Where Hillary Went Wrong
Now that the final debate is over and Hillary’s “kitchen sink” strategy did not succeed in throwing Barack off stride, it is probably time to look at why both the Clintons and the MSM were so wrong about the race. In my inaugural post in December, I wrote that the Obama campaign was a source of hope for me at a time that I thought America was getting into deep economic and political waters. In early January I suggested that we were entering a new post partisan “Interregnum”:”those hinges in time when the old order is dead, but the new direction has not been determined” and that the Clintons did not understand that the ground was shifting beneath their feet.
Because Mark Penn did not understand this shift in spirit, he thought he could use classic attack politics and for two days in New Hampshire with the tears and the “Iron my Shirt” trick it worked. But you can only cry once and Bill Clinton’s attacks in South Carolina misfired. As late as two days ago, Penn was still playing dirty, releasing the picture of Obama in Somali traditional dress to Drudge–but it didn’t play.
But the biggest mistake was the Clinton’s assumption that the contest would be over on February 5. On February 6th I wrote that Obama would take the next ten primaries and there were rumors that Clinton had loaned her campaign $5 million. That was the straw that broke the camel’s back. As Claire Walker of Lancaster, Ohio told the Times this morning when talking about the $5 million loan,
“Where did that come from?” she asked. “A lot of people in this area who thought she was for the working middle class, and the poor are wondering about that. That’s a lot of money. That really hurt her in this area.”
“That $5 million came out of nowhere,” Ms. Walker added. “I think even more than her husband that will cause her to lose. The people here are poor, but they’re not stupid.”
But ultimately all of Hillary’s blunders might not have changed the dynamics of this race. Barack Obama is the once in a generation politician that perhaps can lead us out of this interregnum. As I said in my very first post on this blog,
I worked for Gene McCarthy in early 68 and went over to Bobby Kennedy when he entered the race in the Spring. I and many of our generation started off that year, forty years ago, with so much political hope and ended it in such despair. And as a result, many of us retreated into art away from politics;just like Bob Dylan did. So in my own students, who have been in that same “retreat” into music and pop culture for years, there is a reverse journey–into the political movement that is Barack Obama. And that fills me with hope.
hmm. not much here so far.
Let me use this space to ask you Jon… ok, let’s say you are McCain’s advisors, you’ve just watched Penn get it all wrong.
What’s your whoop Obama strategy and why?
They are trying it out today. Accuse him of being a closet Muslim. Obama hit back brilliantly. You will find him to be the Ali of Politics–Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee.
Check this out.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23375294#23375294
Maybe this will not be a point that will receive serious attention in the mainstream press but surely on enlightened blogs like this one should one not ask the more basic question:
What is so wrong IF Obama is a Muslim, or draws some inspiration from one of the 3 Abrahamic religions of the world?
Should not educated, englightened people wonder why in a country that, supposedly, values multiculturalism and diversity of faith “association” with Islam makes a person inelectable?
I am not a Muslim, in fact I am an atheist of the Christopher Hitchens/Dawkins persuasion, so I am not coming at this with some sense of personal hurt but this surely is one of the more ridiculous indicators of the post-9/11 atmosphere that a fringe element of a particular faith has become justification for denouncing an entire group that has only one thing in common – religion (there are multiple facets of an individual’s identity and religion is only one!).
To digress just a bit: In an earlier blog there was some mention of Huntington’s ridiculous hypothesis of jihadist mindets and the “clash of civilizations” based on the non-democratic mindset of Muslims. The World Values Surveys, a large, statistically rigorous effort at measuring peoples values around the world over several years, have shown quite conclusively that government and representative government are not the sources of conflicting values. What is the bone of contention is a more basic issue of scope of individual freedom, specifically that of women’s freedom to express their preferences (particularly in the sexual domain).
But this is part of the most basic issue all societies have faced and will continue to face – the individual-social dynamic wherein individual aspirations for self-expression (in every way – not just in markets) necessarily get constrained in social settings that have multiple individuals (with differing aspirations). The conflict arises because different societies/cultures deal with this issue in different ways. Western societies are more individualistic, non-western ones less so. I am not trying to say that this means the Western world should not promote individual freedoms (it should absolutely) but this type of recasting of the non-Western world in the neo-con (though liberals at this point are just as guilty of this) worldview is not going to work. Iraq didn’t teach us this. The lessons, for those willing to learn (including liberals) are there from Vietnam, Philippines, and many other places.
Apologies to all for going on and on, but as an admirer of Amercan soft power (on individual freedoms, regardless of the outcome) this “Obama is a Muslim, is not a Muslim” line of thinking is deeply worrisome. It is the same cowardice that one saw a few years ago with open-minded people not wanting to be labelled a libearal. Someone, maybe starting with Jon, should start making a case against this type of thinking and not count on Obama’s campaign, which has to play politics, to do the hard work
Jon I asked:
“What’s your whoop Obama strategy and why?”
You answered:
“They are trying it out today. Accuse him of being a closet Muslim. Obama hit back brilliantly. You will find him to be the Ali of Politics–Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee.
Check this out.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23375294#23375294
1. THAT IS NOT AN ANSWER. You are not a spin doctor for Obama, I asked for proof of your political insight, how to dismantle Obama, that’s it. Are you refusing to answer?
2. The video link I see with AM Cox (she was stronger with suck and wonkette) shows Obama not actually answering what to do with Al Qaeda in Iraq, just arguing about why they are there now. Assuming they are now THERE, Obama’s question was ” what do you do if Al Qaeda is in Iraq, and he said STAY, re-invade. So, if they are there, turns out he now has reason NOT TO LEAVE.
3. Please really answer my points. I take the time to ask questions. Answering them directly. in Q&A format would be nice.
I have no interest in imagining a “whoop Obama strategy”.
Jaiki:
I agree, it’s not just worrisome–it’s sickening.
However given that Clinton’s gender, Obama’s race, and McCain’s age have all been HUGE issues as well, it’s hardly surprising.
I’m assuming that you and I aren’t the only ones who have noticed this (and American Muslims must be thrilled), so I’m guessing that the only reason that these anti-Muslim undertones haven’t been identified as racist and denounced (or rejected?), is that none of the candidates are actually Muslim, so it’s not considered relevant or newsworthy.
In any case, the focus on race, class, gender, and ethnicity in this election has been really disturbing. Discussions around “the Latino vote,” for example, are loaded with all sorts of really problematic assumptions.
Speaking of problematic assumptions, some appear in your comment as well, if I understood you correctly. (I may not have.) Islam is a religion that is practiced in most Western democracies by active citizens of those Western democracies. Those citizens are “Muslims”. Being Muslim has nothing to do with what part of the world you live in (or come from), or the system of governance one is used to. Your comment seems to suggest otherwise (I mean, why else would you be talking about the Western/non-Western world in a discussion about Muslims in the US?)
As far as the electability issue goes, I think that being Muslim IS an issue. Besides the obvious problematic conflation of Muslims/Islam with both 9/11 and the Iraq war, there is another root to this anti-Muslim sentiment in the US: The notion that the U.S.A. is a Christian country, with a system of governance and value system built on Christian values and principles. The idea of a “separation between church and state” didn’t keep Christian values from shaping the US government’s structure, processes, and policies. Now, even this perceived separation has become increasingly less important to many Americans. Today there are those who think that the US’s “Christian-ness” is something that has to be changed to make the country more inclusive and equitable, and those that think it should be protected and reinforced. Those who subscribe to the latter notion, are going to be incredibly intolerant of anyone seen as challenging the Christian status quo.
While I don’t think it’s this issue that’s fueling current “Obama is a Muslim” fears, I think this is an issue that will have to be addressed before an openly Muslim person will ever be let anywhere near a seat in the US government. Although the US has dealt with issues of race, gender, and sexual orientation as they relate to governance, but “religion” has yet to be addressed. “Church” may have been addressed once upon a time, but “mosque”? That’s something for the 21st Century.
Oh come on! I will stipulate you do not want to whoop Obama. I 100% admit Jon Taplin is on the side of Obama.
That said, you are a professor. You think critically by profession. Critically examining the weaknesses in Obama does not weaken Obama. If you have no interest in even imagining a “whoop Obama strategy” you are politely casting yourself as an unappointed spinmeister and turning the world of blogs into the same horrific playground found stage left at televised and corporate sponsored “debate.” Critically examining Obama’s campaign (or McCain’s campaign) STRENGTHENS HIM (or him). Don’t fear truth. If there is a there there – you do it a disservice by refusing to answer questions.
We’ve met before and I grant you wide and deep credit about your subject matter, but expertise requires critically examining your own side, your own product, otherwise you are a consumer, not a producer.
Besides, it is fun. We don’t have to be snarky about the man. You won’t lose your religion. Tell you what, afterwards we’ll think of even more soaring communication strategies he can employ.
Ha. So I’m wrong, and pleasantly so: a Muslim has made it into Congress. The US is a tad more progressive than I’d given it credit for. And of course Jews have been in government for awhile.
So, perhaps I’m full of cr*p. It wouldn’t be the first time. ; )
Jaiki,
I think 100% of the “xxx is a Muslim, not a Muslim,” discussion while regrettable can generally be attributed to the “Muslim” part and not the person.
Islam (and the Koran) has some internal rule making and social expressions, that are unacceptable to libertine republics. This is not to say there aren’t some sickening fuddy-duddies of the Xian faith, or that most Muslim’s want to impose Sharia law where-ever they go. We’re all annoyed that both backwards groups want to take away my subscription to Playboy.
Islam is scary rather because of all the “Allah Akhbar” (God is great) stuff. To the Xians, this doesn’t sound like their gd, and to non-religious types (like yourself) Islam hasn’t really cleaned up its own ranks yet enough to be welcomed gladly into libertine republics, has it?
I think it is healthier to examine how Muslim’s might prove to libertine cultures (the west) they are more concerned we get our Playboy’s delivered, than that the nutjobs they know thru a friend-of-a-friend are no different than the “follow Xian law” guys we’ve weakened legally on our own.
It took us a long time and much blood shed to get sex on TV and porn on the Internet, I’m not worried about Obama being a Muslim, because Obama doesn’t want to take away my 2girls1cup.com (jesus, yuck).
But, I would encourage anyone running for office here as a Muslim to take such a pledge, because that’s where voters hearts lie. It won’t take much to to convince people not to worry about the religion of Islam as long as the religion isn’t anti-Morgan.
I’d point out it was Hillary (the feminist) attacking Obama for being a Muslim out of political expediency, the same Hillary who many here would be choosing to vote for… if the attacks worked.
Great post… I could see the beginning of the end when she teared up @ a press conference. I just thought to myself, is she seriously tearing up and/or crying in front of people. Even if it was a ploy to gain sympathy, it just looked bad, in my eyes @ least.
I actually like McCain because he appears to be a straight shooter, but his age will be a factor that plays into many voters mind. The country needs some new blood to lead it in the right direction. I think if it’s an Obama/McCain choice that the young vote will decide because quite frankly, I can see young republicans, who are moderate crossing over and voting for Obama…
Wow, I just saw the video of McCain and his comments on Obama’s statement on Iraq… His heart wasn’t even in it, well, maybe it was… I really don’t think he has a chance @ debating Obama, but it should be interesting…
Interesting points here, some illustrated with rather base examples.
To the discussion of the problematic notions of painting one as ‘muslim’, I concur. Myself, I try to remember Jefferson’s famous words: “If my neighbor believes in one god, or twenty, is of no concern to me, it neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.” We are a nation founded on the basic principle of freedom of religion. I would also argue that this implies freedom *from* religion. (one of my favorite bumper stickers of all time reads: Dear Lord, please save me from your followers.)
Ironically, I think it interesting and saddening that an atheist would likely have more difficulty being elected into office than would a Muslim. Neither are inferior, but based purely upon belief, neither should be held to be superior, either.
A fact lost on most discussions of the founding fathers and other influentials in this country’s early days and establishment, was the fact that most of the powers-that-were, were in fact *deists*. If one considers the historical perspective of the time, and the recent religious happenings in greater Europe and England in particular, this is not hard to understand.
That said, I believe that if one of the polling agencies were to question the public about opinion of Sharia law, support for such an action in the US would not achieve a 10th of a percent.
Which leads me to a question I have been wondering for some time: Though we profess to be an open nation, with state-defended rights of religious freedom, is it right or acceptable for Muslims to want to establish Sharia law in the countries to which they immigrate?
Some European countries struggle with this currently. My own (current) belief is that it is not just that an immigrant population should be able to establish a more restrictive culture and legal system on an established national populace.
That said, we as Americans certainly did not respect the indigenous populations of North America when we got here either. It does not state on our currency that we respect Grandfather Sky, Mother Earth, The Raven or the Coyote…
- Zhirem
Thanks for your observations Melissa and Zhirem.
My worry about the Is Obama a Muslim bit is not about McCain or Hillary bringing it up. They are politicians and their game is based on shaping opinion favorable to themselves so they will use everything that is treated as allowable (interesting how race is no longer usable, whereas just a few decades ago it was) to win the game. My concern is really about the press coverage and the writings of otherwise brilliant observers of the world. In the past couple of days I have spent/wasted a good bit of time reading the major newspapers to see what the commentators have to say. In no instance did I see any commentator deal with this most basic issue. You can find fundamentalists in every religion, and equally heinous (as 9/11) acts are committed by Christians, Jews, Hindus, and others in the name of religion.
As to whether most Muslims want to impose Sharia wherever they go, I don’t know what survey that is based on. If any of you have a reference to a large, representative, probabilistic survey I would greatly appreciate it. In its absence I don’t find that opinion particularly believable because most human beings in the world are peaceful, and within Islam there is tremendous diversity of opinion and religious fervor so it is not fair to caste everyone in the same light.
Finally, Melissa to clarify the Western/nonWestern bit. It was not about Islam but to point out that tensions in the individual-social dynamic are dealt with differently in different parts of the world. You may want to check out Ron Inglehart’s (Univ of Michigan Dept of Pol Sc) work that is based on the World Values Surveys for this.
Jaiki,
“If any of you have a reference to a large, representative, probabilistic survey I would greatly appreciate it. In its absence I don’t find that opinion particularly believable because most human beings in the world are peaceful, and within Islam there is tremendous diversity of opinion and religious fervor so it is not fair to caste everyone in the same light.”
Huh?
As I said, yep you can find nutjobs in every religion. I don’t see any reporters, and “brilliant observers of the world” casting Muslims as baddie baddies.
Do you? In absence of you proving they are, I think we’re all comfy with the general rule, that you can come live here freely, practice your own religion, win political office, just don’t try and limit our own consumption of wine, women, and song.
It appears in Europe, where there has been much more Muslim immigration, there has been much more Muslim anger at western behavior.
Is this not the case?
Jaiki, please do not misunderstand me. I by no means am implying that Muslims want to establish Sharia law wherever they go. But it seems to me to be an interesting trend, but perhaps that is too broad a descriptor. As for examples of this: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&tab=wn&ned=&q=Sharia&btnG=Search+News
I think that freedom of religion is paramount. But I hold at the same time that an immigrant population, *any* immigrant population should adopt and adapt to the social and legal norms of the new home. Some of that is not to be just expected, but some of it seems to just be common sense, and the considerate thing to do?
- Zhirem
“I think that freedom of religion is paramount. But I hold at the same time that an immigrant population, *any* immigrant population should adopt and adapt to the social and legal norms of the new home.”
It seems I didn’t get my point across. Islam is a religion practiced the world over. The assumption being made in the statement above (and in other posts here) is that all Muslims are immigrants. Well, many of them aren’t. The issue of freedom of religion/Islam should not be approached as an issue about immigrants. They are two separate issues, and should be treated as such.
Many European countries are notoriously xenophobic, partially because people’s roots in those countries often go back centuries. The “Muslim=foreigner” sentiment is particularly strong there because many Muslims are *relatively* recent arrivals. North Americans should be wary of perpetuating this notion, for obvious reasons.
Anyway, as far as “immigrants” go: Social and legal norms in every place change over time, largely because the social norms and values of the people in those places change over time. To say that immigrants should adopt and adapt to local norms fails to recognize that these norms are actually quite diverse, and they certainly aren’t fixed. To say that an “immigrant” should adopt and adapt is to say that some people should have less of a right to participate in acts of citizenship than others. That goes against the very principle of democracy upon which everything else is based. If we all adopted and adapted, today I would not be considered a “person” under law, and I would have no rights. The value of democracy is that all people get a voice, and these important issues are debated and discussed in public forums until we come up with an answer or decision that most of us agree with.
As far as Muslims go: Muslims aren’t trying to impose Sharia law everywhere they “go” (or everywhere they are.) I would say that most Muslims seem to be happily abiding by whatever legal system they find themselves living under. Like all religions, there is diversity in how Islam is practiced. Most Jews are not Hassidic and will happily use their stoves and rip toilet paper on Shabbat. Most Christians are not Amish and happily drive cars and use modern technology. By the same token, not all Muslims want to live under Sharia law. To paint all Muslims with the same brush, is like painting all Christians with the same brush: it makes no sense. (Just putting that out there, although I think we’re all in agreement on this).
There are four million Muslims in the U.S., mostly well integrated into U.S. Culture. In Universities like USC, there are a large number of Muslim students, many of them studying in the U.S., but planning to return to their home countries. These are the best ambassadors for public diplomacy that we have. We should make it much easier for all foreign students to get visas and we should encourage many more of them to stay and work here. Currently my Masters students lose their visa about 4 months after they graduate. If they don’t already have a job with a visa (another catch 22) they are sent home.
Politically Obama’s appeal is that he represents all of us, physically and in his political approach. McCain’s version of Swift-boating Obama, will not work with the younger generation. Ans as I said before, if you believe Obama is a closet Muslim you are a hard core republican anyway.
What is McCain’s version of swift boating Obama? So far, it has only been Hillary, no? McCain repudiated a radio talk show host for even saying “Hussein.” It sounds like you are accusing McCain of something he didn’t even do.
“Politically Obama’s appeal is that he represents all of us, physically and in his political approach”
Jon, McCain’s following is the 30% of the folks who call themselves independents. And “all of us” (whoever that is), certainly don’t feel Obama represents everyone. Do you mean the Muslim students and yourself?
Are you having a hard day? I ask, because as I said before:
1) I don’t see anyone except Hillary painting Muslims with “the same brush,” as their extremists.
2) No one is saying 4M Muslims aren’t well integrated into our society.
3) I think we’d all agree Sharia law has no place here.
What’s the issue?
Morgan- McCain doesn’t need to do the dirty work. He can have apparatchicks like the head of the Tennessee Republican party put out press releases and then he can denounce them. He gets two news cycles instead of one.
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/02/tennessee_republican_party_sla.php
I do agree that Sharia Law has no place in America.
Wait, I don’t think we can blame McCain – he deserves the benefit of the doubt. Just as we’d give the same benefit to Obama, just as Obama granted to Hillary the other night.
If McCain was coy about it, that’d be one thing, but he simply wasn’t.
Re our Founding Fathers:
http://watkins.gospelcom.net/foundingfathers.htm
So some were indeed Christians, but some significant ones were not…but clearly the Christians were OK with that, unlike some contemporaries of ours.
Charisma, Beware of charismatics, they make the worst leaders. I don’t remember who said it I’m sorry to say. Having worked around a few and witnessed others its’ my impression that they say and do pretty much what they want. This inexplicable ability to convince people that they have not seen what they have just seen or have just experienced something that hasn’t happened. Hillary, she of limited charisma, has been taken to the woodshed by a real charismatic, just like her husband.
The idea of any-one being a “closet” Muslim is funny, my daughter is a Muslim and there is nothing closet about their life . They are devoted to Mohammed possibly more than so called Christians who only pray maybe once a day.
But the idea that Hilary could afford to lend herself five million dollars without blinking suggests she is a different world to myself.
A phone rings in the White House, it is 3 am a voice on the other end says” Where is your husband”.
Lightly applied it should work.