Obama U.

For all the talk that the Dems, and the left in general, has neglected attention in developing a “farm team,” with an emphasis on training and infrastructure, party leaders seem to have gotten the message loud and clear. The latest example of this comes by way of Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.).

This January, Obama’s Hopefund [Leadership PAC] will bankroll a “school’ to train first-time campaign workers and place them in campaigns across the country. The recruiting focus of Obama’s “Yes We Can” program will be young African Americans and Latinos.

Nate Tamarin, Hopefund’s director, said the aim of the week-long campaign school is to “create this whole class of young, talented staffers who can work their way up in the Democratic Party.”

Kudos to Obama for launching this kind of initiative. I don’t know the details of what the “campaign school” will emphasize, but knowing Obama, it’s likely to be a valuable program for participants. And if recent history is any guide, there are a few hundred Dem candidates who’ll likely want to talk to the program’s “graduates” about campaign jobs. One can only hope other party leaders with leadership PACs will follow his example and make this kind of effort at training young party activists, particularly with outreach to minority communities.

As for what this might mean for the junior senator from Illinois…

Formed early this year, Hopefund PAC has had little trouble raising money, not surprising given Obama’s near rock-star persona among Democrats nationwide…. In its first six months of existence, Hopefund raised $852,000 and donated nearly $100,000 to a cavalcade of colleagues and other politicians seeking office in 2006. At the end of June, Hopefund had $445,000 in the bank.

The formation of this campaign training school is one of a number of small steps the first-term senator has taken since coming into office in January to cement his status as a national figure in the party. He has signed a bevy of fundraising appeals for individual senators, including a Moveon.org-organized appeal for Sen. Robert Byrd (W.Va.) that raked in $800,000 in less than three days.

Obama has politely deflected questions about his future political ambitions. He seems a very unlikely presidential candidate in 2008, with Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) already casting her considerable shadow over the field. But if Democrats fail to win back the White House in three years time, get ready for chants of Obama 2012.

Sounds about right to me.

I know this gets repititive, but I really love that guy. It’s not fair to Dems with less exciting personalities, but some people inspire you and some don’t. Obama is one of those quit your job, pack your stuff, and go to campaign HQ to help types. Or is it just me?

  • Hillary?
    Her presidency will unite the republic?

    Give me a break.

    WAAAAAAAY to much baggage.
    WAAAAAAAY to much knee-jerking from jerks.

    Wake up dimocrats:

    Clark/Obama 2008.

    ‘nuf said.

  • It’s not just you, Gary. Obama has this “glow” about him and goodness and integrity just seem to radiate from him in all directions. I probably sound like a star-struck teenager, I know. All I can say is that hearing him speak at the convention and reading transcripts of other speeches he’s made (Knox College, especially) restores my faith in the future of our republic. I don’t know about 2008, but he seems to be the kind of public figure we’ve been waiting for. Someone who can inspire so many people who usually sit on the sidelines to get involved. And this Hopefund PAC seems like a great way to start!

  • Everyone I know who has heard him speak, read his book, seen him on tv, knows he is the real deal. He has the charisma and intelligence to unite the country — if only it will pay attention. No politician I have ever seen, heard, or read about as a historical figure, excites me like him.

  • Formed early this year, Hopefund PAC has had little trouble raising money, not surprising given Obama’s near rock-star persona among Democrats nationwide….

    He only has “rock-star” status because he’s something that the Democrats haven’t had in the party for a while.

    A Democrat.

  • Beautiful. Obama is doing exactly the right thing, it warms my heart and stirs my sense of hope to see him taking his substantial political capital, and, even though he’s still very young himself, already wisely and somewhat selflessly investing in our Future. That’s a leader.

    However it scares the shit out of me to hear people actually talking about floting Clinton in 2008– to lose. And then lackadasically handwaving, “oh well, we’ll have Obama in 2012”. Folks, if we lose the White House again in 2008, there won’t *be* an America here in 2012 to win. It’s like that old Sting song: “The meek shall inherit the Earth? What good is a used-up world and how could it be worth having?!” Get with the program, here, people! This is much more urgent.

    Even more scary is the talk of Clark/Obama. Folks, you have it *backwards*– try Obama/Clark. You don’t put your stirring orator, visionary inspiration, natural politician at the *bottom* of your ticket! And your postion-paper policy wonk at the TOP??! How could anyone be so dumb as to even suggest that? And yet, that’s exactly what we did in 2004, and it cost us the election to have some stiff, wooden Washington insider at the top of the ticket, inspiring nobody and turning off voters. Clinton/Gore or Reagan/Bush is how you do it and win: you put the SALESMAN at the top of the ticket, and the BUREAUCRAT at the bottom. Best foot forward, as they say.

    A combination like Edwards/Kerry could have won in 2004. Likewise Obama/Clark in 2008 would be the right way to do it– or shall I say, the way the right-wing would do it, and win. They understand marketing, sales, and how to win elections. But not us: both Edwards and Obama are too new and too thin on experience to allow Serious Democrats put them at the top of the ticket.

    I should note here that the Repugs didn’t let Shrub’s complete lack of experience keep them from putting him on the top of the ticket. He’s a good politician, connected with people, was a damn good salesman. He was smooth and he sold well. They knew that all their experienced, “serious” old-hands were electoral losers: the Bob Dole types. And so they did the smart thing: THEY KEPT THEM OUT OF THE RACE. So, why wouldn’t we put an Obama or an Edwards up there, and let him pick a Clark or a Kerry or a Feingold for the VP to deal with the Beltway? People who have natural charisma, charm, and “star power” win elections. Bill “Elvis” Clinton had that from the get-go. Obama has it at a level I’ve never seen in a politician.

    What have we got besides still-wet-behind-the-ears Obama and Johnny Sunshine? Are all our salesmanlike, inspirational, “people-person”, charismatic leaders too young and/or inexperienced? And we refuse to give them uncontested primary victories because of that? That’s suicical– we can’t wait for this younger generation to earn their stripes before taking back the White House.

    What else is out there? Schweitzer? I just don’t know, but this is serious business.
    We can certainly help the Repugs self-destruct, in the hope that they’ll end up fronting an absolute loser in 2008, allowing Clinton to sail back into the White House with relative ease. I’d like that actually; it’d be nice to see her health care plan revived and carried triumphantly on the shoulders of a Democratic Congress. But the only way either she or Clark are going to win is if Pat Robertson runs as a third party (with Roy Moore as his running-mate!) and takes the Repug base away completely.

    It’s insane to just passively rely on Repugs self-destructing so that we can win by default the way that, say, Nixon did in 1968 and 1972. We need more, and better candidates. I’m very excited about what Obama is doing– building the future. My question is– what can we do in the next 2 years to assure that they’ll even *be* a future for him to build?

  • I like Obama a lot. He has a lot of potential, but let’s see what he does in the next couple of years.

    I still like Edwards. He should have led the ticket in ’04, but he didn’t. Oh well.

    And I like Clinton. I say she will win every state Kerry won and she can (not will, but can) win Ohio, Florida, Iowa, and Arkansas, and possibly Missouri and Colorado. Yes, she has baggage, but she also has high name ID and (right now) good positives.

    I’d like to see the Clintons back in the White House.

  • Goatchowder said it all!!! Can we get you to work at DNC HQ Goat??

    In my mind, Hillary is radioactive and if you really want to fire up the Repug’s – run her.

    Obama is the ONLY Democrat that I would consider for President in ’08 at this time, with the possible exception of Harry Reid if he continues to build on what he is doing now. Give Americans charisma and hope… Hope sells, people!

  • Rock star? Check back with me when Obama is in his third term as senator.

    Um. Have you been to Illinois? Even the grass is blue here. He will get elected everytime he runs.

  • Hurrah!

    I finally broke down and went back to finish college so that I could do my part and be useful to my party in it’s time of need.

    Oh well, and a million thanks to Obama for what starting what will hopefully spark the creation of a hundred such schools.

  • Comments are closed.