Leveraging Iraq
Posted on Mon Jul 30, 2007 at 12:42:20 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Blogometer's Conn Carroll writes:
[T]here was a clear opening for Barack Obama to embrace the netroots and tap into their enthusiasm for a more progressive Dem party. . . . Obama could have joined forces with Sen. Russ Feingold (D) to end the war through de-funding and cemented his anti-war credentials.Instead he chose a more measured path on the war (timelines, some residual forces, etc.) and did not pro-actively engage the netroots community. Now, as more and more are noting that his numbers have flatlined, Obama may be changing course.
Using his dictator-meeting exchange with HRC as launching point, Obama has launched a major netroots banner ad buy featuring a 'Judgment Matters' message that touts his pre-Senate opposition of the war and his eagerness to talk to 'our adversaries.'
It has always been my view that Obama's biggest campaign mistake was his failure to differentiate himself on Iraq. It amazed me that not only had John Edwards seemed to have outflanked him on the issue but that Hillary Clinton had neutralized it. More.
As for what to do now, I personally feel that Obama's current attempt to regain the high ground on Iraq is insufficient and ineffective.
Conn cites Chris Bowers:
Open Left's Chris Bowers observes: "Throughout this period of the campaign in 2003-2004, Howard Dean seemed to have a fairly consistently upward climb, starting in the mid-single digits, and ending near 30% ... By way of comparison, in 2008, we haven't seen anything like that sort of movement for three or four months. [Barack] Obama's upward momentum seems to have, for one reason or another, just plain stopped at some point in the early spring." Bowers attempts to explains: "Iraq is the major issue of the campaign, but it is playing out differently. ... Within the Democratic field, the Obama campaign, in terms of "superior" judgment, and the Richardson campaign, in terms of no residual forces, have both tried to use Iraq to position themselves relative to the rest of the field. So far, it has not resulted in a big change on the national scene, but that does not mean it never will.
It has not, AND will not, for the Big Two, imo, unless and until Obama decides to lead on Congressional efforts to end the war. I am in favor of the Not Funding option of course, but if there is a different plan that can work, I am open to suggestions. Obama has not shown leadership here. He must.
Conn also mentions:
Bowers also notes that unlike '06, progressives are not "driving the national conversations on the campaign." Bowers concludes: "If the progressive grassroots was driving the conversation, I simply don't think there is any way Clinton would still have a sizable lead on Obama. His upward momentum would not have stopped three or four months ago, and he would probably be close to tied with Clinton at this point."
Given the appalling lack of attention to the Iraq issue by the blogs, this is hardly surprising. Moreover, Bowers assumes that the blogs should necessarily prefer Obama to Clinton. Frankly, there is nothing in their records or their rhetoric [ADDED] as conemporaries in the Senate that makes that so. Bowers projects his own anti-Clintonism onto the Netroots. It is not so simple.
Obama has his own political style problems with the Netroots. And not just me.
| < Vanity Fair Rips Judith Giuliani Big Time | The Credibility (Or Lack Thereof) of O'Hanlon and Pollack > |
