Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Question of the day

Posted in:

Illinois
Obama

Normally, we try to stay as far away from national politics as possible. The discussions generally devolve into regurgitated party-line talking points.

So, let’s try this today without the afore-mentioned brainless, automaton rhetoric, shall we?

Rate Barack Obama’s presidential campaign to date.

…Adding… I think some of you may be jumping the gun a bit. As Bill Baar noted in comments, “Always keep this graph in mind when talking about the primaries.”

posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 9:21 am

Comments

Sen. Obama has charisma, a message that will be popular with many of his party, and a fundraising machine.

That’s the good.

He has made goofs when speaking of foreign policy that will be used against him. His wife has defended him and attacked his opponents. I still don’t get a real feel that he has a coherent platform; it just feels pieced together, but that may be more my ignorance than his shortcoming.

In the past few months, other than the Pakistan gaffes, we haven’t really heard much from him, so I assume this is the lull before the real campaigning storm hits this winter.

Overall, I think he gets a “B” to this point, more positive than not. This is coming from a staunch conservative, btw.

Comment by Fan of the Game Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 9:29 am
I’d say strong in the begining…new face, fresh ideas, etc. But it appears he’s slowing down some when he now has to get to the meat of the campaign.

A at first, but I agree with a B also overall now.

He’ll have a tough time beating HRC.

This coming from a conservative Democrat

Comment by By Stander Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 9:33 am
Obnoxiously good.

He’s not ducking his soft spots, but is aggressively responding. He’s taken some good hits from the Clinton machine, and stood up to them well.

He is focusing on the early primaries, but also round two. He seems to think he’ll be around there. A little risky, but also will serve him well if he doesnt’ crash and burn in Iowa/NH.

Comment by Pat collins Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 9:40 am
He started with a burst of energy, but hit a plateau and has been stuck in second for a long time. Whatever he’s doing isn’t terrible, but it isn’t working enough to push him to the front. He’s going to need a new strategy, or at least some serious refinements to the old one, to vault into first. Fortunately for him, he has the resources to do it, but resources without a winning strategy equals money squandered on consultants (witness his former opponent Blair Hull).

Part of his problem is that while he’s smart and has smart people around him, the Democratic primary favors the candidates who can organize mobilized constituencies. Obama’s appeal is broad, but HRC and Edwards are doing a better job of piecing together segments. If HRC and Edwards split the organized constituencies, and HRC and Obama come out about even in mass appeal to unaffiliated primary voters, HRC wins. Obama thus has to beat HRC pretty widely in mass appeal, and while that’s doable, it is as yet undone. So to me it’s impossible to give him a really high rating until he does that.

Comment by Gus Frerotte's Clipboard Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 9:40 am
I agree with Gus…stuck in second gear. Maybe started to much to early? Who knows. Needs to refocus media on his campaign…again…and to keep it there. Ratings: low B, High C+

Comment by Siyotanka Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 9:48 am
HRC is beginning to roll. It will be difficult to catch her if he doesn’t begin to sound presidential. Some of his foreign policy gaffs are only the beginning of his continued slide in the race.

Comment by downhereforyears Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 9:58 am
Barack is an exceptional candidate whose languishing campaign is evidence of serious staff-level flaws. If his staff can get their act together (especially his ground teams), than he’ll be a formidable challenger in Iowa; otherwise, he’ll find himself fighting for third place.

Comment by HiFi Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 10:02 am
barack claims to be an outsider, yet most (if not all) of his senior staff are beltway insiders. what a farce. most people are too naïve to see this.

give all of the huge crowds, fawning media attention, etc., i don’t think his camp has been able to fully capitalize. geez, look at his poll numbers.

Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 10:04 am
He seems to be doing about the B/C+ level talked about earlier. He is charismatic, can work a crowd, and has a great future if he does not do something really stupid. But he is also going against the Clinton machine that has had 20 some years of high level experience while taking some heavy shots and working through it. That experience counts huge. The other candidates are not far behind in the experience level. Barack needs time to get himself sold, take some hits, show some good ideas, do something significant, and have a consistent presentation that just rolls out.

Comment by zatoichi Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 10:15 am
He’s getting media and money. And he’s drawing crowds.

There’s a bunch of people who have run for POTUS who wish their campaigns had gone as well as Obama’s has at this point in the election cycle.

Comment by Carl Nyberg Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 10:18 am
Barack is a great spokesperson, well educated, likable, but sorely lacking on international experience. He tends to do a lot of “Ready, Fire, Aim.” That could do him in if he doesn’t control his knee jerk reaction to respond to every baited question. I think the Redzko indictment will come back to haunt him and will help be his undoing, as everyone sees him today as a “clean” alternative. I give him a C+ with his failure to pound on the table and take command. Being a Mr. Nice Guy does not win elections. To date he hasn’t shown me that he can be a World Leader. Nice guy, raises money well, dresses nice, all the girls like him, but in over his head.

Comment by Justice Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 10:24 am
Interesting. This campaign may be too long for him. So far, I’m not thrilled with the campaign.

I don’t buy that he made “gaffes” [the Pakistan thing was obvious — if we know where they are we are going in to get them — and should be a settled matter of U.S. policy] but for some reason he’s just not moving the numbers.

Comment by Skeeter Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 10:27 am
Every campaign is a story. You either write it yourself, or have your opponent write it.

So, Obama started off writing his books to prepare us for his story. That was his launch.

Now, the story is being written by others. It is now a story about a wonderful inexperienced Senator with a delighful voice not ready for prime time.

So, Obama has hit some unmovable objects on his way to the White House in 2008 and he can only get around it by having his opponents melt down, or by having voters change their minds.

It isn’t going to happen.

He isn’t ready. The good news is that he hasn’t hurt himself in the future, so after he has worked as a Senator longer than he has worked as a presidential candidate, he’ll be in a better position.

He also needs to be governor before he runs again.

Comment by VanillaMan Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 10:33 am
Hmm, I think he has benefited from Biden’s allegations. He is the recipiant of tons of media, he has a young image and a good following despite having done nothing that impressive (than other candidates). George Clooney has it right, he is a rock star.

Perception is reality, if people think he is really a change agent, that is what he is to them.

Big question is will he be Howard Dean for this season?

Comment by Wumpus Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 10:34 am
Pretty good so far but there doesn’t seem to
be much movement in the polls in his favor-he
seems to have peaked a week or two after he
announced.

Comment by Esteban Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 10:45 am
He hasn’t hit his stride. It seems like he’s still coasting on his own coattails and not reaching. Like all candidacies, one the public realizes that their rock star is just another human being - they start to lose interest. He’s got to keep them and he isn’t doing that yet.

I think it was too easy for him earlier and he’s not trying anymore or worse has forgotten how to try. He can draw the crowds but he doesn’t excite them enough to keep them for the long haul. He excites now but it’s the fan excitement and that’s more a fad than long-term.

He’s still better than most (C+/B) but he should be getting an A or A+. I just have the feeling that it’s in him to move it up and I’m disappointed that he doesn’t.

Comment by babs Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 10:48 am
Better than I expected due to his lack of experience, but not good enough to beat The Hill. VP more likely than the experts predict, I predict, as goes predictions.

Comment by Osssie Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 11:09 am
The campaign needs to hit the Clintons for what they are. Clintons keep trying to paint the picture of obama of as not ready. Look back at President Clinton’s first 6 months of nannygate, don’t ask don’t tell, national health care. Plus he did more to destroy unions in this nation than most republicans.

Comment by keep up with the jones Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 11:12 am
As much as I have been a fan of Barack since he was elected to the State Senate, I am finding it hard to get excited about his campaign. I think his message of hope is important, and I think maybe he has more to offer in terms of healing our status with the international community, but…he is just not catching my attention. If he isn’t catching mine, then I’d give his campaign a C Plus.

Comment by Non-profiteer Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 11:20 am
I think I have been watching a different campaing than most of the above have seen.

What I hear and read are platitudes and emotions. America needs a change etc There have been no specifics or concrete plans. The campaign I see is vote for me, I am different from the others and I will come to better choices on the issues when I get there.

So far I see a wonderful package with a complete unknown inside.

This coupled with his lackluster performance in Illinois and his cosiness with the Illinois powere peddlers makes me nervous.

Comment by plutocrat03 Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 11:22 am
Always keep this graph in mind when talking about the primaries.

With that caveat out there, a C+, a B-; he’s running against Clinton running a flawless A+ campaign.

I’m still betting on Gore and Obama for the Dems in 2008.

Comment by Bill Baar Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 11:22 am
I agree with the President of Canada - he has made some gaffs but he isn’t dragging the huge negative load of ballast Clinton is. His positives seem consistent to rising, slowly though, but there is quite a bit of time to get there.

Comment by A Citizen Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 11:26 am
I haven’t really followed his campaign that much. All I did was attend a rally so far. I think for now he gets C because of some of his mistakes he made with regards to stating his foreign policy.

Comment by Levois Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 11:27 am
Although I hope Obama gets the nomination, my money is on Clinton. Street smarts beats charisma in a fair fight.

Comment by Illinois Eddie Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 11:28 am
My vote is for Obama over Hillary. If he doesn’t make Prez, perhaps he would be interested in unseating Blago.

Comment by Just My Opinion Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 11:29 am
I’d give the campaign a B+ to this point. Despite some struggles Barack remains the #1 alternative to Hillary. The national polls do nothing but give 24 hour news something to talk about. With his money (and ability to keep raising it) he will retain a very real chance of winning the nomination. If he wins Iowa, he can run away with it.

Hillary campaign has been very strong. Her problem is that even in the national polls the majority of Democrats still want someone else to be the nominee. In early states that number increases.

Can Barack consolidate the anti-Hillary majority? I think he can and will.

Comment by 2for2 Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 11:36 am
Obama is showing what is wrong with campaigns of young political turks. Boosted early on by charisma and media attention, the practicality of the ‘change’ espoused is finally showing through. Motivating people is important(and the campaign has done that), but making the message stick and be practical is what wins in the end.

His performance at the debates at Soldier Field left much to be desired. He had homefield advantage and bumbled through it. To me, that moment was a sign that he is not going to win. He was ill prepared for that debate and it showed.

I give the campaign a C.

Comment by Pound the pavement Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 11:41 am
Great run to 1st base, but still standing on that bag. If he doesn’t round the corner to 2nd and 3rd quickly, he will be done for.

Comment by Niles Township Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 11:44 am
I think that the Obama campaign shows his ability to appeal to the mainstream population who may or may not get involoved with politics. I think that his ability to appeal to the people who do not feel apart of the process, coupled with the ongoing situations our country is facing on a foreign and domestic level, have opened the floor for a new voting demographic and a new conversation that public officials will have to adapt to. My concern is will those same people that have supported him monetarily, support him at the voting booths, as he has received a considerable amount of donations from individuals.

I give Obama a B+, but I give his chief staff and advisors a C- for they didn’t have a follow up plan after the HUGE and inspiring start.

Comment by YouNeverSawMe Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 12:12 pm
I’ve heard him speak twice in person. I think he’s a terrific public speaker, and he puts a fresh twist on the typical issues. That being said, I think he talks a lot but doesn’t really have much to say. Just another recycled career politico IMHO.

Comment by howie Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 12:12 pm
Off-topic, I know, but I thought you might want to see Fred Thompson’s first TV ad. It’s not very good at all.

Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 12:23 pm
Rich
Two thoughts on Fred’s commercial. First it looks like he’s got Parkinsons. For someone who sort of acts for a living you’d think that he could do a better job of using non verbal communication tools. Second, when it first starts, I was half expecting him to say: “This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky to live through it.”

Comment by Tom Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 12:37 pm
To use harness racing parlance, Obama is a great closer. He is getting “live cover” behind Clinton and Edwards and with good luck and and good timing, will blow past the Democratic field (as Clinton and Edwards quickly fade) and across the finish line first.

Comment by Reading on Walden Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 12:47 pm
thompson’s ad looks like it was taped in 1988 with a SVHS camera and the graphics are terrible. the message wasn’t exactly awe-inspiring either. he’ll be out faster then he got in.

Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 12:56 pm
A+ on fundraising.
B+ overall

I disagree that Obama has committed any significant gaffes in his foreign policy statements because I discount the the Washington punditocracy and inside-the-beltway conventional wisdom. There has been an “echo chamber” effect which has exaggerated the significance of these so-called gaffes.

He still is very competitive in Iowa - IF he can defeat Clinton in Iowa and then New Hampshire, I think Obama’s campaign can still take off. I am not convinced that the polls are reflecting his appeal and grass roots organizing efforts.

Clinton’s looking very tough to beat - but I think she has reached a plateau. There is still a strong “not Hilary” contingent in the Democratic Party because they doubt her electability as a result of her high negatives. If she stumbles in an early primary/caucus, it could open the door for Obama or Gore. Obama could beat her if it were a one-on-one contest.

If Obama can fight Clinton to a draw, I think a brokered convention and a Gore-Obama ticket would be unbeatable. I think Clinton would be foolish not to choose Obama as VP, but I don’t expect her to do so. She’s running a serious risk of turning off a significant portion of Obama’s base by choosing someone else.

Personally I like and respect Hilary - I think she’s competent and quulaified to be President. I rate her general election chances somehwere between probable and maybe. But I prefer someone else because I sense that another nominee would have a good chance for a landslide/realignment election. I’d prefer to win big!

Regardless of the outcome of this election, Obama’s career prospects still look very good to me.

Comment by Captain America Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 1:07 pm
Clinton and Obama are 1-2 in national polls.

National polls mean nothing.

With the way the entire primary calendar has collapsed about half the country will be done voting by Valentine’s Day. There’s no time to make up a difference, which means that just like 2004 the only polls that matter are the surveys of likely Iowa caucus-goers.

Right now, those have it as Edwards 1, Obama 2.
No one outside these campaigns knows what sort of handshake deals may or may not be in the works — like 2004’s Edwards-Kucinich deal — so Obama may yet be able to pull out an Iowa win.

Note the dramatic extremes right at the time of the Iowa caucuses in the graph Bill Baar and Rich Miller highlight. Whoever is 1 and 2 in Iowa will be the ones duking it out two weeks later on Whatever-Superlative-You-Like Tuesday. The edge there goes to Obama with his campaign funds. Edwards just can’t match that, and I don’t think Hillary’s going to come out of Iowa with a big enough win to get a bounce from it.

As for Obama’s campaign to date, I agree with the B’s folks are giving him.

The folks who keep talking about “foreign policy gaffes” on this thread (and throughout the media, including the blogosphere) are demonstrative of Team Obama’s slight lack of media coordination.

The actual gaffes are no worse than anyone else’s (”president of Canada” … no different than “that General guy” from 2000) — yet the media can’t shut up about them as if they’re the end-all/be-all (just like they can’t stop talking about Sen. Edwards hair, even though Mitt Romney spends as much money on his mane).

Obama’s comments about al Qaida in Pakistan (he never used the word “invade” — his conservative detractors did) and not using in-the-field nukes are common sense. Even the military told the pundits Obama was right on the nukes issue and we heard a collective “Gee, didn’t know that” out of the chattering class. The stuff about talking to opponents is the same stuff Clinton was saying just a few months before — but she was able to take the 30-second campaign response out of context and attack him with it.

That people keep calling those issues “gaffes” says more about them than it does Obama.

Full disclosure: I’m now doing low-volume volunteering for Obama in Illinois (collecting signatures for petitions). Haven’t donated to the guy (and don’t plan to).

Comment by Rob_N Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 1:10 pm
Anonymous wrote “#

thompson’s ad looks like it was taped in 1988 […] he’ll be out faster then he got in.”

… ROFLMAO.

Technically, he’s still not even “in” as it is.

I read a schedule based on his stated announcement date and it illustrated how, using the maximum possible times allowed before disclosures are due, Thompson won’t have to file any financial disclosure til after the Iowa caucuses.

He’s going nowhere, and doing it in super-slow-mo.

For the same reason, I don’t think Gore will “jump in”. It takes a lot of effort to put together a campaign for a caucus, and Iowa is a tough sell for anyone — no “favorite” sons or daughters there this year. If Gore waits til October to announce he’s running, he’ll have two months (sans holidays) to put together a team to get even a decent caucus showing.

It ain’t magic. Just because someone announces something doesn’t mean he/she is going to automatically get caucuses to go along.

Comment by Rob_N Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 1:15 pm
Sorry, one more postscript for those who are envisioning a Gore primary campaign…

In Illinois and other states, candidate petitioning is happening now. A candidate can’t get on the ballot without the proper number of valid signatures.

If Vice President Gore announces he is running for president and waits til October to do it, that leaves him scant weeks to collect the number of signatures necessary to even get his name on the ballot.

In essence, he (and Thompson and any other late-comers) are shooting themselves in the foot from the get-go.

Comment by Rob_N Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 1:19 pm
Gore won’t campaign. The Democrats will offer it to him in a brokered convention.

Obama will get VP.

But Clinton looks awfully formidable at the moment.

Comment by Bill Baar Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 1:49 pm
Rob N

I only raise the possibility of a Gore candidacy in the contest of a deadlocked, brokered convention,which obviously is a longshot scenario, but not impossible, if Obama does well. Stranger thing have happened in Presidential primaries/caucuses. Gore would be the compromise candidate at the convention.

I am aboslutely convinced and concur with those CF bloggers who suggest that Thompson is going to be a complete bust. I can not understand why Republicans are projecting him as a potential savior of the party.

Comment by Captain America Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 1:54 pm
Republicans are projecting him as a potential savior of the party.

Roeser not one of them, Yesterday on Fox, films of the candidate moving through a Fair crowd. You can really appreciate what professional makeup and studio lighting can do by seeing the contrast…a big man, baggy pants, cavernous eyes, speaking in a monotone. No, I don’t have a dog in this fight but let me tell you, this buildup is leading up to the biggest letdown since 1898 when the Hero of Manila Bay, Admiral George Dewey told the media he had surveyed the presidency and felt qualified to run because the only duty specified by the Constitution was to enforce the laws…and since Dewey had been obeying orders all his military life, he wouldn’t have any problem doing that.

He’s right.

Comment by Bill Baar Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 2:27 pm
I thought this election was going to be about Iraq but increasingly I think it’s going to be about national security, regardless of what we are doing in Iraq. Recent Al Qaeda eruptions in
Denmark and Germany point in that direction. And surely there will be more such near misses, even if they don’t happen here on US soil.

And that is bad news for Obama because Americans concerned about terrorism aren’t going to vote for a comparative unknown who has made some rookie foreign policy statements which simply can’t be erased from the record, no matter what he says from here on out.

It could be bad news for the Democrats regardless of who they pick. People vote on emotion and it isn’t hard to drum up emotion about terrorism here even as 911 recedes into history. The memories are still pretty fresh.

Comment by Cassandra Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 2:40 pm
I’m not really sure what the fuss is about on those “rookie” foreign policy statements. If the Taliban strikes our troops then retreats to safe havens in Pakistan, and the Pakistani government won’t cooperate by going after them, are you saying that we should do nothing?

Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 2:50 pm
I thought Obama deserved a lot of credit for the FP talk on Pakistan. It was distorted out of context but he tried to inject some serious talk among Dems on FP and got darn little credit for it.

It’s just Clinton never misses a beat in the debates I’ve watched. She is an awsome campaigner to watch.

Obama just seems way to patronizing to me. (And that may just be me I know…)

…but I just cringe he’s going to go off on some fatherhood lecture.

Comment by Bill Baar Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 2:59 pm
I think Obama has done much better than a lot of people here are willing to acknowledge. The media frenzy caused such over the top expectations. But a freshman senator, with no other national experience or exposure, has John Edwards and Hillary Clinton weirded out about him. Plus, he’s raised ton of money, mostly from small contributors.

His mistake is to think he can run the campaign just as he wants, speaking frankly on all issues, and calling things as he sees them from his little bank and shoal of time. It’s noble, but naive. As a presidential candidate, his reach must exceed his grasp - he has to speak to what is over the horizon, not just what is in front of his face, and have the wisdom to know that saying this can inadvertently cause that, etc. It’s just not there yet, and his advisors are not filling the gap.

Comment by Anon Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 3:02 pm
Fred looks like he’s about to die.

Comment by archpundit Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 3:16 pm
With regard to Miller’s comment of 2:50: That mirrors my comment of 10:27.

Obama should be able to toss that criticism back in the face of anyone who raises it. The criticism is based in part on the idea that it made mobs in Pakistan mad. That’s a bad thing? We should coddle the mobs by letting Osama go free if we know where he is?

If any Republican would go after Obama, he should just retort by stating that the GOP position explains why Osama is still at large. If we know where he is, we must attack and if Pakistan doesn’t like it, that cannot be a bar to our action.

Comment by Skeeter Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 3:16 pm
With regard to Thompson:

They’ve had six month to plan that, and they put him in front of a background where it is difficult to distinguish him from the background?

Couldn’t they get some decent lighting or a better background?

Comment by Skeeter Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 3:18 pm
Well, first time here so I will offer up my opine for the meager cents it is worth.

First, the caveat…I am a Dem. I will vote the party no matter the candidate. I am bitter over 2000 (no, I haven’t let that go yet!) and bitter over having my patriotism, religion, and morals assailed when I don’t agree with the “other guys”. But I do very much think Barack has a great chance at this. I give his campaign a “B” because I think he needs to focus. By that I mean he is an inspiring speaker but his speeches tend to go over the heads of most people. His delivery is excellent, he just needs to refine the message a bit. I have been watching this guy since he was endorsed by Senator Simon and voted for him on that proviso alone. The speech at the 2004 convention was nothing short of magical. I like HRC but she is all a bit too rehearsed for me. Yes, she did capitalize on some debate moments but it seemed so disingenious..so packaged. She was giving the answer she thought voters wanted to hear and not what was the best for the country. She was going for that all important sound bite. Barack tells us what he thinks is best for us as a nation and sometimes that is not what we want to hear but what we need to hear. I have spoken to many over the past several months. Just plain folks who have been misguided enough in the past to vote the “wrong” way…and they all have great things to say about Barack…not so about HRC…I do agree that her candidacy will do more to organize the other guys than anything they can pull together at this time. No one sits on the fence with Hillary. They love her or hate her. I want a sure fire victory…a big one. But I am worried. After all, no one can snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory like the Dems.

Comment by Chip Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 3:34 pm
Great fundraising, but his speeches are starting to veer way to the left.

He recently said, “I want to go before the United Nations as President and say, “America’s back.”

Not too many Americans would appreciate pandering to a corrupt institution that is mostly supported by our money, and that fails to act in the face of world atrocities.

His message is filled with puffery- where is the plan? Still waiting.

Comment by Thirtysomething Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 3:43 pm
He’s stuck because once you get past the rush of his uniqueness, there’s no there there. No international record. No national record. No executive record. No national security record, at a time when we’re fighting two wars.

You can only live on a fresh face, homilies and platitudes for so long. He’s still only a couple of years removed from being a Mushroom in Springfield.

Plus, expectations for him are so high from the national media, he could be crushed with 3rd place showings in Iowa and New Hampshire.

He went too soon.

Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 3:45 pm
“I’m not really sure what the fuss is about on those “rookie” foreign policy statements. If the Taliban strikes our troops then retreats to safe havens in Pakistan, and the Pakistani government won’t cooperate by going after them, are you saying that we should do nothing?”

I supposed you would have be for exapnding the Vietnam War into Laos and Cambodia, too.

If Obama (and Rich) publicly took that position in the late 1960s - early 1970s, you would have been crucified for being an absolute blood thirsty warmonger.

That is why it is a “rookie” mistake.

Think it. Don’t say it.

Comment by Leroy Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 3:48 pm
Wordslinger,

Both Bill Clinton and George W. Bush fit your descriptions of no this, no that to a T with the exception of the “executive experience” and, given the field of legislators on the Dem side, none of them qualify for that paradigm (except former Mayor Kucinich).

That said, only Romney and Giuliani have “executive” experience on the other side of the aisle — and there’s wasn’t any more stellar a showing than then-Gov. Clinton or then-Gov. Bush.

In short, your arguments are hollow.

–

Thirtysomething, considering the go-it-alone attitude we’ve had for the last 6 1/2 years, Obama’s statement is a propos. There’s a reason the UN, as imperfect as it is, exists and unless you’ve forgotten the lesson of WWII you risk ostracizing such a body at the peril of us all.

If you think Sen. Obama’s message “is filled with puffery” I’m truly sorry for you — because by that standard all 20 or so candidates from both sides are in the same boat.

Comment by Rob_N Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 3:56 pm
Leroy, correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think that the North Vietnamese ever attacked the continental United States.

Plus, I can’t stand it when baby boomers always try to bring every argument back to that era. Move on already.

Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 3:56 pm
Leroy, when did the Viet Cong plan and execute an attack on New York City and Washington, DC?

Try comparing apples to apples next time.

Comment by Rob_N Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 3:58 pm
Sorry for the duplicate — typing at the same time.

Comment by Rob_N Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 3:59 pm
I can see why Rich tries to avoid these topics. It is humorous to read of the certainty in certain posters’ predictions.

If you’re that sure that “”blank” candidate will secure the nomination, or that whoever wins Iowa, etc will lead the pack, then there are some pretty compelling trades you should put on in the presidential futures markets (where, I might add, you can trade pretty much every aspect of the race.)

Comment by Greg Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 4:05 pm
January 2008 Presidential Futures Iowa Caucus Trade - Go Long Obama - Go Short Clinton.

Comment by Reading on Walden Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 4:10 pm
I would compare it to Kerry’s graph but reversed. He started with a huge boom, has dropped down and leveled off.

He has had a few “Ooops, did it again!” with regard to some of his comments that slipped out of his mouth. Sort of Blagoesque which is scary.

He seems to have lost momentum (enthusiasm?)in the past few months. Nothing new to say.

I think by primary time it will be a “God I’m sick of hearing about this guy” due to all the excessive media coverage. That may cause people to vote for others.

Then there is the big “Tony” factor. I have seen where Rezko may end up in court in Feb 2008. Not good timing to have him spilling his guts during the primaries.

Comment by Papa Legba Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 4:11 pm
I suppose you could interpret his statements about Pakistan and about meeting with “problem” foreign leaders in various ways, but the overall impression a lot of us relatively neutral observers could was….amateur. And these days,
amateur means dangerous to a lot of voters.

I read somewhere in the last couple of days that
his advisors are revamping his approach to presenting his foreign policy stance, suggesting that the campaign thinks it’s a problem too.

But first impressions are hard to change.

Comment by Cassandra Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 4:30 pm
It is humorous to read of the certainty in certain posters’ predictions.

We can certainly judge the quality of the campaigns to date though and Clinton seems to run a far more disciplined one than Obama.

Obama’s success is bringing in the bucks and a lot of them from Illinois,

Paul Green, political scientist at Roosevelt University in Chicago, said the financial windfall for Obama is in line with the state’s tradition of using campaign contributions not just to get someone elected nationally, but also to stay on the right side of people who hold power locally — no matter how a national election turns out.

In Illinois, that means pleasing Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley, Sen. Dick Durbin, and a state-level Democratic Party that holds total control in Springfield. And all of those heavy hitters have lined up behind Obama.

“There’s more to it than just Obama and his ’vision.’ … It’s a strategic decision” to donate to him in Illinois, said Green. “Mayor Daley is going to be around awhile. Obama, win or lose, is going to be around awhile. So you protect your interests.”

So what Obama does with the windfall win or lose in Illinois is an interesting question. A lot of people are going to feel he owes them.

Comment by Bill Baar Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 4:30 pm
Barack is faltering in this slow part of a very long campaign. His confidence has been shaken because of the criticism he’s gotten over his comments on foreign policy.

Barack needs to strike out and claim some territory for himself - in domestic policy, which no candidate has done yet. NPR said we are getting into a guns vs. butter fight in Congress. It’s more like a guns vs. margarine issue. Barack should say that and tell how we are going to get to butter.

Barack may be too inexperienced for the job - and I’m a supporter of his. HRC is certainly outclassing him of late.

Brack need to seize an issue and elevate to national proportions. That will be the test of his candiacy.

Doug

Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 4:42 pm
National opinion polls at this stage are, as many posters have pointed out, pretty worthless. Better is simply to look at what the public says it _wants_, in terms of overall candidate messages, and figure out who is doing the best job of combining their message and personal background to meet that demand.

As a sense for what the public wants, check out this recent Gallup survey (before it’s removed from the public sphere). The public wants change, and it’s not so concerned about extensive D.C. experience (good news for Obama).

http://galluppoll.com/content/default.aspx?ci=28591

Next, check out this example of what Hillary’s doing on the stump. Her message is to implicitly connect her experience to her _ability_ to bring change - “if you want change, I’m the one with the know-how to bring it.”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0907/5616.html

It’s a clear message and it is resonating. Barack’s brand of optimism and audacity of hope would probably play better without Iraq in the backdrop. After the shattering experience of the past few years, Hillary’s “cautious change” may be more resonant with what the public wants.

Has Barack figured out what a proper, credible message-response would be? I see what Hillary’s doing. I’m less sure just how Barack is countering at this stage (but he may well be).

Comment by ZC Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 5:12 pm
Cassandra, Did you see the debate and watch the speech that you are reacting to? Or are you simply interpreting what the media relayed about those events?

The pundits are proving themselves wrong, especially when they talk to others they consider to be experts and those folks then say Obama has a point in what he says.

–

Greg,

A win in Iowa gives a candidate two things: days of free air time and a patina of “electability”.

Since half (or more) of the delegates will have been awarded within 3 weeks of Iowa, there isn’t much time to launch what amounts to a national campaign in order to change the Hawkeye caucus outcomes.

Just who wins Iowa (from either party) is still up in the air given the fluidity of that state’s polls.

Comment by Rob_N Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 5:12 pm
Just a couple thoughts:

1) the grade of “A” fundraising and all of that Illinois-based fundraising may come back around to bite the Good Senator O. in the caboose, depending on where the contributions came from.
Time will tell.

2) I share the feeling of a few posters that at any given moment, an Obama speech can veer off into a how to live your life lecture, which is disconcerting. I would have expected that more from HRC, but so far, I don’t think she (and Bubba) have missed a step.

3) A “candidate of change” shepherded by David Axelrod is either fooling himself or trying to fool us.

Campaign Grade: Incomplete.

Comment by Arthur Andersen Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 5:12 pm
Too Rob_N re:UN

The UN is a corrupt institution which is populated with more dictators and tyrants that you can shake a stick at. We do not need to announce that we are back, we need to announce that we are going to clean up that cesspool and start making positive use of those funds which have been chanelled into private hands for decades.

No action in Darfour and innumerable other horror spots on the globe. Thanks UN

I will make the arguement that in many cased the UN is a shield for the bad guys.

Sometimes you have to go it alone…..

Comment by plutocrat03 Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 5:16 pm
Fred’s spot is not designed to be a political spot-what you have is the ‘law and order’ (actor)candidate -framed in that visual context- calling supporters/voters to a town hall meeting over the internet. Many messages working. His lighting is flawless-no double chin-appearing chiseled.
For its desired intention/purpose/audience, the understated copy permits the visuals to lead with the messege his role on ‘law and order’ has created for the actor Fred Thompson.
The key for him is to translate the fiction of his TV -confident/understanding/wise/- character into his real life as Presidential candidate.
It’s a tough twist to pull off. No doubt he’s been spending a lot of time rehearsing.

Comment by bullmoose Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 5:42 pm
ZC, that was an excellent analysis. Thanks.

Also, like Rob_N, I tend to believe that the national nattering nabob punditocracy is a joke and should never, ever be listened to.

Bullmoose, Fred’s lighting was flawless? Really? His suit was the same color as the background and his face looks pasty white to me. Also, that head-bobbing thing was just weird and the way he read his lines beginning at, “Today, as before,” sounded overly scripted.

I don’t care how good your message is, you can’t get your message out with all those distractions. I’ve watched the ad five or six times, now, and I still don’t know what he’s talking about.

Also, since we process way more of what we see than what we hear, a very good way to analyze a TV ad after you’ve watched it a few times is to turn off the sound. Try that and then come back and tell us that Fred’s ad is good. You can’t do it, cuz it’s horrible.

Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 5:52 pm
In January of 2004, Obama was poised to lose the Senate primary. He won in a landslide no one predicted.

By fate, luck, happenstance, timing or whatever, he hit the national scene in Boston and has been skyrockecting ever since. Once people get to know him, they like him. He connects with people (whatever that means).

From almost also-ran in the Senate primary to down to the wire in a Presidential primary in four years is nothing short of astonishing. Sure, he may end up an also-ran in this race, but he loses nothing. And hopefully he’ll run for Governor in 2010.

This campaign is A++, with nothing to lose, everything to gain. If you’re still not sure if he has what it takes to win, ask yourself if any other presidential candidate in recent memory wouldn’t love to be in his shoes right now, Dem or Rep.

Comment by 47th Ward Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 6:37 pm
In January of 2004, Obama was poised to lose the Senate primary. He won in a landslide no one predicted

I don’t think Hillary has any divorce records or unhappy spouse for the Prince to unearth.

Comment by Pat collins Wednesday, Sep 5, 07 @ 9:21 pm
I don’t think Hillary has any divorce records or unhappy spouse for the Prince to unearth.

She’s the unhappy spouse and the question is why didn’t she divorce Bill.

It’s the question so many Dems fear. Now that individual authenticity is important, and ones personal and public lives are one, candidates can’t be living hypocritical marriages… and people are going to say she must really be self-loathing to stick with him.

It’s why we’ll see Gore instead unless she overpowers and Obama and Edwards really fizzle.

Comment by Bill Baar Thursday, Sep 6, 07 @ 6:45 am
PS on Pakistan:

Considering these three guys arrested in Germany were trained in NW Pakistan, Obama’s talk doesn’t seem very out of line.

He shouldn’t have backed off.

Comment by Bill Baar Thursday, Sep 6, 07 @ 7:01 am
Obama needs to listen to Joe Biden. Joe told us that it has always been US policy to go into Pakistan if we had evidence to pick up terrorist targets.

Why doesn’t Obama just keep his day job and start being a Senator?

Comment by VanillaMan Thursday, Sep 6, 07 @ 10:05 am