The News Buckit: March 2008: Political news and campaign coverage

Top ten reasons the GOP could beclown Obama in November
a post written by Patrick Ishmael
Monday, March 31 at 3:31 PM

10. Reliable red states: There's nothing like having friends that like you through thick and thin, and for Republicans in 21 states, that's exactly what they have. Unfortunately for Obama, he's strong in all the wrong places; of the primaries that Obama has won over Clinton, almost half are very reliably Republican and off the general election board -- states like Kansas, Idaho, North Dakota, Alaska, etc.; in contrast, the states that Clinton is carrying in the primaries are states that Clinton could, in fact, carry in a general election, with less than a third solidly red.

Add to that John McCain's very real ability to make blue states purple or even red (New Jersey the latest example,) and Obama has a very real problem. Like her husband, Clinton can make a legitimate play for wayward Blue Dog Democrats in these battlegrounds; Obama is less able. Why?

9. The "L" word (liberal): Ideology, plain and simple. Obama's no moderate, and when it gets down to brass tacks, what he believes will matter more than the audacious audacity of his audacilicious hope. National Journal's classification of Obama as the Senate's most liberal senator is not a label Obama will be able to avoid. It's easy ad material and underscores his weakness in states like Pennsylvania and Florida, although it should be noted that NJ's assesment is merely a reiteration of how Obama has described his politics in the past.

8. Michelle Obama: Mrs. Obama is one of the most visible spouses left in this campaign, which brings with it its own positives and negatives. The more vocal she is, the higher the perception her husband's administration will be a tag-team presidency, and the greater the scrutiny paid to her as a result. Mrs. Obama's "pride in her country" kerfuffle wasn't just a misstatement, as she recited the line twice that day; critiques of it are appropriate -- after all, she meant to say what she said. Meanwhile back in the real world, the American people expect their first spouse to celebrate his or her country in public, not complain about how "mean" it is and previously undeserving it was of her appreciation... that is, until Barack inspired all those people.

7. Tony Rezko: Money, money, money. It's the lifeblood of politics but also the seed of its corruption, and Rezko is one of its seediest denizens. More will come out as his trial progresses, and Obama's close association with him ties calls into question one of his prinicipal arguments to be President: his judgment.

6. A changed political environment come November: A message of "hope" is effective in hopeless times. And if the times aren't hopeless? Not so much. If Iraq continues on its path to normalcy and US economic woes stabilize, Obama's potent "politics of change" talking points evaporate, leaving only Obama's sparse voting record and argument of superior judgment, itself a shallow proposition. There's no guarantee there will be significant progress on either front, but if there is, positive news there is far more detrimental to Obama's candidacy than anything that will (likely?) come out of the Rezko trial.

5. Obama's specious public record: One bill made law and an important chairmanship with no meetings aren't good indicators of what to expect from an Obama presidency. Fact is, there's not a whole lot to find, and of what there is, it's all liberal. (See point 9.) Moreover, the notion that Obama is qualified to be President because he was against going into Iraq implies that about 26% of the American people are also qualified to be Commander in Chief. The "me and 60 million other people" argument is not a very good one, particularly if it's the only one to be made. So what other indicators of Obama's judgment (not including Rezko, of course) can voters reference when deciding for whom to vote?

4. Reverend Wright: The 527 ads are too easy (although this is a bit over the top,) and the jabs at judgment are obvious. No Republican would have survived this sort of long-term association, and the equivocations of Obama's supporters will do little blunt the damage such ads will have. Is Obama never wrong, or are we always wrong for questioning him? Should Obama have to answer for his association with Wright, or should the US of KKKA instead take this opportunity to do some soul searching with Barack as our predestined moderator? Someone should ask Don Imus.

3. Obama's frequently posited obliviousness and never-posited arrogance: It strains credulity to believe that Obama had little reason to believe that Rezko was a crook. Or that he didn't realize his self-narrated links to Selma and the Kennedy family were fabricated. Or that his pastor was an angry bigot and conspiracy theorist. Or that he didn't fill out that questionaire that had his handwriting on it. Throw in his Hillary "you're likeable enough" and stories like this from the John Edwards camp, and the non-partisan avatar of Hope and Healing seems a bit less likeable himself.

2. Hillary Clinton: ...and who she's now representing -- women, Florida, Michigan, and Blue Dog Democrats. If women don't show up in the general for the Democrats, this race is over, and any perceived chauvinism that women voters take from how the Democratic process shakes down will be an extreme stumbling block for an Obama nomination. Specifically, not counting Florida and Michigan is a knee-capping of their candidate as well as a disenfranchisement of millions of voters... and it appears the Obama camp has no problem with that. Toss in a little bit of Wright anti-Americanism, Michelle Obama antipathy, and Barack Obama politics (guns anyone?), and Hillary isn't just a barrier to Obama's nomination: she's the last refuge for conservative Democrats.

1. John McCain's biography: It's why he's weathering the storm that comes with being from the party of an unpopular president. And it's why Obama could get bounced around pretty good by the end of this process. McCain supports torture? Intriguing suggestion, given his five years at the hands of torturers. Beholden to special interests? Obama only got, what, something like $70 million last year. If I recall properly, McCain got $0. Ever. A third Bush term? Republican primary voters would disagree, as apparently does the public at large. And you gotta wonder: WWHDD? What would Howard Dean do? Hmm.

Clinton may not fare better in a match-up, but Democrats should be wary about sending the unvetted newbie into fight the (literally) battle-hardened veteran, given the circumstances.

h/t Instapundit for the word "beclowned," at whose blog I first saw this wonderful scription.

Opinions expressed by News Buckit writers are expressly their own and may not represent the opinions of The News Buckit, its staff members, or its editors.