Barack for president?

October 22, 2006

Guest Post by Michael J.W. Stickings

According to the AP, “Sen. Barack Obama acknowledged Sunday he was considering a run for president in 2008, backing off previous statements that he would not do so”.

Mark Warner was widely seen as the anti-Hillary candidate, and it was assumed that Evan Bayh and John Edwards would be the likeliest to benefit from Warner’s decision not to run. That may still be true, but Obama must be seen as a credible candidate who would attract a good deal of media attention and popular support. He could very well be the future of the Democratic Party. That future could come sooner than we thought.

All I can say is: Its about time.

  • I honestly don’t see the US being mature enough as a country to have a black man for president (or a woman for that matter… sorry, Hil). There’s a goodly number of Americans whose heads would explode at the very thought of a black president.

    President Obama is a pipe dream, as is a woman or an openly gay president. It just ain’t gonna happen. You might like to wrap yourselves in delusions of America the free with equal opportunity for all, but the reality on the ground is very different. If Obama ran in ’08, I’d be very surprised to see him survive (literally) to election day.

  • Obama dismissed notions that he might not be ready to run for president because of his limited experience in national politics.

    [From the AP article]

    Really? I hope who ever the hell is saying this went full bore ape shit when the Ass from Texas (via Kennebunkport, ME) announced he was going to run.

    My personal feelings about Mr. Obama aside, I think this country is still too much of a seething cesspit of bigotry to put him in the Oval Office. Outright sheet staining wearing aside, there’s still sub-surface stupidity a-plenty in the land of the free. Exhibit A: Chris Rock’s bit on people being surprised Colin Powell is so articulate.

    In addition there will be plenty of people of all races who will openly and vocally have a huge problem with the fact he is first generation “mixed.”

    HOWEVER. If I knew this were going to be another re-match with Alan “Wing Nut” Keyes, I’d say what are we waiting for? Maybe Obama is waiting to get a better idea of who his opposition will be.

  • President Obama is a pipe dream, as is a woman or an openly gay president. It just ain’t gonna happen.
    Comment by raff

    Fraid so. I don’t know if they would say it but I suspect the thoughts in the wingnuts heads about Hillary and Obama would be: dickless and miscegenated.

  • But if Obama is running, then I am quite certain that my belief that Hillary is not running is true. I like Hillary, but I can’t bear the thought of listening to all the righty spew which that would induce. I would prefer to hear someone else being beaten up.

    I like Obama, but I’m not taking my “Re-Elect Gore 2008” bumper sticker off yet. I wish that he would quit picking on his party though, before he becomes Joementum, Jr.

  • I don’t particularly trust charisma without demonstrated experience, and insufficient experience got us where we are with Bush. However, I’d go for Obama if everyone else did. Otherwise I agree with #7. I’d love to see two terms of Gore/Obama, which would season him nicely and set us up perfectly for two terms of Obama.

  • Shit. Do you think the GOP reflected in 1999 and said, “Americans will never elect an arrogant ex-drunk wastrel with no ideas or curiosity about governing.”

    Gore/Obama in ’08.

  • I don’t know if it’s necessarily impossible for a black man to win the Presidency. After all, how many of the diehard racists are going to vote for ANY Democrat? I don’t think those are persuadable voters, so it’s not as big a concern.

  • I’m glad to hear Obama is considering. He seems to have a freshness about him that I think the party needs. Would he be a viable candidate? I don’t see how that’s possible to know at this stage, but I’m fairly certain Clinton is not electable. Kerry or Gore might be electable, provided they learned something from their past mistakes, and provided they can overcome the baggage they’ve accumulated through long histories in Washington — but those are two big “ifs.”

  • “… I don’t think those are persuadable voters, so it’s not as big a concern.”

    Don’t kid yourself. Voters seem to be more motivated to vote AGAINST things they don’t like as opposed to voting for things they agree with. Bush is a perfect example. If dems take the house or the senate, it’ll be because people are motivated to vote against Bush, the lesser of two evils, so to speak.

    If you run a black or a woman candidate for pres (or even better, a black, gay woman… to bad Condi’s on the wrong side…), it would motivate every misogynist, racist, bigoted asshole to get out & vote for the alternative…any alternative. You think politics are ugly & divisive now? Just try running Clinton or Obama in ’08. You’ll see some real sparks fly then…

    A Clinton or Obama run for pres would rip your country in half.

  • Obama is fresh and exciting, no question about it, and I think Publius is right that the election could be won with the persuadable voters. But Gore has been giving great speeches lately and came across really well in “An Inconvenient Truth”. I think he has great credibility and experience, and the Clinton “baggage” that he couldn’t get past in 2000 now looks good in comparison to the Republicans. Also, the Republicans have already taken their best shots at him, so they really have nothing new to say about him. Plus the thing that I like most about him is that he doesn’t actually want the job any more. The old saw about how a desire to be president is a good reason to disqualify someone from the job has been looking more and more sensible with every president after Eisenhower.

  • #3
    VP
    Comment by Dale — 10/22/2006 @ 4:29 pm

    I’d prefer to keep him in reserve a bit longer but… I guess that’s not a bad option. He’d be 55?56? and better-seasoned when he ran for the top spot. Though *not* as a VP to Hillary, and how we can persuade her not to run is beyond me…

    I don’t share raff’s gloom about the chances of a black person running for Prex (or a woman’s. Just not Hillary ). Nobody thought Doug Wilder had any chance of being elected as VA’s Governor, either, yet he beat all odds, and “down South”, too.

    What’s really weird is that the *Republicans* are pushing for Obama on their blogs and in MSMs; either they’re lying through their teeth (as per usual), or else his chances are better than we think.

    Frank Rich’s article in today’s NYTimes offers an interesting argument for Obama’s running soon: before he becomes an ineffective windbag, like Biden 🙂 I watched Roberts “betting” for the SCOTUS position and I must say I share Rich’s opinion of Biden! The man was so enamored of the sound of his voice, he couldn’t stop talking. And he *was* witty. Just not *that* witty…

  • The Lucky Sea Men: Do you think the GOP reflected in 1999 and said, “Americans will never elect an arrogant ex-drunk wastrel with no ideas or curiosity about governing.”

    Arrogance, alcoholism, irresponsibility, stupidity and lack of experience are one thing…

    … being black, female or homosexual is quite another. Honestly! ;-P

  • I have a lot of problems with Obama’s running. I would love the idea of a black president, but I know there is still a lot of racism out there, and it isn’t all in the Republican Party, sadly. (And there are strong currents still in both the black and white communities against ‘mixed marriages’ though Derek Jeter has silenced many of these.) I think a black candidate COULD win, but only someone who has been around long enough that their race is not the first thing you think of when you think of them. (The obvious example is Colin Powell, or Condi, not that I’d support either of them for other reasons.) For political junkies like us, this is true for Obama, but I still have my doubts that the average voter knows him well enough.

    Two more important points. Both his election to the legislature and to the Senate were aided by the lack of strong opposition. When Jack Ryan got shot down by Seven of Nine, the best the Republicans could do was Alan Keyes, and I believe there was a similar example in the legislative race. Even in the primary, he got a great boost from his main opposition being caught up in a scandal.
    The only time he faced serious opposition was in his Congressional campaign against the seriously awful Bobby Rush, and he was defeated 61-30. We know he is a great speaker, yes, but that is not the only campaign skill needed, and we don’t know how he would handle a race against a strong Republican.

    Finally, he’s been in the Senate for two years, and always in the opposition so far. We know what he is against, but we don’t know, yet, what he is for. (Pell grants, ‘transparency’ — where he lined up with McCain and Coburn — and a, to me, too strong stand on immigration are what he has worked for so far.) I think he’s probably beter than this, and I loved his support of the New Deal, but I still think he needs more time to show what he can do before we start marching behind his banner.

    The most important thing we have to do is WIN. Maybe a year from now I’ll feel differently about Obama, but I still remember that Michael Dukakis was a ‘media star’ and apparently a great choice. Hell, i remember arguing that George McGovern, with a history of getting elected in a Republican state, and with positions that I assumed most people supported, should be a great candidate.

    Let’s give it time, give him time — and a few others. (I personally would love to see Elliot Spitzer run.) Let’s see what is happening with the Republicans over the next year before we lock into any candidate.

  • SUB-ROSA NEWS

    Some of the News
    That may be True

    POPE LISTS OBAMA AS SAINTHOOD CANDIDATE

    Rome October 22, 2006 – The Vatican announced today that Barack Obama was one of
    three candidates Pope Benedict XVI considers worthy of sainthood. Thus, begins the process of further examination of the life of the Illinois Senator for eventual elevation to saint.

    Reporters questioned the Vatican spokesman, Cardinal Sanducci, raising the point that Mr. Obama was not even a Roman Catholic. Cardinal Sanducci noted that the Senator was clearly a man of great goodness and that, given his background, he could bring the message of common good to Asia and Africa, as well as to the United States. It was also clear that Mr. Obama also does extraordinarily well in promoting inclusiveness and faith to audiences and talk show hosts around the world.

    Reporters asked whether or not this action was perhaps premature since Barack Obama had not even been President as yet. Cardnal Sanducci responded that this was considered a plus and that, in fact, a U.S. presidency would constitute an automatic disqualification.

    Some observers noted the Mr. Obama’s life had not been totally exemplary and that he had said that he may have even tried “a little blow”. Others dismissed Mr. Obama’s statement as just a political move to get some street cred.

    Acording to Europe United Press, it was later learned that the suggestion for sainthood consideration came along with a substantial donation from the Bill and Hillary Clinton Foundation.

  • I don’t understand why everybody is looking for a magic leader to bring the Democratic Party out of the wilderness. Aren’t we supposed to be part of the reality-based community?

    What do we really know about Obama? How progressive is he really?

    Could it be that we are projecting ALL our hopes of a united, peaceful and more just America onto this man, and that a little more skepticism ought to flavor our consideration of him?

    I remain unconvinced.

    • Comments are closed.