By Jim Spencer
SpencerSpeaks.com
Ex-Colorado Sen. Gary Hart boarded the Dump Hillary bandwagon over the weekend. So did ex-New Jersey Sen. Bill Bradley. Both endorsed
“As one who has struggled throughout a lifetime for restoration of idealism to American politics, I can only smile, and perhaps shed a tear of happiness, that our time may have come,†Hart wrote in a Huffington Post blog item.
Let’s put the emphasis where it should be in that quote – on the “may have.â€
If Obama wins the
Hart and Bradley - and to a lesser degree current national Democratic chairman Howard Dean – each tried to reinvent the Democrats in campaigns for their party’s presidential nomination.
All failed.
Hart’s lack of experience as a one-term Senator took him down in 1984. He couldn’t take care of his extra-marital monkey business with Donna Rice when he was the front runner in 1988.
Bradley’s performance on the court as a professional basketball star excited fans, but it was never flamboyant. His bookish, boring 2000 presidential campaign never scored with Democratic voters.
Dean fired up younger voters as an alternative to the status quo in 2004. The ex-Vermont governor raised tons of money on the Internet, but lost a big lead in the
Bradley’s statement Sunday endorsing Obama reflects the differences in times and personalities that may make a new kind of Democratic candidate possible.
“Barack Obama is building a broad new coalition that brings together Democrats, independents and Republicans by once again making idealism a central focus of our politics,†Bradley said. “Because of his enormous appeal to Americans of all ages and backgrounds, Obama is the candidate best positioned to win in November.â€
National polls show that depends on the Republican candidate. Presidentelectionpolls.com averages the results of most public opinion polls. The website shows Obama moving from a losing position against Republican Rudy Giuliani in January 2007 to a seven percentage point lead in December 2007. Obama led Republican Mitt Romney by double digits in national polls throughout 2007. Interestingly, the national poll averages pulled together by Presidentelectionpolls.com’s David Terr show Obama would have the most trouble beating Republican John McCain. Obama went from a narrow lead over McCain to being tied with the
Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton, long perceived as the Democrats’ frontrunner, shows similar margins over Giuliani and Romney in averaged national polls for December 2007. But the
There seems little doubt that new-direction Democrats have chosen this moment to try to stage their coup. Hillary Clinton symbolizes an entrenched model. Even in a presidential victory, some Dems see
The risk comes in picking inspiration over experience. This is really what the Obama-Clinton battle boils down to. As political pragmatists will tell you, nothing inspires so much as victory. As Gary Hart, Bill Bradley and Howard Dean know, you accomplish next to nothing without holding office.
The wild card for Obama may still be race. In 1990, Doug Wilder of
Fiscally moderate and socially progressive, Wilder tested a presidential run in 1992 and got buried by indifference.
Wilder came out for Obama over the weekend, too.
“Our country needs a leader who can unite and inspire our citizens, a leader who can see things with a fresh eye, and a leader who can move beyond the parochialisms of the past,†Wilder said in his endorsement statement. “We need a leader whom people want to rally around with the confidence that positive change is on the way.â€
These days, Hart insists a candidate’s ethnicity no longer matters.
“The torch has been passed to a new generation of American leaders, and we don’t care what color it is,†Hart wrote in the Huffington Post.
We’ll see. If Obama wins in
Copyright 2008 by Jim Spencer. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.
20 users commented in " New-Direction Dems Try to Seize the Moment "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a TrackbackWell, I am libertarian in my political stance and even I am excited about Obama.
“1990, Doug Wilder of Virginia”. It is 18 years later. A lot has changed.
And, also to counter your DW reference: “Edward William Brooke III (born October 26, 1919) is an American politician and was the first African American to be elected by popular vote to the United States Senate when he was elected as a Republican from Massachusetts in 1966, defeating his Democratic opponent, Endicott Peabody, 58%–42%.” Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Brooke
Hilary Clinton’s critique of Obama was right on the money when she compared him to George Bush: he is an untried, green, first-term junior senator who was crowned by the press corps in 2000 when he gave the keynote address for the Dems. BFD. When you parse his speeches, there’s no connection to reality in them because he has yet to accomplish anything in his life besides getting elected to the Senate. He will have to rely (like George) on others judgment to field any kind of team if he becomes president. Washington can smell this kind of weakness a mile away, and they will eat him alive. He will not be able to unit the Democratic Party, and the best chance of the century will be pissed away because we let the media make our choices for us. Both Hilary Clinton and John Edwards have been through (different) trials by fire and are strong thinkers and doers, Clinton as the most hard-working and maligned First Lady ever, and John Edwards as the little slugger and workaholic who took on the big corporations and made them pay. I’d go for Edwards first, settle for Hilary if I had to, but Obama will be a political disaster.
I’m still confused why Obama is the populist candidate suddenly. I don’t discount experience, but it’s not that important of a credential, when we see Bush can manage without a brain. Presidency’s are not monarchies; they’re team effort. Do you think Bush thunk up all these Iraq war strategies, privatizing SS, signing statements, and warrantless surveillance? Most presidents are figureheads, charismatic rather than personally smart - e.g., Reagan. Others are developed after they’re in office - Carter.
I think the sudden attraction of Obama is really “anyone but Hillary”, or as Edwards puts it the same old corporate politics. So why not Edwards? Where’s his baggage? He has a message and a plan unlike Obama. If you truly want change and see it laid out, vote Edwards and read his plan. Not one lobbyist will be allowed in the White House; can it get any simpler?
Well, good to see Jim is back after a three-week hiatus. As for the comments of usersuz, let’s start with a bit of fact: historically, the polls are accurate. They are an accurate snapshot of what people are saying or thinking when the poll is taken. A January poll is just that — a January poll — and not at all a predictor of what may happen in November.
As for GWB’s claim that he was a uniter not a divider, the thinking part of our populace now understands that was a creation of the fertile mind of Karl Rove and never was a reality. GWB has done virtually nothing in his seven years in office but divide.
As for Hillary Clinton’s claims of experience, what experience. She has been in the Senate for slightly more than one term. Prior to that, she occupied a bedroom in the private quarters of the White House. From the East Wing, the first lady’s bunker, she screwed up a health plan, managed the Travelgate fiasco, and contributed nothing of record to American government or society. Personally, I think I’ll take Obama’s idealism and lack of experience over the other Democrats still contending. And until the Republicans decide on a candidate, all the polls saying Obama (or Hillary) would or would not defeat this or that Republican are so much blather that prove only that there isn’t enough real news to support a 24/7 news cycle.
Oh, by the way, John F. Kennedy, if I recall correctly (a euphemism meaning I’m not going to do the research now), served four years in the House and one term in the Senate, not much more than Obama.
Wow! Anytime Hart puts his seal of approval
on anyone–then it is time to move in the opposite direction. How about a button to push which means “none of the above.”
Usersuz.. “Obama has yet to accomplish anything in his life besides getting elected to the Senate”? What is different from Hillary riding the coat tails of the master politician or Edwards the ambulance chaser and hedgefund (offshore) vice president?
I find it interesting that when husband Bill ran for President as the former governor of a backwater state, experience on the world stage was not an issue.
If the Democrats think they need to carry the west to win the presidency, Hillary is not the candidate for that task.
Like any presidental election the key will be the independent voters.For what polls are worth,they suggest that they are looking for change and a new approach. Again Hillary is not the candidate that will carry this group. While both parties will hold their base, the key group again are the independents.
“Our country needs a leader who can unite and inspire our citizens, a leader who can see things with a fresh eye, and a leader who can move beyond the parochialisms of the past,†Wilder said in his endorsement statement. “We need a leader whom people want to rally around with the confidence that positive change is on the way.â€
The above quote is a very accurate description of Dennis Kucinich. We have such conversations as the above because the media refuses to give Kucinich any favorable mention.
Hillary’s campaign chest was full when she started out, I’ve always been suspicious that it may have been fattened by people who knew she could not win.
The last I heard, Hillary’s plans as president were to send Bill and Bush Sr. around the world as envoys of this country, as they did after the tsunami, as ex-presidents. They deliberately excluded Jimmy Carter. Breaking bread with the enemy is one thing, traveling together representing our country is another.I don’t want my country associated with the Bush name.
People are sick of the same old status-quo, the Bush/Clinton Dynasty, politicians in general.
That’s why Obama on the Dem side and Huckabee on the Gop side are picking up steam.People are casting about for someone they can believe in, for someone who will keep their word.
But is there such a thing as a truthful politician?
Wildflower…What gives you the idea that Huckabaee will keep his word? Because he is a baptist preacher? He would be a disaster for Republicans and the country.
Also, the bit about Bush and Clinton touring the world has been put by the wayside. Bush Sr. wasn’t asked. Clintonism…. make it up as you go.
Also, Carter is not an ambassador for the U.S. (in fact, quite the contrary) and has gone his own way. In my opinion is somewhat senile and has spent whatever capital that he has with the anti-American world to re-write his disasterous presidency. His own supporters have distanced themselves from his opinions. He should have gone into the sunset with class like Gerald Ford.
Obama is by far one of the most truthful politicians that I have seen. I wish that I could support him. That being said, I would not be ashamed if he was our president. I would be proud. Afraid for our way of life, but very proud. He is a good man.
Noidea, i was talking abt. the tsunami trip, and Carter was snubbed. I said nothing about thinking Huckabee would keep his word. I merely said people are casting about for someone to believe in whom they can trust, truthfulness. After all, we just finished 7 years of the most lying administration in the history of our country. You think I’d vote for Huckabee, and put women back in the stoneage? Surely you jest.
It’s cold today but so far as I know hell hasn’t frozen over yet and I have never voted for a GOP for president. I’d vote for a Kucinich/Ron Paul independent slate in a New York minute though.
[…] O’bama and Edwadrites are telling voters to vote for UNCOMMITTED to continue the Dump Hillary Movement as the Change started in Iowa and ignored in New […]
[…] seems growing numbers of the Democratic press, pundits, money types, king makers etc are joining their counterparts on the right and are either behind This Movie or want to avoid […]
I agree with Wildflower about the Huck. He’s rising fast in the Repub arena because he’s appears more believable and trustworthy. While I wouldn’t want to see a religous zealot get elected, I’d prefer the Huck over Romney, Rudy, and (oh, please God not the war-hawk) McCain. The Huck is sharp, and has some leadership qualities. Now this is all relavent of course, being a Dem and all.
But noidea, you’re living up to your namesake, because you have “no idea” about Carter. While Carter’s term go saddled with the oil crisis and economy just like Hoover got targeted for the depression, Carter was the most honorable and honest president we ever had. Show me the dishonesty and corruption, and not just conspiracys! No president has done more for this country and the world, in his charity and leadership around the world, then Carter. Ford did nothing but play golf, like Reagan, Nixon, and Bush Sr. When you have that kind of notability and former leadership of the free world, you SHOULD put it to good use helping the people of this nation and world, like Carter and Clinton has. At 83 years old what do you think the Bushes, and the rest will be doing? Carter is building house for Habitat for Humanity, traveling the world overseeing democratic elections and running a charity org. You didn’t see Ford speaking out against Bush Jr., like Carter bravely did, or standing tall for this nation AFTER his presidency. None of the recent presidents after Carter could carry his jockstrap ex post facto.
Keith,
Jimmy Carter supports whatever is against U.S. policy. He praised Kim Jong Il, he propped up Hugo Chavez. He said that Josef Tito was a “man who believes in human rights”.
Fourteen members of the Carter Center advisory board have resigned after concluding that the Center’s founder, former president Jimmy Carter, has turned to “malicious advocacy” for the Palestinians and against Israel. That is a high number of ’so called friends’ who have turned their back on him.
Look further about comments that Alan Dershowitz, once an ardent supporter, says about Jimmy Carter. He accuses him of accepting large sums of money from foundations (Sheik Zayed) that have amongst their goals to eracicate zionism. Harvard declined the same donation.
Jimmy Carters voice with respect to the Middle East should be taken with a grain of salt.
Habitat for Humanity is a worthwhile cause, but Jimmy should stay a bit more focused on that project rather than claiming to be the moral authority of the world.
I may have ‘no idea’ as you say, but I read a little bit. All I said is that he was going his own way and should let the sun set on him in a similar fashion to Gerald Ford.
Keith,
You also mentioned that Ronald Reagan did nothing in his final years. I might remind you that he was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease shortly after his presidency. I don’t imagine he was “playing much golf” as you put it.
I agree 100% with Keith, Carter is the most honorable, decent president we ever had.
And a final slap in his face was given when the Iran hostages were released during his successor’s inauguration. We all know there were manipulators in this country who had their hand in that.
Read a little more, noidea, the 14 who resigned were not associated with implementing the work of Carter’s Center. It was re Carter’s book “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid” which referred to Israel’s policies in occupied territories rather than to Israel itself. I’m not judging Carter on taking a different look at the situation. Maybe someone should.And he probably knows more about it than anybody in the world.
This area has been a festering hotbed for 60 years. Sometimes I wonder if the CFR didn’t put Israel there just to keep the world in an uproar. It’s too bad we didn’t give Israel a piece of our country here instead, maybe lower California, maybe the southern borders.I would welcome them to this hemisphere. And I’ll bet the Israelis would take care of those borders
for us.
Wildflower,
I never said that Jimmy Carter was not honorable or decent. I said that he is not aligned with US.
Wildflower,
The media plastered Pat Buchanan for similar words. Crucified him calling him an anti-semite. Yet Jimmy gets the pass..why? Duvalier’s Dream? There is nothing wrong with isolationism.. but don’t be a hypocrite. Not you, but the so called enlightened ones…..
noidea when we were having our “chemical weapon terrorist threats” here the Israelis were having them for real, heading to their taped up rooms when they hear the sirens. I realized how stressful the conditions they have lived under all these years are, with constant threats from their “neighbors” and I felt so sad for them. All the Israelis wanted was to live in peace on their own little strip of land but this peace has always been denied to them because they live in a vast sea of dark ages bullying Islamic fundamentalism. When your “neighbors” believe in killing you so they can go to heaven..do you think things will really ever get better?
Leave A Reply