|
I'm noticing a trend.
Obama just hired a new senior advisor to handle 'rapid response', John Del Cecato, a partner at David Axelrod's firm. The commentary from Josh Marshall was a withering 'Obama to launch post-1992 operation'. And then, today, on the telecom bill and Dodd's hold, Markos politely noted that Obama has no credibility, that he's not even worth considering as a potential leader (not because he can't lead but because he won't). Marshall followed up with a note on Obama's stance on the FISA bill titled 'Day Late and ...?', and Jane Hamsher called the move 'All Hat and No Cattle.'
This is a group that, by and large, wants anyone but Clinton to get the nomination, so the degree of toxicity here is fairly high. It's a remarkable collapse in credibility, picking up speed recently at an accelerating pace. It goes back to Obama's unreliable behavior during the Lamont campaign, his shrinking violet act during Military Commissions Act, and his constant chiding of the secular left. This basically laid out his approach to movement politics, and his unwillingness to build a power base among people desperate to find some reason, any reason, to support him.
Obama might be able reverse this slide by leading on fights on media consolidation, civil rights, and just generally gumming up the works in the Senate. And perhaps there's some strategy here, of African-Americans, young people and white evangelicals that I'm missing.
Still, the internet space was seen as a potentially significant base at a certain point. And while Obama is doing pretty well online, I'm struck by the utter contempt with which he is held by these opinion leaders.
There seems to be this sense of cynicism about Obama, and it runs deeper every day. Rather than the campaign heating up after labor day, which is what I was constantly told would happen by the Obama people, the perception of Obama as a rudderless operator has congealed. The gloves didn't come off. I can't say I'm surprised.
I think this is a positive development, as it suggests the environment has become more difficult for those who will not lead. Say what you will about Clinton, she has been leading on aggressive pushback against the right-wing media. To put it in evolutionary terms, the 'fitness function' that selects for politicians is now prizing leadership more aggressively than rhetoric and money. This shifting environment is very important, though it's not clear whether it's a permanent shift or whether the right or left will benefit more strongly.
|
STATE BLOGS
