MyDD :: Notes on Obama and Clark

Notes on Obama and Clark

by Jerome Armstrong, Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 08:45:49 AM EST

A terrific photo on the right, by Coral Moore, of Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak, with about 40 "Draft Obama" marchers outside the Calhoun Square Starbucks in Uptown on saturday. It shows a maturation of the draft for Obama that wasn't there a few months ago.

When Barack Obama's potential candidacy was launched in Nov/Dec of last year it generated quite a bit of excitement, and it was easy to see there was wide support for Obama, but how deep, was the question? The only fitting answer was to say that time would tell. So I've been watching, and interacting a bit, with the online movement that's backing Obama, and waiting to write a post on it.

I hope to be blogging that piece this week, and one of the things that is interesting is to compare the Obama movement to the Draft Clark movement that happened in 2003, and I'd be interested in reading your comments about that (or any other) comparison.

As a historical note, I was semi-involved with the Draft Clark effort. Markos and I had formed a consultancy group in January of 2003. I liked Dean; he Clark. We agreed that whichever hired us first we'd both work together on that campaign. Both the DraftClark.com and DraftWesleyClark.com 2003 websites launched on the same day April 11th or so (uncoordinated). DraftClark.com was launched by Markos learning scoop coding over a week and myself drafting content (reading Clark's book). The wayback machine has archives of the site. In the beginning of May, Clark, through his CoS, gave us a decision date of May 15th, and then AZ was hired by Dean so the point was mute. In late May, we handed off (iirc) about 3500 signatures that we'd collected in the past couple of months to John Hlinko and he ran it for a touchdown, while Stirling Newberry took over posting content on the DraftClark blog. It was a quick and fun online draft effort for myself, and I wasn't nearly as engaged with it as I was with Dean's movement, but it give me a bit of a perspective on the Draft Clark effort, if just at the beginning.

More on Obama's online movement to come, and let me know what you think.

Update (Chris): And, right on cue, Obama is in.

Tags: Barack Obama (all tags)

Permalink :: 64 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (none / 0)

I go to the University of Minnesota. To find a link to a MNDaily article on the front page of MyDD blows my mind. I'll be sitting in class today asking myself the same question: "how?"

by AaronE on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 08:53:29 AM EST

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (none / 0)

Well, for the how, you can thank Paul Provost, head of the Minnesota chapter of DraftObama.org. He's done an amazing job of getting people together in Minneapolis and really working hard to show Obama that the gopher state is behind him.

If you'd like to get in touch with him, you can drop him a line at mn@draftobama.org.

-- The Draft Obama 08 Movement is Starting
Help Us Grow, Sign Up At www.draftobamam.org

by acaben on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 06:48:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Sorry to say, this line is what strikes me most: (none / 0)

"I liked Dean; he Clark. We agreed that whichever hired us first we'd both work together on that campaign."

Check out the New Progressive Blog EENRBLOG

by dk2 on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 09:27:42 AM EST

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (3.00 / 1)

I don't see what strategic weaknesses the draft addresses for Obama. Clark needed the publicity and grassroots network. Obama can snap his fingers and get both of those.

That said, the draft Obama movement is clearly the most sophisticated online support network of any candidacy.

I wonder how frequent this scenario is.

by Matt Stoller on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 09:39:06 AM EST

Really? (3.00 / 2)

That said, the draft Obama movement is clearly the most sophisticated online support network of any candidacy.

I still don't get this statement. Obama has no campaign yet, and because of that no campaign web site. His current web site has NO blog and no other media except MSM clips that haven't been updated in a month. His Senate site has podcasts, which average out to about one every month and a half.

So, his supporters are forced to use other venues to follow him and talk about him. Now, ask instead which campaign has the most sophisticated online network. What would the online reality look like if all the other campaigns failed to provide a common place for interacting with the candidate and their supporters?

It's a bit of a red herring to say that the Draft Obama group has the most sophisticated online support system, when other campaign supporters have no NEED for such a system, since their candidates have a central website.

I'll be back in a couple hours...

BlueNC - Progressive NC Politics

by Robert P on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 09:54:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Really? (none / 0)

It's a bit of a red herring to say that the Draft Obama group has the most sophisticated online support system, when other campaign supporters have no NEED for such a system, since their candidates have a central website.

The other way of looking at might be that the most impressive thing about Obama's support is that it is of such a broad nature that it has been able to become very sophisticated with no official centralization whatsoever.

by Silent sound on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 05:32:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I guess we'll never know, what had happened if... (none / 0)

Obama had a better online organization all along, or;
Edwards had a poor online organization all along.

BlueNC - Progressive NC Politics

by Robert P on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 10:30:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (none / 0)

As a card-carrying member of the vast Obama star-f*cking conspiracy I think it's my job to point out that there are now reports Obama will announce something on a call with supporters today.

Patrick Ruffini, former E-Campaigns Director for the RNC, had a really interesting look at the various draft Obama movements and their impact on this blog that I found an interesting take on it all.

www.adamconner7.com

by Adam Conner on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 10:02:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (none / 0)

Not really unless you are distinguishing between "online support" and say, "online operation"

by blueflorida on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 10:48:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (none / 0)

That person on the Facebook says they won't support Obama for pretty much all the reasons that I like him. He's a Clintonite on free trade. And good for him.

by Baldrick on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 01:30:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (none / 0)

Yea, good for him. Maybe he will appoint Tom "I don't even need to see a trade agreement to support it" Friedman as trade ambassador.

Outsourced? Go back to school. Plant closes? Go back to school. Laid off? Tough shit, move to China.

Thank you free traders!

"Pray for the dead and fight like hell for the living" - Mother Jones

by Jambon on Wed Jan 17, 2007 at 04:46:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (none / 0)

the draft Obama movement is clearly the most sophisticated online support network of any candidacy.

I'm not sure about this.

1) The "Draft" part of this is a sham. He clearly wants to run and everyone knows it. "Drafters" are either spinning or deluded. Basing your support on non-truth is basing it on quicksand.

2) It seems almost impossible to me that Obama will take input from outsiders (e.g. "draft" people), which will put him in the same position as Clark in late 2003 when he tried to take control of his grassroots and destroyed that support.

Me | My Work | Future Majority

by Josh Koenig on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 02:03:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (none / 0)

You are right about the problem that developed after the Draft Clark phase for Clark in 2003, but I do not lay the blame on Wes Clark. While he was experienced enough in issues that matter to be President of the United States, he was a rank amature at running for office, and he had never even worked with campaign staff before. Clark knew he was playing for big stakes in the major leagues and he had to trust others to give him a map through the mine field of politics, and he not surprisingly took counsel from seasoned pros who could say they had been there before. Clark did not have his own experience base to work from in challanging their conventional wisdom.

I think by mid January 2004 Clark had turned a corner and was starting to truly understand the role and importance of the grassroots and he gained confidence also to break from his handlers to speak in his own voice more.

While I was involved in Clark's 04 campaign it was mostly as a visible online supporter. I have stayed involved with Clark's team since then (as a volunteer) and can say from personal experience that Clark is working closely with grassroots supporters now, and has been doing so consistently for some time now. He also has his sea legs beneath him now. If Clark runs again, his grassroots supporters will certainly have seats at the table.

Blogging at http://www.aleftturnforclark.com

by Tom Rinaldo on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 03:10:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (3.00 / 1)

I wasn't trying to blame Gen. Clark, or really blame his team either. I was just noting that when a support organization develops outside a campaign, and the campaign tries to integrate that organization in such a fashion as to be able to enforce message discipline (which I expect Obama to do), this will in all likelyhood drain out 80% or more of the support from said organization.

If Clark runs again, it won't be a Draft/Campaign split, but rather an integrated grassroots operation for a campaign. Much more effective that way, as you note.

Me | My Work | Future Majority

by Josh Koenig on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 04:44:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (none / 0)

Thanks for that clarification. I think your observation is an important one. The marriage of a professional campaign structure with strong grass roots activist participation is a complex dance to pull off. I know that within the Clark community a whole lot of effort has been put into working out the points of friction since 2004. As you said, if Clark runs again, all that effort will be invaluable, and one has to wonder how well that type of fusion will be managed by a new campaign like Obama's.

Blogging at http://www.aleftturnforclark.com

by Tom Rinaldo on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 06:21:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (none / 0)

I'd say the Draft Obama strength is pretty strong online, strength that turns into offline events much like the Walk for Obama pictured above.

Political new comers, such as Minnesota's Paul Provost, the Draft Obama Minnesota director, are getting into the mix and kicking some tail. For full disclosure I am also from Minnesota and a member of the draft Obama group.

If Obama can inspire more to follow his lead, and motivate more people like Paul, the others should look out. These bloggers and organizers are the people that will go door to door, make the phone calls, and attend rallies. Fresh new thinking on political strategy and intuition are on the way.

If Obama announces this week, as he is expected to, I believe you will see many fence sitters hop to the Obama camp.

Obama/Clark 08'

by Demrock6 on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 09:52:57 AM EST

most movements don't start with the MSM free ride (3.00 / 1)

correct me if I'm wrong but most "movements" aren't started by the corporate main stream media.

It appears pictures of Obama topless, and all the free press Obama gets are not historical of a "grassroots" originated movement.
Obama needs to be careful that he is not seen as a top down creation as Rev. Sharpton said yesterday on Hardball..

I'm firmly in the ABH camp with Edwards first. I'm hoping at some point Obama will show more bold leadership than he has recently - taking passes on Kerry-Feingold and recently on Face the Nation where he refused to answer whether or not he supported ted kennedy's bill. I think the reason he has not become a true "movement" yet is because he has yet to show some bold leadership on anything recently. Supporting the Levin amendment or non-binding dissaproval with Iraq is not really it.

Obama has a free media platform not given to anyone like this except maybe McCain (or Hillary but without the negative slants). If I were to advise Obama it would be that he better do something bold with this free media time or else it will pass him by.

At this point Obama seems more like a media creation than a bona fide Dean/Lamont like movement IMHO.

Call it "Medicare Option" not public option

by TarHeel on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 09:55:07 AM EST

Re: most movements don't start with MSM free ride (3.00 / 1)

And neither did this one. The media may love him, but that doesn't mean there aren't real people driving the movement.

If you look at the movements, including DraftObama.org (full disclosure, I'm helping lead that), they were very much created by real, actual grassroots people who simply liked Obama and wanted him to run. In that specific case, it was Ben Stanfield, a computer programmer in Maryland. He's a good guy, very real, and very much not a member of the corporate media.

In terms of bold statements, well, there is the fact that he was the only one of the front runners to oppose the Iraq war before it started (see http://www.obamawasright.com/).

No disrespect meant to those who've since changed their minds, but you gotta give Obama his credit as well for coming out against it in 2002. It wasn't easy to do, and few did (remember, Bush was still very popular at that point).

by jhlinko on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 10:43:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: most movements don't start with MSM free ride (none / 0)

C'mon John. You don't really put "draft Obama" in the same league as "draft Clark," do you?

by blueflorida on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 10:51:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: most movements don't start with MSM free ride (3.00 / 1)

Well, since I ran DraftWesleyClark.com, I suppose I've gotta comment on this one... ;)

I think this one is definitely different, but no less genuine.

As Jerome rightly points out (and thanks for the kind words, Jerome!), this is different in the sense that the primary goal of the draft Clark effort was to raise awareness of him. The thinking (my thinking at least) was that as more people got to know him, they'd be as intrigued and impressed as we were, and that would start to build a groundswell for the draft. So I suppose it was a two stage draft.

In this case, by contrast, we're already starting with high name rec for Obama (though perhaps not as actual mass awareness as we political junkies might think). So the goal is really more of a direct draft -- showing him that his support is real, and that if he runs, he'd have people he could count on.

Another big difference is the time it took to draft -- the Clark one lasted 6 months. And while that was exciting and all, it was unbelievably exhausing for those of us working on it (seriously, this was long long days, not just sending a few emails).

This one (we think) will be shorter. And selfishly, it's been easier for me, since I've been more advising than driving the train. :)

by jhlinko on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 11:24:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: most movements don't start with MSM free ride (none / 0)

Another important difference: when you started draftclark the candidate in question wasn't already running. Obama, for all intents and purposes, is already off to the races.

Me | My Work | Future Majority

by Josh Koenig on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 02:05:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: most movements don't start with MSM free ride (3.00 / 1)

Good point, although.... to be honest, I'm still not sure Obama is definitely running.

I still have nightmares of 1992, when everyone thought Mario Cuomo was certain to run, but didn't.

Now, as a (half) Italian kid from NY, perhaps this hit me harder than most. :)

Nevertheless, I'm still of the opinion that no one is a candidate until they formally jump in. So I certainly think it's a heck of a lot more ilkely now than it was with Clark back in '03, when Jerome, Kos, I and others jumped into the fray. But that being said... it ain't over til it's over, and it ain't started til it's started. :)

by jhlinko on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 02:13:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: most movements don't start with MSM free ride (none / 0)

I'm still of the opinion that no one is a candidate until they formally jump in.

We differ in opinion then. I think there are often people (e.g. Kucinich) who go all the way to file FEC paperwork, but who aren't actually running for office.

Semantics aside, it seems to me Obama's as "in" as Edwards or Clinton and has been at least since that NFL commercial.

Me | My Work | Future Majority

by Josh Koenig on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 04:57:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

what is a draft exactly? (3.00 / 1)

Many of us thought Mark Warner was running. Apparently not eh? Looking back, was his draft movement a sham?

by clockwerks on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 03:42:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: what is a draft exactly? (none / 0)

Warner was running -- staffed up and everything -- and then decided not to. That's cool. It's a free country.

Honestly, I actually wasn't aware there was a "draft warner" campaign, but to the extent that the website is truthful and it really did start in October 2004, that would make it pretty authentic.

However, continuing a "draft" campaign once ForwardTogether launched would have been to one degree or another an exercise in political theater.

Me | My Work | Future Majority

by Josh Koenig on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 04:50:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: what is a draft exactly? (none / 0)

Considering that one of the co-founders of the Draft Warner movement started his Draft Warner blog in November of 2004, I'd say that's some proof of authenticity. Not to mention having active organizers in 37 states and offline events in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina.

Warner may have staffed up and been ready to run, but ultimately he didn't take that plunge. The same applies to Evan Bayh. And I think that's the point that John Hlinko makes about the Draft Obama movement - why stop until he's definitely in. I think a draft effort that shows there is consistent, organized and large popular support beyond the media hype and insider pundit speculation is necessary and valuable input for the decision-making process up until the day they actually do (or not) become an official candidate. And it doesn't hurt for all the supporters of a potential candidate to start networking and connecting for that day when they hope the candidate will call upon them to act.

Ain't it cool to watch how people use technology to take the initiative and self-organize around presidential candidates instead of waiting?

by clockwerks on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 06:56:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: what is a draft exactly? (none / 0)

See my other comment on what constitutes "running." Paperwork isn't it. I certainly wasn't casting aspersions on Team Warner though.

Ain't it cool to watch how people use technology to take the initiative and self-organize around presidential candidates instead of waiting?

Golly gee it sure is.

It's also somewhat heartbreaking to see people trade on creating an artifice of activism -- one gets a strong sensation of choreography in all this, ala Chris's "right on cue" note -- and watch candidates (potentially) disappoint the heartfelt wing of their activist base when they do "make it official."

I just calls 'em as I sees 'em, and I'm a skeptic these days. Most of Obamrama feels pretty fake to me.

The idea that he's going to be meaningfully "Drafted" by some kind of spontaneous citizen movement is disingenuous. I believe the people who promote this are spinning, using the "draft" terminology because it sounds cool and important, and angling for seats at the table for a campaign they (and anyone who's paying attention) know is coming. Any true believers caught up in this are in for a rough landing, I think.

I'd probably have an easier time accepting this if it was just the Obama Fan Club.

Me | My Work | Future Majority

by Josh Koenig on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 09:28:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You're going too far out on the assumption limb (none / 0)

You've got a right to your opinion, but... be careful not to go too far out on a limb. Talking about "choreography" and "angling for jobs" is just plain innaccurate.

I'm a senior advisor with DraftObama.org, and the last thing I'm looking for is to join another campaign. I just want the guy to run, period. And no, there is no choreography or coordination -- period.

I understand your skepticism, but sometimes a draft is just a draft. It's pretty simple -- yes, we think the guy is likely to run (more likely as of yesterday). But he still hasn't said for sure. And most of the people "certain" he is going to run said the same about Warner, Bayh, etc.

So... until he formally gets in the race, the purpose of the draft is pretty straightforward -- convincing him to do it. Maybe he's 50% there, maybe he's 99.9% there, but until February 10th, we won't know 100%.

by jhlinko on Wed Jan 17, 2007 at 08:53:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama's credit is the same as Edwards (none / 0)

when Obama didn't have to vote on it he was against it in cook county a very democratic district.

Now that Edwards doesn't have to vote on it he has taken the most liberal/progressive step on ending the war possible.

Obama won't back the Kennedy bill to not fund the escalation.

I give Edwards and Obama the same credit for statements in non-voting capacities.

Call it "Medicare Option" not public option

by TarHeel on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 03:20:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's credit is the same as Edwards (none / 0)

Seems about right.

Me | My Work | Future Majority

by Josh Koenig on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 04:58:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Except that (none / 0)

Obama spoke agasint the Iraq war when Bush was at the peak of his popularity

Edwards spoke out agsint the war after most of the nation had turned against both Bushand the Iraq war.

by Sam I Am on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 05:03:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Except that (none / 0)

Which would mean anything if Edwards were running for President of Illinois.

by justinh on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 05:17:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Except that... Illinois ain't Massachusetts (none / 0)

Illinois may lean Dem for sure, but it's still been on the "Swing" list in recent presidential elections, and has elected Republicans to statewide office.

When Obama made the statement against the war, it was 2002 -- when both Bush and the forthcoming war were relatively popular.

If he'd planned on staying in a local seat, sure, it would've been easy. But considering he was eyeing a run for US Senate -- the statement was anything BUT easy. Had the war been a success, and had Obama been running against a credible GOP candidate, that single stance could've tanked his candidacy.

Kudos to Edwards for having the guts to reassess his position, and admit he was wrong. But kudos to Obama as well for being right from the beginning.

by jhlinko on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 07:46:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Except that (none / 0)

Obama speaks, but won't vote.

That's actually worse, to me.

Me | My Work | Future Majority

by Josh Koenig on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 09:30:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What if Obama does not run? (none / 0)

Where will all the money go?

by jasmine on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 09:57:28 AM EST

he's running (none / 0)

the amount of free press and MSM fawning he's getting is too good to pass up.

He will not get this kind of fawning again.

He will/is running

Call it "Medicare Option" not public option

by TarHeel on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 10:00:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

A draft movement means they're really drafting (3.00 / 1)

Clark/Obama comparison:

Clark seemed to be like a real Draft-A-Candidate movement. Taking someone who wasn't seen as a potential candidate and making him viable.

It doesn't seem the same way with Obama. He's been a potential candidate longer than Clark was in 2003. It seems more like a club for his supporters waiting for him to make a decision. It's not the draft movement that will convince him to run. The Draft Clark movement is what pushed him to do it.

by jrb1968 on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 10:08:35 AM EST

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (3.00 / 2)

Despite the Draft Clark movement, the General waited a long time to get into the race in 2003. He may make other mistakes, but Obama won't make that one. Draft movements can only go so far. Obama does risk, however, peaking too soon. But under almost any scenaro getting in early (it's still sort of early) will help. In addition, Obama come to the race with more political experience than Clark ever had. Obama has a base in one on the nation's largest states and he actually has been elected to something.

I'm still waiting for Wes this time around because his strengths are, I'm convinced, what the Democrats need most in 2008. I think a General would do better against Sen. John McCain than another Senator. I think a non-traditional politician will do better than a more traditional politician. I think more than ever a presidential nominee in 2008 will need credibility on defense & foreign policy. Some people who believe as I do are backing Bill Richardson, about the only title not on his resume is "Senator."

I've been wrong before. Obama & Edwards both bring incredible strengths to the race. Obama, especially, clearly will excite a new generation of voters. If this is a year defined by generational change Obama and Edwards are it's standard bearers.

by howardpark on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 10:11:00 AM EST

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (none / 0)

I see they chose the epicenter of liberalism in the Midwest for their rally. Sadly, drive 100 miles in any direction and people think Obama is a terrorist from the middle east.

by eric the red on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 10:12:08 AM EST

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (none / 0)

Where is the "epicenter of liberalism" in the Midwest? Chicago? Mineapolis? Madison? Cleveland, home of Dennis Kucinich? Ann Arbor? I get the sense you don't really know the midwest.

by howardpark on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 10:42:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (none / 0)

Eh.... I live in Minneapolis and my city council member is Green Party. Its pretty out there.

by AaronE on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 11:07:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (none / 0)

although the "drive 100 miles in any direction" line is bullshit.

by AaronE on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 11:08:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (none / 0)

Umm, yeah.

I was referring to the place that, you know, they were having the rally... Uptown Minneapolis.

by eric the red on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 03:05:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (none / 0)

yeah, that 100 mile drive the Duluth... oh wait, that place is pretty granola IIRC.

I mean, I know about the emails going out (Hussein! Islam! It's the Manchurian Candidate all over again!), and it's true that a lot of people in smaller rural communities may be on those circuits, but the truth is that these "epicenters" are also, you know, population centers. It's also hardly accurate to suggest that rural areas are in generally solid GOP territory. Trending shows the opposite, actually.

Me | My Work | Future Majority

by Josh Koenig on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 05:06:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (none / 0)

Im completely undecided on the dems, but found myself giddy when i first heard that Obama was making it official today with an exploratory committee. If he has as much substance as he does hype, i think he will be the nominee.
Although, I do have to say that I am increasingly noticing among the netroots growing support for Edwards. If Edwards becomes the netroots darling combined with his already established institutional supports (unions, trial attorney donor base, etc) along with his high favorables, it may make one hell of a race/ presidential ticket.

EDWARDS/OBAMA?!?!? I kinda like the sound of that

by jmotoole on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 10:43:02 AM EST

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (none / 0)

That ticket has absolutely no foreign policy or governing experience. In a race about Iraq, that'll be a problem.

by Lucas O'Connor on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 11:10:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (none / 0)

When the electorate considers Iraq a bungled mess that we shouldn't have ever gotten into and demanded a new direction in 06 and was rewarded with an escalation plan, maybe it will be an advantage.

NJ Hussein Independent

by NJIndependent on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 12:15:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Notes on Obama and Webb (none / 0)

is the ticket. It brings in VA....and the presidency.

by BrionLutz on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 07:45:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm an Edwards guy (3.00 / 1)

but you'd have to be corpse not to be interested/intrigued in Barack star. He's the greatest natural political talent I've seen, better than Clinton, better than Reagan.

Unfortunately (fortunately for Edwards) it seems he's choosing to run as the Broder-Brooks-can't-we-all-get-along candidate.
You've got a problem in the primary if Marty fucking Peretz likes you. I guess Obama and Axelrod assume that African-Americans will support him no matter what. Still, it's hard to win the Democratic Primary as a moderate. On what issue will he get to the left of Edwards? I don't think his intitial opposition to the war will be enough to win over progressives.

I'm very interested to see the Obama-Sharpton dance during debates. As Sharpton subtly suggests that Obama is a sell out, will Obama smile politely? Or, given that Sharpton represents everything Obama claims to abhor, will he call him out and risk alientating African-Americans?

The race is on.

by david mizner on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 11:37:45 AM EST

The problem with Edwards (none / 0)

is that he was for the war before he was against it. In a debate, Obama will say, "Senator Dodd, Senator Biden, Senator Clinton, Senator Edwards--you all voted for this war." And that will do him very well.

Another problem I have with Edwards is that I just don't like the idea of our party nominating another rich white guy (as a rich white guy myself) for president.

And finally, I never thought that Edwards had any real substance. His big strength was that he could give a good speech, and Obama beats him on even that category.

My personal analysis is that Edwards will go the way of Gephardt. An early lead in Iowa, that is slowly chipped away.

We'll see--I've been wrong a 100 times before, so who knows?

by Terryus on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 11:47:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Edwards can say we've all made mistakes (none / 0)

Obama with admitting cocaine use probably doesn't want to say he's perfect either.

certainly hillary as the bill/lewinsky stuff in the wings..

Edwards can simply say "what have you done for me lately" -

obama what have you done in office to end the war?

Call it "Medicare Option" not public option

by TarHeel on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 03:23:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Its the downticket voting, stupid (3.00 / 1)

Why do I support Obama?

(By the way, I like Edwards too- its like your children, you love them equally but in their own way).

Anyway-

1) Would he make a good President?
Yes. After the foreign policy disaster of Bush, someone with his intl perspective, diplomatic skill and potential on the world stage would do immense good for our country.

He can also unite the country after 16 years of division.

2) Look downticket.
My feeling is that whoever our nominee is (Obama, Edwards, Hillary, Richardson, Clark, even Vilsack) if a Dems gonna win in 2008 they'll win. I don't see us losing any Kerry states and there are halfa dozen purple states that provide us enough pickup opportunities (OH, NM, IA, NV, CO, VA) we should take the electoral college. If we lose, hell- its gonna be some sort of media-assissted GOP Juggernaut (i.e. McCain and no serious scrutiny).

So... look downticket. If Obama wins, its historic- but its also an insurance policy. The black turnout will be through the roof, and if that doesn't plain ol' elect Obama President (it may), it will sure devastate some GOP state legislative districts and maybe even open up a couple interesting Senate races in heavily African American states.

3) Obama is Kennedy. He brings a whole generation to the Democratic party.

Would you hire George W Bush to be YOUR latex salesman?

by jgkojak on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 11:45:37 AM EST

Re: Its the downticket voting, stupid (none / 0)

Obama is Kennedy. He brings a whole generation to the Democratic party.

Maybe. His penchant for triangulation could have the opposite effect on a millennial wave that's relatively politically savvy and media skeptical.

I think the candidate who delivers Universal Health care and Universal Net Access is the one who locks up the next generation.

The black turnout will be through the roof, and if that doesn't plain ol' elect Obama President (it may), it will sure devastate some GOP state legislative districts and maybe even open up a couple interesting Senate races in heavily African American states.

Don't underestimate the power of a backlash on this too though... I think it would make a great fight, but Obama as the candidate would draw out (and maybe, possibly, hopefully) excise the most bitter, brutal, racist elements in America. Like I say it's a fight worth having, but it could also be costly.

I don't think it's a guaranteed net-positive from an electoral standpoint, that's for sure.

Me | My Work | Future Majority

by Josh Koenig on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 05:11:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Its the downticket voting, stupid (none / 0)

Certainly would be cool to hear a platform that includes Universal Net Access in the same breath as Universal Health care. I like that. And I also like the emphasis on delivering it, not just promising it. Which of our potential Dem 08ers could DELIVER those two?

by clockwerks on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 07:58:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Its the downticket voting, stupid (none / 0)

Well we'll have to do a lot just to push the idea no matter who the candidate is.

Frankly I think any Democratic candidate could deliver all this and more, but it will only happen if citizens organize and demand it.

This, by the way, means that effective issue advocacy needs to be done around/outside the campaigns themselves. That means there's a good window over this year to do it. I think there's a lot more value in building movements to push issues and tactics than candidates at this point.

It's a very different dynamic from 2003, to me anyway.

Unless you really want to work for a presidential campaign, I think it's a lot more effective to try and push the national debate and back Pelosi than to organize around any of the candidates in particular. Issue-based organizations will persist because the issues will too; candidate-based organizations will be largely persona or process-driven, will cut against one another, and will (with one exception) largely evaporate.

Me | My Work | Future Majority

by Josh Koenig on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 09:37:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (none / 0)

From my perspective, the big difference between the two is that Obama has a political network and advisors. General Clark had nothing. The Draft Clark movement lived online and offline (meetups, local coordinators), and we had to show General Clark he had some form of support. I really don't think Obama, he of large crowds wherever he goes, had to wonder.

by lhuynh on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 12:24:23 PM EST

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (none / 0)

Clark's draft movement was real, Obama was going to throw his hat in the ring whether or not these people got behind it, whereas Clark and his family needed some convincing.

And back to the other day's argument that the Draft Clark movement killed Dean's momentum...I don't think so. Clark was drafted because people weren't satisfied with the cast of candidates at the time (including Dean) and they were impressed with Clark himself.

And I can speak from experience, as I was a member of the draft movement since April of '03.

by DaveB on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 01:00:46 PM EST

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (none / 0)

Listen, the cat's good and all, but he ain't gonna be our nation's next president...no way shape or form. Now Gore/Obama 2008--that's a different story...
www.minor-ripper.blogspot.com

The Ripper www.minor-ripper.blogspot.com

by MinorRipper on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 01:07:49 PM EST

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (none / 0)

I had not found blogs in 04 so I missed the online candidate movement. I also wasn't following too close the primaries as I had some health issues.
What I do know is that I have been very up on Obama since he ran for the senate here. the excitement going around the country started for us a few years earlier.
I guess you could say, to find out how Obama plays in the long haul and what his staying power is, talk to people from Illinois.
We got the bug early and by the time of Ryan's campaign imploding in the early summer, Obama fever was already solid here. It took a month to find someone who would run against him as he was blowing the gop away.
He ran at a 60% or more all summer and into the fall.
Now, in 07, we are still in thrawl with Obama. He has done his job well. He's done alot for the state and has done alot of legislation.
He still draws sell out crowds here and people still crowd and swoon.
In southern Illinois it's the deep south. Like alabama. He has a big fan base with those white good old boys there. Solid republican districts still love Obama. He attracts the evangelicals, the good old boys, the business upper class, working class, dem, repub, and indies.
He has staying power here and star power as well.
The fun thing is seeing all the people who think he's some lightweight flash in the pan. Some guy who peddles just hope and nothing solid.
Just wait. It will be fun to see how the country acts when they find out about the real Obama.

by vwcat on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 05:40:58 PM EST

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (none / 0)

That is good to hear; I think Obama somehow manages to create a 'new' constituency in US politics. You should have seen his announcement clip on the ABC evening news nationally here in Australia tonight. Totally out of character for typical local coverage of US politics. How does he do it?

It works for me... it will be fun.

by Shaun Appleby on Wed Jan 17, 2007 at 04:42:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Notes on Obama and Clark (none / 0)

k1 k2 k3 k4 k5 k6 k7 k8 k9 k10 k11 k12 k13 k14 k15 k16 k17 k18 k19 k20 k21 k22 k23 k24 k25 k26 k27 k28 k29 k30 k31 k32 k33 k34 k35 k36 k37 k38 k39 k40 k41 k42 k43 k44 k45 k46 k47 k48 k49 k50 k51 k52 k53 k54 k55 k56 k57 k58 k59 k60 k61 k62 k63 k64 k65 k66 k67 k68 k69 k70 k71 k72 k73 k74 k75 k76 k77 k78 k79 k80 k81

by nachnachoo on Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 11:58:41 AM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.