The mainstream media has today caught up with the reality of the race. That reality has been constant since Obama mathematically won the race in February.
It took a decisive win in North Carolina and holding his ground in Indiana to bring about this realization. In winning last night Obama triumphed over Hillary Clinton’s last minute pandering on the gas tax. It was ultimately the pander that sunk Hillary Clinton’s stock with the media.
I have argued that the gas tax pander would backfire on Clinton. Today it appears that is exactly what happened.
Here’s New York magazine on the impact of the pander:
There was a certain you-had-to-be-there quality to the homestretch of the Indiana Democratic primary. Through most of last week, national newspapers and cable pundits stayed fixated on the Jeremiah Wright imbroglio. But over the past week, the headlines in Indiana turned to the split between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama on the idea of a gas-tax “holiday.” So did the political ads flooding Hoosier airwaves. And the result was last night’s nasty surprise for Clinton.
It’s easy to see why Clinton was tempted to hop aboard the Pander Express, once John McCain floated the idea of suspending the federal gas tax of 18.4 cents a gallon for the summer. Giving some badly needed relief to truckers, farmers, and vacationers fit right in with the hash-slinger-in-a–Wal Mart–pantsuit image Hillary honed in Ohio, perfected in Pennsylvania, and was deploying all over Indiana. And when Obama derided the idea by saying it would only save consumers “pennies,” he seemed to be handing the Clintons one more opportunity to portray him as an out-of-touch elitist.
But as things turned out, when Hillary called for suspending the gas tax, she threw Obama the kind of rope he desperately had been seeking to pull himself out of the Wright train wreck. Wright screwed Obama as hard as any noncandidate has ever screwed an American presidential contender. And even after counterattacking and distancing himself from his former pastor, Obama was noticeably off his game. But the gas tax became a rare instance where Clinton and Obama directly and diametrically opposed each other on a policy issue, automatically generating headlines and coverage that helped push Wright out of the local news in Indiana.
Further, the gas tax turned the national media against Hillary over the weekend, because the Clinton campaign hadn’t bothered to line up (or just couldn’t find) a single expert to support suspending the tax. That left Clinton herself and surrogates like Senator Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) insulting economists on national television, which looked ridiculous. It also left the media free to report the story without trying to be evenhanded and essentially to tell viewers that suspending the tax is a stupid idea.
Most importantly, the new debate let Obama rediscover his voice. He not only opposed the “holiday” on principle. In a way he hasn’t done on issues such as wearing a lapel flag pin, he also stated his objections loudly, pithily, and in keeping with the themes of his campaign. Liberal bloggers kept writing that Obama needed to argue that suspending the tax wouldn’t save drivers any money. Instead, he hammered away at it as a “gimmick” and a symptom of the Washington politics he says he wants to change.
…
Tragedy or poetic justice, Clinton went one pander too far in Indiana.
Remember. Gas tax. Gas tax. Gas tax.
Check out the poll on Time’s website. 81% of respondents want Hillary to drop out of the race.
Yeah yeah got it. Gas tax. Gas tax. Gas tax. Do you say those words in your sleep too?
Ok. So Obama will get the nomination. Hallelujah.
How do you suggest he unifies the Dems before he thinks about unifying the nation?
How crucial is it for him to pick a running mate who will be favored by the Clinton supporters? How does Obama woo the Clinton supporters (the 60+ and white demography etc)?
God forbid he should actually consider Hillary as the veep (which will definitively be pushed by many Dem insiders). I think he should pick a white female democrat who preferably worked under Bill Clinton admin.
It is impossible to ignore the potency Hillary has shown. And that’s why many of the big wigs refused to take sides during the months long dual: Reid, Pelosi (even though she kind of gave away her preference), Gore, Edwards (although his own adviser endorsed Obama), Dean (he even alluded to the possibility of Michigan seats being counted…aaaghh). Somebody mentioned these uncommitted superdelegates are just as stubborn as Clinton. I think they are truly impressed with her resilient and just know that she will hang around DC for a long time to come and remain a political clout. Whatever….
I am ready for Obama-McCain debates.
No offense zm.. no Clinton as the VP. She’s too despised already plus this whole nomination has been about her ‘entitlement’ as it were to be the rightful Democratic nominee.
I also do not see a Clinton supporter on the VP ticket as ‘we’ want change. Anything ‘Clinton’ represents the old status quo. That said, it will be interesting to see who’s going to become VP.
Wow..what a drama! Now let’s take on the hardline Republicans..
woohoo..
Ingrid
None taken Ingrid. I understand your point. But this election year it’s all very differernt…
Different set of rules…thing we may need to do for the sake of unity…blah…blah…
BTW, I went to school in Austin (Go LONGHORNS).
So I feel akin to you. 😉
Hillary Clinton will not be Obama’s VP pick. She is a Senator from New York. That is not going to expand his base. Dont overestimate Clinton’s draw on the electorate. A lot of her support came from the affection people had for Bill Clinton and from the name recognition attached to that. With her on the ticket, Republicans will come out in droves to vote against her.
If she had any chance of becoming VP, she is burning it now with her race baiting. Put a fork in her, she is done.
Clinton’s base of women voters are not going to vote for a Republican who will appoint a Supreme Court justice to overturn Roe-vs-Wade. Not going to happen.
Obama needs to pick a VP that will shore up his support in a swing state. There are a number of options. To name a few, General Wesley Clark, Jim Webb, Kathleen Sebelius, Bill Richardson, Evan Bayh, Sam Nunn, etc.
So you agree with those who think Obama needs someone with strong background in defense?
As the landscape stands now I think he needs a Western governor. That’s why Richardson is appealing in many ways. I am a little concerned about having two Senators on the ticket.
I like Biden.
On the other hand Webb could help in Virginia. And has strong defense credentials. Mark Warner looks like he is running for Senate. He would have been a good pick, and may still be.
I dont think Obama needs a strong foreign policy VP. I think he has a great foreign policy team as it is, and he has the temperament to be a strong leader on American foreign policy. Personally, he represents a powerful face representing America. I dont think he needs backup.
Evan Byah. He’s very well respected by those Typical White Peopleâ„¢ in those states that won’t vote for Barack Obama.
zm.. what is it with those people who go to UT and keep up the ‘go longhorns’ thing?? haha. I have to say, this sure is longhorn country cause come game time.. yap yap yap football football football. I don’t care for football obviously but that said, I’m not a follower of teams except when I grew up in HOlland and ‘we’ had to play soccer opposite another country, THEN I’d get riled up. How patriotically nonsense is that lol!!
Anyway.. I’m sorta breathing now but still, it ain’t over until the fat lady sings..
give it to me Hillary!
Ingrid
heh
I rallied for Biden as far back as in May 🙂
zm, never doubted you for a minute 🙂
I’ve been a fan of Biden since the 1980s. Even though the idea of Biden on the ticket was great, I didnt think Obama would pick him. Shows you how much I know! 🙂
In retrospect, the Palin pick makes the Obama/Biden ticket the only one that looks presidential.
Palin will sit with Gibson for her first TV interview soon. She won’t have Matthew Scully to write her answers. Let’s see how she defends GOP’s platform on economy, healthcare, energy crisis, foreign policy…
Knowing how Gibson operates, it will be a softball interview (I am embarrassed to say he spoke at my college graduation). I understand that part of the “interview” will be a walk and talk session. I would like to know what ground rules ABC agreed to to get the interview. Gibson has already said that he wont ask her about any of the scandals.
This whole thing is turning into a joke. The GOP is counting on the low info voter to once again pull the lever against their economic interests.
You are probably right. Gibson (with Stephanopoulos) moderated a farce of a debate between Hillary and Obama back on March 21 (what a night that was….!!!).
It is possible Palin will answer only preselected questions – so she’ll appear well versed.
If the dim-witted Americans pull the lever against their self interest agaaaain….god help us. But I have a feeling that the euphoria over Palin will be short lived. Once the debate starts, she will look incompetent next to Biden. Survey showed that women who admired her accomplishments are not necessarily in favor of her becoming the VP. Two-thirds of the general voters (across gender and party affiliations) feel more comfortable with Biden in that position.
Palin is serving the purpose for McCain though. People like James Dobson who previously didn’t approve McCain had just endorsed Palin-McCain ticket yesterday.
It is really sad that McCain who used call himself a different kind of politician, reached across the isle to push on issues (and alienated many of his party hardliners in the process), praised Obama on his efforts in the past flat out lied about Obama’s accomplishment in the senate during his speech. Palin is the one who has the reputation of running her office like “my way or high wayâ€. She has had a pattern of removing people from the AK legislature if they did not agree with her. How would she work with a Democratic Congress and Senate?
It’s like McCain could not fight his party anymore, so he joined them. He has wanted to be the president for so long…now he’s ready to do whatever it takes to win.
He is most definitely nor putting country first.
McCain has lost control of the campaign. The religious right wing of the Republican party is salivating.
But the demographics are favoring the Democrats. Obama needs a big turnout in key swing states to win this thing.
Palin is the GOP’s wedge issue this year. In 2004, it was gay marriage that got their base to the polls. This time they have manufactured another one. At this point, Palin could be a drooling moron and the Republicans would still vote for the ticket.
The debates will be crucial to sway the independents (read, low information voters) toward the Democratic ticket. The voters – ones that are actually in play – are willing to vote for Obama, but they have to be given a hook to do so. That’s the Dem ticket’s challenge between now and November. They have to show two things. That Obama is a safe bet. I think he has already reached that threshold. Then they have to show that John McCain will run this country into the ground. He cant be trusted. That’s the winning argument. Facts matter very little at this point.
The Dems can talk policy on the Sunday talk shows. But in the ads and in the ground game, they have to go on offense and convince Americans that McCain is unpredictable and unsteady. It is an easy argument to make. George Bush made the argument quite successfully in 2000. The surrogates need to go out and repeat the mantra over and over again: McCain is risky.