made the observation the other day

    Calling out the Clintons for lying = CDS to Hillary Huggers

    Calling out Bush for lying = BDS to the Bushites.

    It’s almost scary just how much the Hillbots have become like their republican mentors…

  36. 36.

    CaseyL

    January 28, 2008 at 11:29 am

    How strongly do I feel about Obama?

    Let’s put it this way: Washington has caucuses on a weekday. I was not going to take a day off to attend, back when I couldn’t make up my mind and thought it’d be fine if whichever of the candidates won.

    Now I am going to take the day off from work to attend the caucus, because I want to vote for Obama.

  37. 37.

    NonyNony

    January 28, 2008 at 11:38 am

    she is the establishment candidate

    Given the endorsements that Obama has gained, I think we can put to rest this little bit of conventional wisdom.

    The Democrats seem to have two establishment candidates this year – which, actually, fits the Dems pretty well. My entire life the Dems have always been more happy to fight with each other than to fight with Republicans. Two establishment candidates will let the establishment maintain the lofty tradition of Dem circular firing squads at even the highest levels of the party.

  38. 38.

    Caidence (fmr. Chris)

    January 28, 2008 at 11:39 am

    Now I am going to take the day off from work to attend the caucus

    1.) This is what I’m talking about
    2.) Good for you.
    3.) Casey, you better put on some armor before you go. Hill isn’t gonna go down before her supporters take your vote from you.

    I’d very much suggest reading up on the caucus rules before you go, like knowing when the doors close, and if there’s ever a time when you’d have to stand in the HRC crowd (hint: never).

  39. 39.

    Richard Bottoms

    January 28, 2008 at 11:49 am

    If Hillary slashes and burns her way to the nomination then Obama wasn’t ready for the big time. Should Obama win the nomination, then it is truly the X-Generation’s time.

    Either way the GOP will fuck off and die so what’s the downside?

  40. 40.

    TheFountainHead

    January 28, 2008 at 11:52 am

    I agree with the sentiment that John McCain and Obama’s fortunes may be somewhat tied. In general, though, I think the independent voters are trending blue this cycle anyway, though. Also, in the state of California, the Republican primary is closed to Independents, but the Democratic primary is not. There are over 300,000 registered Independents in California…

  41. 41.

    TheFountainHead

    January 28, 2008 at 11:54 am

    In general, though, I think the independent voters are trending blue this cycle anyway, though.

    /facedesk
    /facedesk
    /facedesk

  42. 42.

    Dave

    January 28, 2008 at 12:03 pm

    Buck Says:

    the Clinton campaign is about organization, brute political force, and calculating every minute detail and working the system for every ounce of advantage

    And if that loses it will be for the first time in history.

    I’d argue the opposite. Goliath always loses. Always will.

  43. 43.

    Caidence (fmr. Chris)

    January 28, 2008 at 12:06 pm

    If Hillary slashes and burns her way to the nomination then Obama wasn’t ready for the big time. Should Obama win the nomination, then it is truly the X-Generation’s time.

    If Hillary has to slash and burn her way to the nomination, then Obama demonstrated handily that positive messages and reaching across the aisle works. He’ll be the guy to beat in 2012. And he’ll have forced the Clintons to get naked and ugly to win this one, thereby expending the credit they had stored up.

    Obama is playing the big time right now. Just because he didn’t win on his first shot doesn’t necessarily disprove this.

    Either way the GOP will fuck off and die so what’s the downside?

    DO. NOT. ASSUME.

  44. 44.

    AkaDad

    January 28, 2008 at 12:06 pm

    I sure hope the Obamaniacs don’t get all butt-hurt and heart-broken when he comes up short.

    I could say the same thing to Hillary supporters, but I won’t, because I’m so above that sort of thing, like Barack. ;-)

  45. 45.

    Zifnab

    January 28, 2008 at 12:18 pm

    I could say the same thing to Hillary supporters, but I won’t, because I’m so above that sort of thing, like Barack. ;-)

    Barak Obama transends butt jokes.

  46. 46.

    Dreggas

    January 28, 2008 at 12:19 pm

    Obama is playing what I consider to be the Wing Chung (not the band) version of a campaign. Let the opponent come at you and use their momentum and attacks against them. He is using a defensive offense and can maintain that he was not the aggressor and does seek to create change.

  47. 47.

    empty

    January 28, 2008 at 12:52 pm

    Jen Says:

    .. Jesse and Obama are alike only in their skin tone, party membership, and pretty decent public speaking ability. It’s not really fair to compare them just because they’re both black candidates.

    True. Jesse is (was?) progressive. Obama. Not so much.

  48. 48.

    Doubting Thomas

    January 28, 2008 at 12:55 pm

    His combination of raw intelligence and charisma was rare and extraordinary. And for what? Welfare reform? NAFTA? Family and medical leave was probably the crowning liberal achievement of eight years in office.

    This is my fear with Obama… like Kennedy and Clinton before him, will his record be more than lofty rhetoric? Progressives often fondly remember Kennedy through rose-colored glasses. He ran as a hawk, got us into Vietnam, had a disaster at the Bay of Pigs and authorized a LOT of CIA covert ops to topple “unfriendly” governments. Not a really progessive record, after all. LBJ had a much more progressive record, after all. Kennedy did make all Americans feel better about themselves, however, just as Reagan did for a while. Obama is now receiving all the establishment, mainstream, andconnected insider endorsements (you can’t get more inside than Kennedy, Kerry, and the New York Times). Because of his exemplary oratory skills, he gets a pass on any of his ideas. Now, I love the bringing of the country together and believe that accounts for his success so far, and who doesn’t agree that country could use much healing. I will be very cautious, however, about expecting progressive ideas from Obama. It will be very interesting to see who he chooses for his cabinet were he to gain the nomination (which looks increasingly likely).

    I can’t help but be cynical of the “politics of hope”, but I will vote for him if he gets the nomination because it sure beats the “politics of fear” on the Republican side.

  49. 49.

    Jen

    January 28, 2008 at 1:10 pm

    rolls eyes
    Okay, empty, vote for the True Progressive. Mike Gravel is still in the race. I think. I expect Jesse is in front of a camera somewhere desperately seeking relevance and I’m sure he’d love for you to write him in. Or Nader. You should absolutely support the purest ideological person you can find regardless of their ability to convince 50%+1 of the people to vote for him. That has worked out so very well in advancing the progressive agenda.

    And Thomas, I know what you’re saying because I feel nearly as excited as I did in 1992 when I didn’t know any better, at the anticipation of an Obama presidency which will almost certainly not live up to the hype. But, he should have the advantage of a Democratic Congress, for what they’re worth, and especially if he gets a fairly decisive “mandate”, I think he could be quite effective. There’s nothing like a Bush presidency to make me ready to embrace mere competence and effectiveness as if it were the Second Coming. I will be *ecstatic* if he turns out to be half as good as he looks now.

  50. 50.

    TheFountainHead

    January 28, 2008 at 1:38 pm

    Obama is now receiving all the establishment, mainstream, andconnected insider endorsements (you can’t get more inside than Kennedy, Kerry, and the New York Times).

    I’m pretty sure Hillary got the endorsement of the NYT, but it could be that I’ve been mainlining hydraulic fluid for three straight days and don’t know what I’m talking about.

  51. 51.

    Buck

    January 28, 2008 at 2:04 pm

    Lets wait for the next primary before we get too giddy.

    Amen

  52. 52.

    Adam

    January 28, 2008 at 2:10 pm

    I’m pretty sure Hillary got the endorsement of the NYT, but it could be that I’ve been mainlining hydraulic fluid for three straight days and don’t know what I’m talking about.

    She did, but the endorsement was weird. It was kind of like, “Here’s all the things wrong with Hillary Clinton. Now we’re endorsing her.”

    This is probably a reference to Caroline Kennedy’s endorsement, when ran in the NYT.

  53. 53.

    Cyrus

    January 28, 2008 at 3:05 pm

    I wish that were true, but for now the math favors Clinton. It’s all going to ride on the youth vote and the independent vote for Obama. Older people just look at Hillary and think “Bill wasn’t so bad, but Barak just lacks experience”. As older people traditionally vote in higher numbers, Hillary carries the statistical edge.

    Caidence is right, that assumption could be proven wrong. And wasn’t it not true — well, maybe true, but not nearly as true as usual — in Iowa and maybe some other votes so far?

    I like the numbers about how Obama got more votes in South Carolina a few days ago than were cast in the entire Democratic primary in 2004. Or how more Democrats voted in the South Carolina primary than Republicans, despite the state usually being so solidly red. Not to get all crazy, but we just might see something unusual this election.

  54. 54.

    ken

    January 28, 2008 at 7:46 pm

    When Teddy Kennedy called Hillary Clinton old today, I thought to myself:

    “Wow, it’s gotta hurt any woman to be called ‘old’ by Teddy Kennedy.”

  55. 55.

    Brachiator

    January 29, 2008 at 1:34 am

    Obamamania is lots of fun to watch. You just have to remember that Jesse Jackson won South Carolina twice.

    You seriously misread the significance of Obama’s win in South Carolina. The Clinton Machine, and their surrogates, were counting on South Carolina blacks to vote CONSERVATIVELY, that is, they thought that they could portray Obama as an inauthentic black. There was an undercurrent of this in the lackluster appeal that Colin Powell had for some black Americans, because he had jumped to the Republican Party, and more significantly, because he had not been born in the United States.

    Obama is black, but he is not descended from blacks who were enslaved in America. His personal story is atypical in some ways. That large numbers of black voters who feel a great deal of affection for Bill Clinton would shift to Obama was a seismic shift that is under-estimated by anyone who views black voters as a simple monolithic bloc.

    This is my fear with Obama… like Kennedy and Clinton before him, will his record be more than lofty rhetoric? Progressives often fondly remember Kennedy through rose-colored glasses. He ran as a hawk, got us into Vietnam, had a disaster at the Bay of Pigs and authorized a LOT of CIA covert ops to topple “unfriendly” governments. Not a really progessive record, after all. LBJ had a much more progressive record, after all.

    Actually, Ike began the ramp up of US involvement into Viet Nam, but you make a number of fair points. On the other hand, I do not think that LBJs efforts with respect to Civil Rights and the War on Poverty would have been possible without JFK’s shifting stand on issues of justice and fairness.

    And of course, LBJ escalated US involvement in Viet Nam, and ultimately was challenged by Robert Kennedy, who had been an architect of his brother’s Viet Nam policies. Life is complicated, and the past is not always a reliable indicator of what may be.

    But there is this: Dubya and his people have been insufferably stubborn, incapable of considering any nuance, fearful of adopting any significant change of course once their minds were made up. In his short presidency, JFK demonstrated a great deal of flexibility, and during the Cuban Missile Crisis had the wisdom to shut down those military advisors who believed that a nuclear “exchange” might work to the advantage of the United States.

    Also, by the way, LBJ ordered an invasion of the Dominican Republic in 1965, to check “communism.” Some of my relatives put their butts in harms way during this misguided excursion. And both Democrats and Republicans, including LBJ, supported oppressive regimes in Indonesia, Haiti and other countries.

    Painting LBJ as “progressive,” without considering the complications of the man and the time, is just uninformed. But at his best, LBJ, like JFK, demonstrated an admirable flexibility. This may be the best that we can hope for from any presidential candidate.

  56. 56.

    Pug

    January 29, 2008 at 9:20 am

    If McCain flubs or turns hard right and scares off the middle ground…

    Would talking about staying in Iraq for 100 years and “more wars to come” qualify as turning hard right? Or is it just plain old nuts?

  57. 57.

    socraticsilence

    January 29, 2008 at 12:06 pm

    “Obamania is fun to watch. You just have to remember that Jesse Jackson won South Carolina twice.” It also sparked the beginning of Bill Clinton’s rise to the top, but hey let’s not mention that. (Huh, funny thing persuing Bill’s statistics in Stats in S. primaries in ’92 it appears he cleaned up the Black vote, while doing far less in white demeographics, must be because those crazy negros just couldn’t help but vote for the first black president. Seriously though, when women came out in force for Hilary after misogynist media coverage it was seen as this great rebuke of anti-women hysteria, but when African-Americans do the same its because they just don’t know any better.

  58. 58.

    socraticsilence

    January 29, 2008 at 12:07 pm

    perusing, not persuing my bad.

  59. 59.

    Ron Cantrell

    January 29, 2008 at 7:12 pm

    Just a by the way, by the way. Hillary got thre Kennedys today. Robert Jr. Kathleen, and Bobby’s other kid, whatshername.

    Go Hillary

  60. 60.

    Thursday

    January 31, 2008 at 10:11 pm

    All the Edwards support is going to Obama, but they still need him to move there publicly.

    On a guess, he’s held off any endorsement because he’s angling for a job. He’s not going to go all in until he knows there’s a chance to split the pot…

Comments are closed.

Trackbacks

  1. Tsunami Tuesday « The Krile Files says:
    January 29, 2008 at 12:07 am

    […] 28, 2008 · No Comments It’s coming up quickly and you might find the following news truly surprising, given most ofthe media coverage of the Obama and Clinton campaigns. All weekend long, the feeling I got from most of the mainstream media was that Obama was riding high and Bill Clinton had pretty much tanked Hillary’s campaign. […]

Primary Sidebar

Image by HinTN (5/22/25)

Recent Comments

  • RedDirtGirl on Proof of Live – Ohio Meetup (May 22, 2025 @ 12:32pm)
  • Melancholy Jaques on Proof of Live – Ohio Meetup (May 22, 2025 @ 12:31pm)
  • columbusqueen on Proof of Live – Ohio Meetup (May 22, 2025 @ 12:29pm)
  • Suzanne on House Bill Passes (Open Thread) (May 22, 2025 @ 12:28pm)
  • John Sterling on Proof of Live – Ohio Meetup (May 22, 2025 @ 12:26pm)

PA Supreme Court At Risk

Donate

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
War in Ukraine
Donate to Razom for Ukraine

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Meetups

Upcoming Ohio Meetup May 17
5/11 Post about the May 17 Ohio Meetup

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)
Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Hands Off! – Denver, San Diego & Austin

Social Media

Balloon Juice
WaterGirl
TaMara
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
DougJ NYT Pitchbot
mistermix

Keeping Track

Legal Challenges (Lawfare)
Republicans Fleeing Town Halls (TPM)
21 Letters (to Borrow or Steal)
Search Donations from a Brand

PA Supreme Court At Risk

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2025 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!