The audacity of hype

By Contributor Archive

Filed Under Race for White House 2008 on Feb 20 

The rejected title.Barack Obama continues to roll over Hillary Clinton in vote after vote, he’s destroying her everywhere except where it counts, in the delegate total.

According to ABC News, the gap between the two is only 79, Barack has 1355 and Hillary 1276. The Democrats have such a screwed up “everybody” wins system of awarding delegate (think participation ribbons) that it’s nearly impossible for either to obtain the 2025 delegates needed to become the nominee outright without the superdelegates getting to pick the winner.

You’d still be hard-pressed to find anyone who knows what Barack Obama stands for, aside from hope, but wanting things to more hope-ier and different isn’t really a platform.

If empty platitudes and excited crowds were all that were needed to get elected, President Howard Dean would’ve imposed socialism by now…

Comments

  • Ben Royer

    Come on ken,it might be true that Senator Obama opposed President Bush`s venture into Iraq ,call it foresight , good judgement who knows? The real issue is the here and now, what is he going to do about it, you just can`t cut and run. It is how are we going to do it what matters. Those are things that can`t be solved whith an inspiring speech alone.

  • Ken H

    Senator Obama had the good sense to oppose President Bush’s folly in Iraq from the start which is something that neither Senator Clinton nor Senator McCain can claim.

    Good judgment trumps bad experience any time.

  • RedStateEddio

    GWC – Spot on with a key stylistic issue that is emerging as a major factor. In fact, I speculate that the issue here in the presidential election is a microcosm of a larger trend in the country. I’m seeing the same type of shift in primary leadership styles at the local level where I operate.

    We traditionally associate CEO level leadership as a command-n-control style (the type A guy/gal). But research evidence is suggesting that particular type of style is becoming less effective, while more inclusive and team oriented styles are beginning to become more central and necessary to run organizations effectively. Daniel Goleman (Primal Leadership) desribes it as resonant vs. dissonant leadership styles. The resonant styles (inclusive and team styles) are listed as visionary, affiliative, democratic, and coaching; the dissonant listed as command & pacesetting.

    W is a perfect example of a command-n-control leadership style; Even Hillary seems to indicate the same style. THAT is what people have been most turned off by (as well as his terrible communication abilities). Obama, on the other hand, presents himself as a more inclusive leader; building a coalition, inviting the disenfranchised, giving a voice to those who’ve felt powerless. All these characteristics emanate from a resonant-style leader. In some respects, Obama is the backlash to Bush as much on his leadership style as on his policy decisions. That could definitely be a huge issue as the campaign continues and intensifies by November.

  • AWB

    Whether you agree or disagree with his policy positions, the Number 1 problem with all this is he hasn’t DONE anything. That’s pretty sad if his best qualification is that he’s been a community organizer. Jimmy Carter thought he could go to Washington and run it like he had Georgia as governor and we know how that worked out. I suspect things won’t be much better for Obama because the problem with this bottom up movement is that the goals of the different groups in his coalition are so different. It’s fine as long as you can unite under a banner of “Change” broadly and vaguely defined (in speeches-not on his website, granted), but it gets far more difficult when Mr. Obama has to go to Washington and actually get something done. I have far more confidence in the confrontational style of a Hillary or McCain.

  • Brian H

    NewYorkStateConservative

    Haven’t you learned by now that “impressive and substantial achievements and experience” is overrated? The guy gives a good speech…at least for the first 10 minutes. After that I find myself waiting with anticipation for the “YES WE CAN” chant, or possibly the next woman to be overcome with such glorious enthusiasm that she loses all consiousness. NOW THATS ENTERTAINMENT!!!

  • goldwaterconservative

    on my previous post, this psychoanalysis of the candidates provides some interesting perspective that i think clarifies what i mean about what kind of leadership obama is exemplifying:

    http://www.slate.com/id/2184696/pagenum/2

    the problem with his kind of leadership, i admit, is that it is great for a political campaign; he has proven himself a leader through his campaign, but seeing how it works in the presidency is a whole other issue.

    Now, I’m leaning McCain, but I have to come to Obama’s defense on these matters of specifics. If you read his proposals (yes, i have actually read his healthcare plan…and it is infinitely superior to clinton’s), he does have the details provided — the wonky details. and, if you recall, over the summer, he was incessantly criticized for being too professorial, droning, and wonky on the stump, leaving crowds looking for excitement feeling underwhelmed (underwhelmed was a word constantly used in these articles). he started changing this some time in the fall, and now he’s being criticized for being to vaporous. if anything, i would criticize obama for this: he is unable to balance his speeches with substance and style; he is only capable of doing one or the other.

  • goldwaterconservative

    i think most reasonable people can agree that obama has accomplished little (fewer but still many reasonable people can also agree that hillary ALSO has accomplished little). That is not the point of Barack Obama. In fact, I would add that his vague rhetoric is also not that much of a detriment, for again, it is besides the point. Obama is offering an unconventional kind of leadership for this country; I am not endorsing it necessarily, for it we’ve never truly seen it before. His most relevant experience is not senator, but community organizer, for that is what he is offering. he is offering bottom-up leadership; he is creating a movement. yes, it is driven by his personality, but at the same time, it is wholly about the people. he is generating a popular desire and motion to push through his agenda (it is not the agenda I would prefer, let me add…). If he’s the nominee, the contrast between McCain and him couldn’t be any starker, for McCain is also a leader, but a top-down leader. He would lead by exhibiting personal, individual leadership qualities, like character and cojones. It’ll be interesting to see which leadership style prevails.

  • NewYorkStateConservative

    Toby, I grant you that Obama has plans and polices (anyone can go to his website and see for themselves), but I would be interested to know what “impressive and substantial achievements and experience” he has.

  • Toby

    That’s right, folks. Keep underestimating Obama and trying to ignore his impressive and substantial acheivements and experience. It’s a winning strategy… look how well its working out for Hillary.

    And keep trying to ignore the fact that politics has always inspired passion and excitement simply because McCain and Hillary aren’t very exciting figures- ignore the fact that most voters decide with their hearts, and those that decide with their heads are smarter than the ridiculous spin that Obama has no plans or policies.

    Keep it up. We aren’t counting on it, but it sure helps.

  • Gary Russell

    Stephen,
    I could promise lollipops and lemonade to all of the children of the world, but it wouldn’t be a PLAN unless I explained how I would be able to get the supplies, distribute them, and, oh yeah, PAY for them.
    Mr. Obama has yet to supply any DETAILS of his “chicken in every pot” promises. Therefore, he has yet to give DETAILS.

    Anyone can recite a utopian (socialist??) wish-list for 45 minutes…

  • george schumer

    Yes, I heard Obama talk about college scholarships in exchange for national service. Not a bad idea, other than the bureaucracy it will create, and the continued reliance on the nanny state.

    But I’ll give him credit for creativity.

  • Stephen

    Obama has a 150 point lead among pledged delegates, that is not something the Clintons are going to be able to overcome easily. When folks talk about Super Delegates deciding the nominee they are talking about Hillary, the only possible way is if she wins the majority of the remaining Super’s, but she would of not won the most pledged delegates and will of stoled the nomination from the people. After Obama is put over the top with Super’s he will of won the nomination out right because he has the most pledged delegates.

    I can’t stand this talk of not knowing where Obama stands on issues, people complain and complain, they just don’t read or listen. Last night in Houston, Obama gave a 45+ minute speech, with details and his normal stump speech and then yall complain that it was too long of a speech.

    all of his issues are laid out in clear form right here, give them a look if you would like.
    http://www.barackobama.com/issues/

    BTW … people do not go to Obama rallies to here policy positions they can go on his website for that, they go to be inspired and to feel good about this country again, to talk about what kind of country we can be, and how we can move past the cynics and move toward a working majority to bring people together for change for the future, not the past.

    After Obama wins Texas and Ohio, Hillary will be out and he will be the nominee.

    Another note, It would be good to keep an eye on the level of turnout in these races, Obama has come out with more votes then all the Republicans combined, time and time again, look forward to a landslide victory in November.