Obama buzz makes a comeback

September 15, 2006

I’m still skeptical that Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) would launch a presidential campaign in 2008, and the senator himself has expressed no interest in the race at all, but if you listen to the Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza, a new “Obama ’08” boomlet is about to begin.

After watching Illinois Sen. Barack Obama (D) closely over the last few months, we’ve grown more and more convinced that he will come under significant pressure to at least consider a run for president in 2008.

While Obama — and his staff — continue to deny any interest in a national bid in two years time, his actions seem to belie his comments on the subject.

The latest evidence? Obama will be the special guest of Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin (D) at his annual steak fry held this Sunday at the Warren County Fairgrounds in Indianola. Harkin has hosted the event for the past 29 years, and it has become a regular stop for presidential aspirants. Harkin’s guest in 2005 was former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, who is widely expected to run for president again in 2008.

It’s probably worth adding that organizers sold more tickets to this year’s steak fry than ever before, suggesting, once again, that Obama has real star power.

And to add to the mix, Obama will be joined in Iowa by Steve Hildebrand, a sought-after Dem consultant with excellent experience as a campaign manager and field organizer, who managed Al Gore’s Iowa caucus victory in 2000. Cillizza quoted Hildebrand as describing Obama as “the biggest star in American politics.”

It’s not just DC; the talk is starting to resonate in Obama’s home state of Illinois as well.

State Comptroller Dan Hynes urged his former opponent, U.S. Sen. Barack Obama, to run for president, just days before Obama heads to Iowa for a major political event.

“We are a nation divided like at almost no other time in our history,” Hynes said Thursday during a downtown news conference to announce his support for Obama. “I believe Barack Obama can change this, that he, and he alone can restore the hope and optimism that has made this country great.”

The comments from Hynes are among the strongest to date from a Democratic official about the prospect of an Obama presidential bid.

I still think it’s unlikely, but I’ll be curious to see if this talk continues, and what effect, if any, it has on Obama. As Cillizza concluded, “The smart money is still on him waiting until 2012 or 2016, but this latest development has to give even those most pessimistic about an Obama ’08 bid some pause.”

Screw waiting. The longer he sits in the Senate, the tougher it will be for him to capitalize on the outsider appeal he has.

For 2008, Obama will be more attractive to Republicans and Independents than he’ll be as the years go by. (I’d love to see what his approval ratings are among those groups, in IL and nationally, right now.) As he casts more and more distortable votes, though, and sinks deeper into that windy culture of the Senate, this will fade.

He should go for it now. Failing that, he should be planning to leave after his one term and run for governor of IL in 2010. If he spends more than one term in the Senate, I think it’s a safe bet he’ll never be president.

  • I’d be a big fan of an Obama/Feingold ticket in ’08. There is, however, one slight issue — Obama’s comments a few months (?) ago to a Christian group.

    Granted, the left does need to reach out the religious community a bit more — too many times, the left is painted as being hostile to religion. The key, however, is to make sure religious moderates are the target, since the left does support gay rights (well, at least 99% of the ones I know do).

    Anyway, I think Obama would be an amazing, dynamic choice.

  • I’ll go with dajafi’s Plan B (run for IL governor). Other than that, racism in America is a large mountain to climb. There are no black governors and no woman has been elected President (or VP) of the United States.

    With America’s inate racism being a severe drag on a non-white candidate chances when running for public office, I’m also afraid that many whites, like myself, would prefer to back a candidate

  • I haven’t seen him do anything positive for the progessive cause since becoming a Senator. In fact, he seems to be following the DLC-moderate-don’t make waves mindset. He would have to be another Clinton to win that way and I just don’t see that.

  • SECOND TRY —

    I’ll go with dajafi’s Plan B (run for IL governor). Other than that, racism in America is a large mountain to climb. There are no black governors and no woman has been elected President (or VP) of the United States.

    With America’s inate racism being a severe drag on a non-white candidate chances when running for public office, I’m also afraid that many whites, like myself, would prefer to back a candidate with less obstacles to victory.

  • The buzz will continue through October as Obama goes on a book tour for his new title, THE AUDACITY OF HOPE. Between October 17th and 31st he’ll be signing books in Chicago, Skokie, New York, Boston, Phoenix, Denver, San Francisco, Seattle, LA, Austin, and Milwaukee. Check the Crown Publishing Web site for the dates to these events.

  • The speech he gave at the 2004 convention was the most masterful piece of oratory I have ever witnessed. He is one politician who would always get the benefit of my doubt.

    Fine Nation piece on progressives’ qualms about Obama:

    Because the media have not looked as closely at his political positions, Obama has taken on the quality of a blank screen on which people can project whatever they like. But he hasn’t discouraged this. A masterful politician, Obama has a Bill Clinton-esque talent for maximizing that screen and appearing comfortable in almost any setting. And, like Clinton, Obama has an impressive control of the issues and a mesmerizing ability to connect with people.

  • What exactly has Obama actually done to warrant all this buzz?

    I’ll take a stab at that.

    He INSPIRES people. He’s thoughtful, young and approachable. He’s got Clinton-like magnetism but with Midwestern family values. He’s got a (Paul) Simon-like approach to policy (Simon was his mentor) but without the bowtie and brown suits.

    And honestly, when was the last time there was ANY Dem candidate (excluding Clinton) that generated any buzz in the last 20 years??

    Go Obama! Obama/Gore ’08.

  • If I knew he’d be running against right-wank psycho Alan Keyes again, I’d say go for it. But I have to agree with 4. America is no where near the point of electing a non-Caucasian president. Even one who is soooo cute (Ahem).
    I’m afraid the fact that his is mixed would be a problem for many caucasians and african-americans. Too many folks are still that ignorant.

  • People who run sometimes have an advantage for VP choice, and VPs have an advantage in elections. While it seems like it’s too early for Obama, I can’t second guess the people who vote in Democratic primaries.

    I’m surprised at how quickly the story of Gore’s saying he might consider it has vanished. Probably an indication he shouldn’t do it.

    And I, for one, believe Clark is the man to win and the man who will best be able to get designed and enacted the kind of legislation that we Democrats believe in. Oh, and he’ll also be best with the international situation, naturally.

  • What exactly has Obama actually done to warrant all this buzz?

    And I, too, will take a (more cynical) stab at that. I lean more toward that him following the DLC sensible centrist, a pox on both your partisan houses route of late. There was that church speech where he bravely scolded all us anti-religeous dems who want to feed the christians to the lions – not that he could actually name anyone. Then he went to Africa got a really warm reception – and promptly started scolding them about something or other.

    It’s endless Sista Soulja moments and the DLC and David Broder are creaming their pants.

  • While I agree with the description posted in 4 and 11, I don’t see that as a reason to not back a candidate. True, racism is not dead. That however, should inspire us to work harder toward the goals of equal rights AND opportunities. I would happily back Obama if I believed he could get us out of this miserable mess that the Bushies have put us in. Right now, I don’t know enough about him, although I was deeply impressed with his trip to Kenya.

    Hypothetically, let’s say Obama is the best and most qualified dem running in 08. Now, let’s say that a lot of the democratic base doesn’t back him because we’re too scared that a person of color can’t overcome being a person of color in the context of a racist nation. All that does is preserve a dangerous status quo. We elect someone else as the candidate who is male and white even though this person doesn’t seem to have the political savvy nor the credentials to run a strong campaign. This person will lose the general election and then we’re stuck for another four years.

    The same goes for Hillary. I say if they can do it, they deserve our support and all our efforts. And I say good if it makes us work harder. In the end, we’re a better nation and a better people. Plus, the national conversation now includes women and persons of color as viable, electable candidates.

  • In my mind the lofty goals of equality have to take a backseat to electability (and ideology). Hillary is certainly smart enough to be president and with Bill it would be a great “two-fer.” But, I’m not convinced (yet) that enough of the American voting public is ready for a woman president. And for Obama, the issue of race is even thornier for Americans to deal with.

  • Case in point (from MYDD):

    “We Democrats are just, well, confused,” Obama writes. He goes on. “Mainly, though, the Democratic Party has become the party of reaction. In reaction to a war that is ill-conceived, we appear suspicious of all military action.

    “In reaction to those who proclaim the market can cure all ills, we resist efforts to use market principles to tackle pressing problems. In reaction to religious overreach, we equate tolerance with secularism, and forfeit the moral language that would help infuse our policies with a larger meaning.”

  • response to comment #9: that Nation piece was one of the more idiotic things I’ve ever read. Sirota is a decent polemicist, but he indicates absolutely no sense of how American politics actually works. Obama is in the tradition of Lincoln and FDR, a pragmatic progressive who understands that ideological purity of the Sirota stripe is a great way to, well, wind up as irrelevant and predictable as The Nation.

    Like Lincoln and FDR, Obama always will be attacked from the left as a sellout and a trimmer. And like those two men, the greatest American leaders of the last two centuries, he could do more to move our country forward and materially improve the world than a thousand pure left ideologues who could never play outside their so-comfortable echo chamber.

    Obama/Clark ’08!

  • GO with Gore Obama in ’08! — Mike @2

    Me, I’d go with that too. Or, alternatively, Edwards/Obama. I disliked Edwards when he was running with Kerry, but he seems to have grown up a lot since then (though his voice is still awful )

    I think Obama is too young, “politically speaking”; a jump from a single term in the Senate, directly into Presidency would be difficult even without the “race factor” thrown into the mix. But, as a vice-President, he’d be much more palatable.

    He’d gain some more political savvy ’08-’16, at which point he’d be perfectly positioned for a ’16-’24 stretch of his own. And it would also give people time to get used to his skin color (racism is still alive an well in US, but it *is* fading a little. The more time he”s given, the better).

    But I would like to see him higher up than Senate eventually; the guy has *loads* of charisma on top of some excellent common sense, without being too “high-falluting” . All would be extremely refreshing after the 8 yrs of BC troglodytism.

  • Why not let Obama run and see what he can do. While Alan Keyes was a last minute straw man, Obama ran against a crowded field of candidates including the state comptroller Dan Hynes and a millionaire stock broker and won handily. If he can win in Illinois that is better baromenter than a few wins in Iowa and New Hampshire. He is a man of class and grace. While he is a graduate of Harvard Law and editior of the Law Review he eventually left the top law firm and the big money to go into civil rights law. He excudes a confidence in his own skin both as a person and a person of color. He has always been against war in Iraq as opposed to Hilary and other who are playing safe. He generates excitement and passion and the side with passion usually wins. Reagan generated passion over a wounded well intentioned ineffective Carter and a dull Mondale. Clinton beat a competent but visionless Bush the senior and Bob Dole. Bush the chicken hawk was able to beat a decorated war hero because his arguments while shoddy touched the gut. With passion there is no guarrantee of victory but it makes it much more possible.
    Fran

    • Comments are closed.