The Obama Legend Jolts 2008 Campaign

Obamamania continues. The Washingtonian has an excellent profile on The Legend of Barack Obama and it is well worth reading the entire article. Obama’s charisma is a large part of the story:

A few short years ago, no one had heard of the skinny Chicago state senator and constitutional-law professor with the big ears and the funny name. A few months ago, he would have gamely demurred when asked if he’d run for president in 2008. Now all bets are off. According to advisers, colleagues, and friends, Obama just might be willing to be the next president of the United States. It would be the capstone of an amazing rise for a politician whose charisma and personal story—half-Ken­yan, half-Kansan, a Hawaii-born, Harvard-educated lawyer—has breathed life into the Democratic Party.

At the heart of “Obamania” is his personality and presence—part preacher, part professor, part movie star. His charisma seems effortless, his charm an afterthought. National Journal White House reporter Alexis Simendinger recalls the first time Obama visited the White House after his election. He was mingling in the East Room with other members of Congress. As she watched him move through the crowd, a photographer asked, “Who is that guy? He’s certainly got ‘It.’ ”

The question now is how far “it” takes Obama—and how fast.

A vague attribute of “it” might create limitations or limit Obama to a few minutes of celebrity, but Obama shows there is substance to. I was impressed with his recent book, which he reportedly actually wrote himself. I do hope he follows this up with more specifics as to what he would do should he run for President. He is starting out well for a freshman Senator, although it is not clear that this is sufficient to qualify him to be President yet.

In Washington, Obama has become a policy wonk. “He’s an amazing person in his capacity to understand the issues,” says Chris Lu. Obama also has worked to develop the framework for his worldview and approach to governing. “Early on he wanted to come up with an overarching narrative,” says Samantha Power, who worked with him on foreign policy. “I was really struck by that desire to front-load the big thinking, the toughness of cracking this nut, articulating this balance between freedom and security.”

Obama has been frustrated by what he sees as the Senate’s wasted opportunities. “I think what has frustrated him more than the process itself is how the Republicans aren’t interested in the issues that he thinks are important to the American people,” says Lu, who explains that Obama would rather concentrate on issues facing the middle class, like healthcare and education, instead of the ideological issues the Republicans have been pushing. Says Obama, “A lot of times what gets done in Washington on a day-to-day basis isn’t all that much.”

The senator’s highest-profile ventures have been bipartisan, including a tutelage in nuclear nonproliferation with Indiana’s Richard Lugar that took Obama to Eastern Europe and Russia, an effort to bring transparency to government contracting with Oklahoma senator Tom Coburn, and a push for immigration reform with Florida’s Mel Martinez. Obama was the first to raise the threat of avian flu on the Senate floor and has spoken out for victims of Hurricane Katrina, pushed for alternative-energy development, and championed improved veterans’ benefits—all while working to expand his support in Illinois, where he held 39 town-hall meetings in his first year. “You have to devote time—things don’t just happen here because of who he is,” Butts says.

With all the prominent Democrats looking at a 2008 run it is hard to believe that Obama is suddently being seen as a front runner. The New York Times writes that the possibility of Obama running is jolting the 2008 field:

But more than simply picking up the pace, Democrats increasingly believe that Mr. Obama has the potential of upending the dynamics of the 2008 contest more than any other Democrat who might run — short, perhaps, of Al Gore, the former vice president, whom some Democrats are pressing to run.

In Mr. Obama, Democrats have a prospective candidate who both underlines and compensates for the potential weaknesses that worry many Democrats about Mrs. Clinton.

He is a fervent opponent of the war in Iraq, and Democrats see him as an exceedingly warm campaigner with a compelling personality and a striking ability to command a crowd. He has no known major political baggage (though he has yet to encounter anything approaching the level of scrutiny Mrs. Clinton has undergone during her years in public life). And Mr. Obama can even match Mrs. Clinton’s arresting political storyline if he tries to became the nation’s first black president as she seeks to become its first female president.

While other candidates had hoped that lightening would strike and they’d survive as the main alternative to Hillary Clinton, Obama’s sudden prominence makes it much more difficult for candidates like Bayh, Vilsack, Dodd, Ricardson, or Biden to gain traction. While John Kerry has the name recognition and cash on hand to make a run if he desires, he has had to postpone his decision in response to questions raised by his handling of the attacks following his recent botched joke. At the moment a Kerry nomination appears to be an uphill battle, but we saw when Kerry came back from trailing Al Sharpton in the polls in the fall of 2003 to winning the nomination that predictions this far out, with regards to any candidate, mean very little.

6 Comments

  1. 1
    Probus says:

    Obama mania will not last long simply because he is running during a time of 2 wars. The same can be said for Clinton, Vilsack, Bayh or Edwards. We are in the middle of 2 grueling wars, at a time of peace we would be more likely to see dem voters take the plunge and pick a candidate without the foreign policy experience of Sen. Kerry as in the case of Bill Clinton. He was elected during a time of peace. Obama and H. Clinton will make great candidates but this is clearly not their time.

    The need for critical foreign policy experience required will hurt them. I think they are both good dems and deserve our support should they choose to run in down the road. I would love to see the 1st female president as our commander-in-chief. I would like it even more to see an African American commander-in-chief. Americans right are not willing to make that jump because there is too much at stake.

    This will be a race for who is the best person to end the Iraq war, who has the best plan and who has the leadership skills and the experience as a combat veteran to understand serious issues of war. Sen. Kerry IMO proved that on his Late Edition interview with Blitzer on Sunday. He understands what’s at stake and is the most qualified candidate. He should take as much time as he can to announce his candidacy. Bush didn’t announce candidacy till June of 1999. The bad publicity over this non-controversy will eventually die out. Missing a pronoun won’t hurt his chances at all.

  2. 2
    Shaun says:

    I understand your point that during wartime voters typically want a candidate that has some foreign policy experience and this could definitely hurt Sen. Obama’s chances. But Kerry? He’s managed to let the Republicans beat up on him twice in two consecutive election years – one of which he wasn’t even running. His “botched joke” shouldn’t have been the lead story for the media for three days. The only thing he’s proven is that he mismanaged the Swift Boat attacks and he can’t handle the punch line of a rather sophomoric joke. If you want to play the “experience in foreign policy card”, then the clear choice is Sen. Biden. Although, I don’t think Biden or Kerry could take on McCain or Giuliani in a national election.

  3. 3
    Probus says:

    Yes, Kerry. You can’t blame him for their smear attacks. Granted he could have done more to fight the smear attacks and lies of the swiftboat veterans in 2004. But he did a fine job of defending himself when they tried to smear him again over missing a pronoun in a joke. It was the lead story not because of what Kerry did or didn’t do but what the repugs tried to do and failed. The media (CNN, Fox News, MSNBC and others have a repug slant in their coverage) they tried to focus on Kerry so we wouldn’t focus on the Iraq war.

    Their attempts failed, as dems won both the House and the Senate which many thought the dems wouldn’t win. You seem to blame Kerry for what the repugs do. He defended himself well. Sen. Biden plagiarized a speech from British Labour Party leader Neil Kinnock when he ran in 1988. Ever since that incident I have stopped listening to him. Biden has not raised nearly as much money as Kerry has. Plus I don’t find him to be sincere. He voted for Rice as Sec. of State while many dems like Kerry didn’t.

    Sen. Kerry could take on the former mayor any day. He has never held any statewide or national office other than being mayor. He is not a credible candidate. As for McCain, he is a political opportunist who won’t get the repug nomination because he is not conservative enough. He voted against the gay marriage ban and voted for embryonic stem cell research. He has also changed his tune on Roe v. Wade. The religious right had problems with him in 2000 and they still do.

    Romney or Huckabee have a better chance than he does. He is a political opportunist who doesn’t stand for anything. He attacked Kerry when he knew Kerry had not insulted the troops. Kerry is by far the most ethical and honest leader the dems have had. He would make a great leader and president. Missing a pronoun couldn’t and won’t hurt his chances.

  4. 4
    Ron Chusid says:

    What we might have is a discrepancy between who would make the best President and who would make the best candidate. For President, the choice is clear for Kerry.

    This leaves the questions of whether we go with someone who is less qualified to be President but might have a better chance of winning. We must also consider that any candidate will be subject to similar attacks. It’s not as if Kerry is the only Democrat to come out of a race harmed from GOP attacks. While Clinton was able to overcome them (partially due to having a three way race, and partially due to being a political genius), Dukakis and Gore suffered similar fates as Kerry. Time has helped to rehabilitate the harm to Gore’s reputation, but unfortunately the handling of the botched joke has slowed down Kerry’s attempts at taking back control of his public image.

    If kerry is going to get another shot he must do two things. He must make the case clear that he would make the best President, as he did in Iowa and New Hampshire in 2004. That”s the easier test for him to pass. He also must convince Democratic primary voters that he can handle the GOP attacks. At the moment this is a serious obstacle for Kerry, but that does not mean he cannot make the case and make a come back. At the moment his chances look poor, but as I said in the post, predictions this far out mean very little. In 2003 and 2004 Kerry greatly outshined the other Democrats in the debates. If he blows out Clinton and Obama in debates everything could change.

  5. 5
    Shaun says:

    Ron, you’re right. I’m not saying that Kerry wouldn’t make the better President. I just think at this time he’s clearly not the better candidate. Democrats need to learn from the Gore and Kerry campaigns of the past in order to win in ’08.

  6. 6
    Probus says:

    I agree Ron. It is too early to count out Kerry. He is an excellent debater and would do a fine job in any debate setting. One of the reasons he was able to win the nomination was that he has an ability to connect with people in IA and NH. It is too early to write off Kerry, he had 59 million people vote for him just 2 years ago. More than both Clinton and Gore.

    Shaun, as you said, right now Kerry may not be in a good position but it is too early to write him off. I think he can fix the damage done by the false attacks on his commitment to the troops. After all he only missed a pronoun in a joke. And Bush knew this and attacked him anyway. He is doing the right thing right now by putting off his announcement, if he plans to run again. He should wait to announce as long as he can.

    His announcement won’t affect his public appearances. He should right now focus on his Senate work which he is doing. Dems should learn from mistakes made by Kerry and Gore definitely. But I wouldn’t count out Kerry at all just because he lost in 2004.

Leave a comment