Obama Has Lost The Nomination

There was never really any chance that BHO would win the nomination. From the beginning, his campaign was driven by a cult of personality based off of the popularity of his two Oprah-ish feel-good self-help motivational books, and not from any real political education or success. He is essentially not a political figure. An article in the NYTimes today, which speaks about his "star role" but his "minor player" status in the Senate, and his easy non-contested route to DC, further prove this point. The article further shows how, before he even got there, the Senate was not big enough for BHO's meglomanical ambitions: he craves media stardom, he craves divinity, he believes he has a special status.

BHO has gone as far as he has in the primary by tapping into a certain civic-spiritual despair among the latte-sipping liberals who drive hybrid cars and yearn for some higher meaning in their lives, since America has no cultural and spiritual traditions of its own. As has been said, "they don't need a president, they need a feeling." These people don't have to worry about their health-insurance, their investment funds, their retirement funds, or much else. They want and need a symbol that gives their lives meaning, at least for eight years, until consumer trends change and they get tired of that symbol and want a new product in the form of a new face.

The fact that BHO has miserably failed to connect with the working-class, the backbone of this county, and the largest segment of the population, is telling, and a warning. Although they may be less "educated" - meaning they haven't spent upwards of 100k to purchase a diploma from a private college where students who can afford it do drugs, plagarize papers, sleep around, while their professors play at politics and frantically try to secure their tenure by publishing unreadbale academic papers in journals that never see the light of day - the working-class is well-educated in bullshit, they know it when they see it, and they see it in BHO, and they have overwhemingly rejected him and his campaign.

Things seemed to be going well for BHO until this week, after he lost resoundingly in Ohio and Texas, two states that matter, and his campaign went into free-fall, with his academic "advisors" shooting their mouths off in all directions because real working people in Ohio and Texas refused to be pandered and patronized to by members of the unelected "elite." Now, BHO said in one of the debates that he sees the role of president as a figurehead who gathers around him a really smart group of people to run things while the figurehead is off pacifying the people with telepromted speeches. But we have seen very clearly this week that BHO cannot control his "advisors," and that those "advisors" are total amatuers when it comes to playing politics, since they have mostly only played at politcs within the precincts of the corporate-molded and funded ivy league. The bottom line is they have no clue whatsoever at how to play real polics in real time when the going gets tough and the obstacles are formidable. This is not a group of people who are going to end the war in Iraq, win the war in Afganistan, deal with Iran, turn this economy around, and institute any kinf of reform in health-care, much less insititute universal health-care. This is a group of people who, like the latte-liberals they are attracting, want to feel good about themselves, it is all about them, not about the American people.

We've seen this week that the BHO campaign is worse than a mere cult of personality. It is a cult of personality with no knowledge of how to do politics when the chips are down and the opposition is strong. Each member of his "team" self-destructs in their own way, one by one, including the figurehead himself who had to storm out of his own press conference after taking only eight questions, because those questions were not laudatory and fawning.

There is no way the elders of the Democratic party are going to give the nomination to a cipher who can't win a big democratic state primary or control the people on his staff when the going gets tough. It just won't happen.

Now, Hillary Clinton appears to have grossly overestimated the amount of nostalgia that there would be for the 1990s. I imagine that starting out the Clinton camp thought that after eight years of Fascism the country would be filled with a profound nostalgia to turn back the clock to the year 2000 and pretend like everything that came after never happened. But this is a country with no historical memory whatsoever. Gore Vidal: "the United States of Amnesia." We have no sense of the past beyond the latest music single that came out last week, so forget about any kind of deep historical awareness of the 1990s of before - it might as well be the Ice Age.

The Clinton camp further failed to realize that Presidents in the post-WWII era are nothing more than consumer products, and are meant to be nothing more than consumer products with a built-in-life cycle of eight years at the very most: shiny and new at the beginning, get some wear and tear, and finally are to be discarded in the trash heap of history. Not having realized this, or having momentarily forgotten it, they brought Bill Clinton back from the dust bin, wound him up, and let him go, whichis the biggest mistake they made, more grievous than overestimating the sense of nostaliga for the 1990s. But, after the public made clear that they don;t like used consumer goods, they packed him right back up and put him on the shelf. For the best.

We have yet to realize what a truly fascinating spectacle Hillary presents us with, since she herself is also a used consumer good, a former First-Lady, but one with a longer use-by date than the former president. The American people seem somewhat skeptical that an old product can and will still function smoothly, but she is proving highly durable and productive; and its worth remembering that old products often work best after all the kinks have been worked out, when they've broken down and been repaired a few times, and then they have that amazing long stretch with no problems at all, until they finally kick it. So we may actually be getting her at the absolute best possible moment in terms of the life-cycle of a consumer good. Something to keep in mind.

The longer this goes on the better it is for Hillary. By winning Ohio and Texas, she nailed the nomination, even if you have failed to realize that yet.

There's more...

John Lewis: Victim of Identity Politics Thuggery

By now, almost all are aware that Georgia representative John Lewis -- Civil Rights icon -- has switched his allegiance from Hillary Clinton to Barack Obama.

It is a sad moment. For a figure as beloved and strong as Lewis is, this capitulation is particularly bitter and hard to watch. This tragedy results after Lewis' being hounded mercilessly for supporting the first legitimate candidacy of a female would-be President.

This is where we stand. "We," that is, as in 'we Democrats.' This is not the GOP we're talking about here.

There's more...

Will Female Superdelegates pull a "David Scott?"

(Note: This diary has been crossed posted at Daily Kos, Taylor Marsh's site in the comments of her latest piece on Jesse Jackson, Jr. and at Hillaryis44.org, in their latest piece called "March to Victory.") ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------

There has been a lot of apparent political pressure put on African-American superdelegates who have been backing Hillary Clinton.

The most notable of these is Civil Rights Movement icon John Lewis, a staunch Clinton supporter up until the past several days.

Representative David Scott, the subject of my title line, is a pertinent example. Here's representative Scott on his defection from Clinton to Obama:

AP: Black Lawmakers Rethink Clinton Support

You've got to represent the wishes of your constituency," Scott said in an interview Wednesday in the Capitol. "My proper position would be to vote the wishes of my constituents."

There's more...

Obama and Clinton: Mistaken identities

Identity politics has become a defining force in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination. From New Hampshire to Nevada to South Carolina, some uncomfortable questions have been raised: Do whites tell pollsters they support Sen. Barack Obama but privately change their vote based on his race? Do Latinos overtly oppose Obama for the same reason? Do women vote for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton under the sympathetic impression that her male competitors and members of the media attack her too harshly? Although it's difficult to conclusively settle any of these issues, it's equally clear that identity politics will continue to vex domestic politics for years to come. But the impact of identity will be felt far beyond the pollsters, pundits,and prognosticators. The unique identity of the next president could have a significant effect on U.S. foreign policy.

There's more...

The Politics Of Identity Politics

I find the media's collective uproar over whether or not Clinton played the gender card to be just plain silly. Given the extent to which the male gender card is played, swapped, and collected 24/7/365 on the network and cable news, their feigned outrage is not without irony.

The truth is that identity politics has been central to the political process since long-before the Roman Empire.  Further, every President in US history got there by playing some form of the male gender card.

Indeed, any objective view of the current Presidential field reveals that Clinton is not alone in trying to win over voters by means of identity politics.

There's more...


Advertise Blogads