Posts Tagged ‘Clinton’

Why Barack Obama Will Lose The Elections

September 14, 2008

I have been an Obama supporter for some time now, though the reasons for this remain unclear to me. Were I upset by Hillary Clinton’s negative electorate not to be a fan of hers? I’m sure that was a factor. Or was I simply swallowed by the jaws of Obamamania? That probably played a role as about 95% of my friends are Obama supporters. These questions are elusive, yet insignificant. The important fact is that my excitement with Obama has reached its nadir. I still think he would be a better president than McCain, but my faith in his victory vanishes day by day watching the election coverage. Why? Let’s outline a few problems of the Democratic candidate (in fact, of many previous candidates of this party who failed).

First of all, Intellectualism. While listening to Obama speak at various rallies an American undergraduate can often relate to the candidate while he projects the same dualities and uncertainties present not only in 201 philosophy courses but in the entire analytical framework of higher education. Most of Obama’s answers start with “Yes, although…” or “No, however…”. This might be a reason for his appeal to the younger audience which, in schools and colleges all across the nation, is exposed to diversified view points and similar intellectual analogies, probably more than much of the adult nation. Yet the electorate does not only consist of vegetable-eating-V-Day-proponent-human-rights-watchers, but also of the populace which values straightforwardness and, therefore, supports candidates who are able to give brisk, even if faux pas, responses. A friend of mine in high school once reflected why in America people choose leaders to whom they can relate to on a personal level and not educated idealists with lofty plans. It may be a question, but it is also a valid observation. We can relate this to the “Kitty Dukakis Question” in 1988, or to the more recent attempt of John Kerry to go hunting, which, in the end, looked more gauche than sincere.

Second, Race. Obama is an African-American, which, sad as it may be, is too much for many of these rural Nebraska voters to take. Call it racism or xenophobia. Obama-Osama. “So we have to call the White House the Black House now?”. They would not vote for a candidate of any other race than Caucasian regardless of the party affiliation. Unfortunately, this is also the borderline for most of them and not much could be done in this matter. Joe Biden’s role was to diminish this very issue, but this Scranton boy is still the vice presidential candidate, and voters there still see the “popular” Obama as the leader in the ticket (though the aforementioned intellectualism also plays a role here).

This brings us to Vice Presidential Pick.  Joe Biden. The long days of waiting for Obama to announce this name. “I am not the guy,” he said days before his named being pulled from the hat. He was right. I myself was very excited for Hillary being the potential VP pick, but her negative electorate was probably the major reason for Obama campaign moguls not to choose her. But what about Joe Biden? A candidate that run in the primaries receiving 1% of the vote? A candidate remembered for plagiarizing one of his speeches in the 1988 campaign for president? I think Hillary’s negative electorate consists of voters who would vote for a Republican candidate in any case. Her supporters however were the most solid group of followers in the recent years of American politics, an asset she still maintains and will continue to have after the elections. Was Biden a good choice? No.

Lastly, Political Positions (or lack thereof). This directly ties to the first as well as to the third problem with Obama. Obama has been portrayed by many conservatives as the most liberal presidential candidate, which I actually find simply not true. Obama tries to show his stance in issues like abortion and gay rights in his already mentioned “Yes, but…” manner forgetting that this does not attract the Christian evangelicals who like “absolute” values, and at the same time alienates the liberal parts of society who also find these issues important making them stay at home during election day at the worst case. Even Biden’s expertise on foreign relations cannot wash away the fact that Obama and Biden did not agree on issues like the War in Iraq. Obama has not actaully presented that many policy proposals as you would expect from a candidate. The truth is that most candidates do not formulate specific policy plans until they are actually nominated in November, for whatever reasons. McCain is not strong in this area either, something that Obama can use in his campaign. But why I never hear any other topics other than health care, Russia, and energy independence? There are tons of other issues Obama can use to get the edge. Lou Dobbs made a good “Independent Convention” and Obama should pick up a few of the topics discussed on the show, for example rising college tuition rates.

All these points make Obama a kind of out-of-reality candidate for 55% of the nation, which is still enough to seal his fate. One might notice my not-so-accidental failure to mention Sarah Palin. She, however, deserves another more precise entry in the near future.  Judging from all this material my prediction is as follows: Obama will lose the presidential elections of 2008 to McCain/Palin ticket, unless the glamour of Palin will crash in the shady deals and scandals of her previous administration in the Alaskan offices. Obama can share the fate of Al Gore entering the realm of single-issue matters, or the fate of John Kerry continuing to be a good and popular (and rich) senator, but his chances of ever coming back to the ticket are as the chances of Al Gore being the VP candidate this year – not that big after all.