by Damozel | Among many bloggers who remain critical of Obama and the Obama campaign, one of those I find most powerful and persuasive is Anglachel, who writes both eloquently and intelligently about the divide in the Hillary campaign.
Here are a couple of quotes from Anglachel's posts, though it's only fair to say that they aren't reducible down to extracts; they are intricately thought through and unified --- the blogging equivalent of origami --- and pulling out a piece here and there isn't really illustrative.
I did not support Obama in the primaries and do not think he was the best choice for presumptive nominee. I intend to support him, and to press other Democrats to do the same. But his views do not coincide with mine, and he was not the candidate I wanted.
I think he is going to pay a heavy price for his campaign's indifference to the discontent among voters who wanted Hillary Clinton, and the airy dismissal of this position by his supporters cuts absolutely no ice with me.
Anglachel explains it better: In No Where Else to Go, on July 1, Anglachel wrote:
The split of the Democratic electorate itself has been followed by growing resistance to the designated nominee. This is not something I have seen before on the Democratic side, though it certainly begins to look more and more like the 1976 contest between Reagan and Ford, with the establishment candidate barely avoiding a convention floor upset by a rival with a new and energized coalition that is dedicated to the party but unhappy with the party direction. The party leadership, like their Republican counter-parts in 1976, appears determined to yield no ground for the cause of true unity, which would require compromise with their internal rivals and the constituencies these actors represent. Instead, what we hear is some variation on “You have nowhere else to go, so tough.”...
It is this arrogance and incapacity to acknowledge legitimate claims and criticisms that has raised the hackles among Democrats who are not necessarily ardent Clinton supporters – though repetition of the dismissal clearly hardens resolve – and which points the way to the underlying problem of the Party, laid bare by this electoral contest. Perhaps it took this particular match up, one that undermines comfortable assumptions about what Democrats believe and are willing to fight for, to expose the fault line I have been discussing for the last few months....
A large portion of the constituents on both side have said they won’t support the other candidate, but polling shows that the Clinton Democrats who will not cross over are larger in number and stronger in their opinions than Obama supporters. The party leadership is threatened by this disaffection, yet they are consistently unwilling to regard this part of the party as part of the coalition they need to retain. The public relations campaign, insofar as there is one, revolves around threats (Roe! Roe! Roe our boat!), shaming (You’re just racists if you won’t vote Obama), but mostly dismissal - “You have nowhere else to go.” The opposition is dismissed as emotional, racist, low information, culturally backward, and republican dupes instead of driven by very concrete material interests.
I think that the Obama campaign may live to regret its massive attitude of entitlement. Even many of Obama's supporters are disaffected and angry. And that they have mainly themselves to blame doesn't mean they won't blame Obama.
And then there's this:
The party may be unified on paper...but the difference can be seen in the philosophical commitments of the final two contenders. One looks at Obama and there is no political substance. Nothing. There is no issue, no cause, no certain pledge that says he and his faction intend to do anything for the working class or any interest that might involve true political contestation. This is what Krugman has pointed out from the start. Everything is on the table to be negotiated away for the sake of “unifying the nation.” When pushed, there will be no shove back. He has nowhere he wants to go. (No Where Else to Go)
I don't think Obama is going to be riding to the White House on that great swell of popular support he and his handlers were perhaps counting on.
I fully expect that before it's over, his campaign is going to have to go cap in hand to Democrats he's failed to reach -- the ones who the party seems to regard as of low value, politically, and not worth reaching out to. I think he may already be learning that that the balloon ride is over.
I can't think of anything worse than a McCain presidency, or than not administering the rebuke to the Bush legacy that it so richly deserves. But I don't want to forget to remind the Pied Piper and those who follow him that if he doesn't lead the marching multitudes in the direction of something better that he's likely not to get paid.
RECENT BN-POLITICS POSTINGS
Oh, Grow Up (Yet Another Obama Supporter Thinks Maybe He's Been Had)
Melissa McEwen & Maureen McCluskey: The Left's Campaign Against Hillary Clinton
Krugman: How the GOP Made the Economy What it Is
McCain to Balance the Budget And Spin Gold Out of Manure
Spitefulness Towards Obama: Some Reflections
Obama & Europe: Will They Still Love Him Tomorrow?
Tracking the Course of the Bush-Cheney Juggernaut As It Lurches Toward Iran
How Uninformed is John McCain About the Economy?
Christian Conservatives Unite Behind McCain
Comments