False Equivalence
- 03.22.2008 - 1:40 PMOnly a media outlet devoted to soothing its liberal audience and rooting for Barack Obama could reach the conclusion that this past week was “a bad week for everyone.” Yeah, right. That conclusion may be more reassuring to people fretting over Obama’s recent travails, but it’s silly to declare that everyone had an equally tough time. (Ask John McCain whether that spike in his head-to-head poll numbers with both potential Democratic opponents left him despondent.)
Between Obama’s speech (which opened up more questions than answers and which, according to one poll, had a shockingly negative impact on voters, especially independents), the dig at his “typical white” grandmother, and his nose dive in general election and key state polls, it would be hard for an objective observer to conclude that this was anything but a really, really rotten week for Obama. But he got that Bill Richardson endorsement, you say. That would have been a 2 on the political Richter scale several weeks ago. Now it rates an announcement on Good Friday. Enough said.
The key issue is whether there are now a significant number of voters who simply will never vote for Obama. They may be Democratic primary voters, who could send the delegate balance sliding in Hillary Clinton’s favor. But they might be independent, Republican, or non-primary voting Democrats. Voters, that is, who might be less than forthcoming with pollsters, but won’t–after hearing Reverend Wright’s venom and Obama’s ineffective excuses–ever vote for Obama. Stunning as it may seem, the Democrats may have found a way to fritter away their 2008 election advantages.
| »Back to Contentions | »Back to Commentary |
March 22nd, 2008 at 2:50 PM
I’m glad someone pointed this out: it’s the first thing that leapt to mind when I first read it a few days ago on Drudge.
March 22nd, 2008 at 3:24 PM
I was astonished yesterday by David Brooks’ praise on the Newshour, of Obama’s Perfect Union speech. According to Brooks, Obama opened his heart, in an intelligent and adult way, to the American people. In the Washington Week in Review PBS program that immediately followed the reporters described the speech as having turned the scandal into a political plus for Obama. That is double talk and double think.
Obama, for over twenty years, made sure to pray at the side, not of his fellow man, but of his fellow black man. He had deliberately chosen a church belligerently determined not to transcend color.
For two decades he sat there with his family and listened to the bigoted rantings of his friend, mentor and moral guide. And now, to explain away long indoctrination in contempt for America, Obama offers to help America “transcend” the problem of color.
That, to Brooks, was an intelligent and adult handling of the Pastor Wright scandal.
March 22nd, 2008 at 4:31 PM
Everyone wants Obama to succeed, if only, in the opinion of a typical white person, to shut up race-baiters such as Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and Rev Wright,hopefully, to end the victim mentality of so many blacks, and to end affirmative action. If a black man can become President, us typical white people cannot be all bad and there will be no need to special programs to help black’s get ahead. All will be well and we will not have anymore problems.
Wishful thinking has replaced serious thought.
March 22nd, 2008 at 7:04 PM
No. There is non such thing as bad news for Obama. It’s all good news for him, all the time.
March 22nd, 2008 at 8:01 PM
No one wants Obama to be the “Black Al Smith.” It does not matter what his policies are or will be. Journalists just do not want Obama to be the “Black Al Smith.”
If Obama is nominated, and he loses the election, he will be the “Black Al Smith.”
Blacks got the vote in 1870, fifty years before women got the vote in 1920.
Will a black be elected President fifty years before a woman is elected?
March 23rd, 2008 at 12:36 AM
McCain is trouncing Obama in public opinion and he hasn’t even faced him in a debate yet. Obama will not be able to hide his shortcomings from McCain. He’ll be able to point out flaws that Clinton couldn’t, because he doesn’t share Obama’s ideology like she does.
March 23rd, 2008 at 3:22 AM
Hm. This should be easier to understand:
Obama is getting trounced in public opinion while McCain’s popularity is skyrocketing. When or if they meet in public debate, Obama will not be able to hide his inadequacies as a Presidential candidate. Obama’s and Clinton propose similar policies for every issue. McCain doesn’t, so he will point out Obama’s policy flaws where Clinton couldn’t.