Reposted from yesterday's TP:
"Hillary Clinton's campaign model," David Axelrod, Obama's chief strategist told me this morning in Chicago, "is a very tired Washington model: 'I'll do these things for you.' Barack's model is 'Let's do these things together.' This has been the premise of Barack's politics all his life, going back to his days as a community organizer. He has really lived and breathed it, which is why it comes across so authentically.
"Of course, the time also has to be right for the man and the moment to come together. And, after all the country has been through over the last seven years, the times are definitely right for the message that the only way to get real change is to activate the American people to demand it."
Dear White Women Over Forty:
David Axelrod is right. And I'll go further. Hillary will lose the general election if she takes the nomination because she cannot sustain support among a sufficiently wide set of demographics to beat John "Not The Faith of Your Father's Waterboarding" McCain. Looking at the demographics of the national and state by state polling, it becomes crystal clear.
This is not a race in which each candidate shares a wide range of demographic support. This is basically a race in which one single demographic, white women over forty, are holding out against everybody else. More importantly, Obama has almost two to one support among independents over Clinton. As for Republicrats-- those who've normally voted Republican but who will vote against their party this cycle (plus those not willing to come out to elect John McCain) overwhelmingly support Obama.
To the contrary, Hillary not only loses those voters overwhelmingly, her nomination would electrify the GOPig base and bring them out in droves to vote against her. These are only two of several reasons why Obama is far more likely to beat McCain than Hillary-- which is itself THE reason to support Obama, if nothing else.
It's also easier to see why those Dems who stand against Obama are so adamant and why they think he's just talk and no action. They are the type of Dems that GOPigs and independents rightfully laugh at and deride. They are the ones who think that the government is just going to give them something worthwhile without them having to do anything other than turn a lever every four years. What nonesense.
They don't see Obama accomplishing anything because they have no intention or ability to HELP HIM accomplish anything. You know, like by joining and forming grass roots organizations that can raise money, raise consciousness, and raise the roof when it comes to competing with the corporate lobbyists.
It's ironic, then, when Hillary mocks Obama with over the top descriptions of solutions coming down in a shaft of light from the sky. The fact is, that's exactly what she is selling-- that she will, all by herself, "fight" for change in Washington, and then turn around and bestow her gifts upon us hapless peasants. Uh huh, riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
The fact is, without the mass follow up mobilization of the public, there never will be a counterweight to corporate lobbying to actually force the kind of changes we need-- changes that we have yet to reach concensus on and push.
Hillary not only fails to see the necessity of mass mobilization, she cannot achieve it even if she did. She's divisive-- whether that's fair or what she wanted is immaterial. It is what it is. She will have half the country mobilized against her. Obaman, on the other hand, will go a long way to uniting the center-left/progressives and independents. His victory will energize the grassroots, and we will have the possibility of forcing Washington to reform.
If that doesn't happen, then people who say Obama is all talk and no action will be right. But the fault won't be Obama's. It will be our's.
But for now, the only thing standing in the way of our own success (or failure due to laziness and inaction), are Hillary supporters-- that single, stubborn demographic of white women over forty. Normally, I love white women over forty. It was my single most successful demographic in life, come to think about it. It's certainly the demographic I spend most of my time fantasizing about, anyways.
And truth be told, even that demographic is starting to move in the right direction. From 70-30 in favor of Hillary, it's 55-45 and getting better (I'm going from memory here-- if these numbers are wrong, I'm interested in what the real ones are).
And, you know deep down in your hearts that Obama is right about one thing-- if there is going to be real change, it's only if the people come together and fight for it with an ally in the White House. It won't come down from on High. You know it. You must know it because you never got anywhere without working for it together as a team.
So come on ladies. In this fight, you have to think outside the box (no pun intended), and look at things from a more objective view. I didn't pick Obama as my first or even second choice. I fell into line when I saw how the other segments of the center/left/progressives moved, and I gave up my choices for the good of the whole.
Ya'll ought to do the same.
If you do, I'll give you a foot massage!
xo
dood
