The Obama effect
“There was an October surprise, and it has all but certainly decided the race,” Peggy Noonan writes at www.opinionjournal.com.
“On the left, a smug triumphalism is setting in. On the right, anger rises: the finger pointing is about to begin. In parts and pockets of the middle, we have Americans who aren’t thinking about politics because they’re busy trying to imagine what a modern depression would look like and wondering, for the first time ever, if it is possible that they may wind up living in their cars,” Miss Noonan said.
“A friend caught the mood in a jollier way, quoting an old comic: ’I have enough to live comfortably for the rest of my life, as long as I’m hit by a bus tomorrow.’ But to the campaign:
“People speak of the Bradley effect - more people tell pollsters they will vote for a black candidate than vote for the black candidate. But I have been wondering about the possibility of what may someday be called the Obama effect: You know your neighbors think he’s sketchy - unknown, a mystery, ’Hussein’ - so you don’t say you’re voting for him, but you are.
“I don’t believe any of the polls this year, or rather the situation is too fluid to believe them for more than a day. But Democrats should remain concerned about this: We have two wars, an economic collapse, a two-term Republican president at historic lows in popularity, overwhelmingly negative poll answers on whether America is on the right track - and the Democratic presidential nominee isn’t 20 points ahead? Thirty? This should be a landslide. They say Barack Obama cannot ’close the deal.’ He hasn’t closed the deal because he’s still making the pitch, and to a wary customer who wants something new but isn’t sure this is the time to buy.”
Anger on right
“John McCain blew it. Barack Obama will win the election, and there may be nothing that McCain can do to stop it. This isn’t just what liberals are saying. It’s what conservatives are thinking, and they’re angry,” David Freddoso writes in the New York Post.
“Annoyed that this is exactly what they thought would happen when he squeaked out a win in the primaries. Frustrated that they kept their criticism of his campaign to a minimum for the sake of the party. Livid at what they consider McCain’s sluggish efforts,” Mr. Freddoso said.
“The feeling was perhaps best summed up by a man who appeared at a McCain-Palin event in Wisconsin: ’It’s time that you two are representing us, and we are mad.’ The Right can only be depressed as they watch Obama buoyed by a world credit crisis and the deep unpopularity of a president who campaigned but never governed like a conservative. It’s the perfect combination to make a president out of an inexperienced, far-left politician whose background provides a gold mine for any opposition researcher.
“To the degree that they are engaged in this election, conservatives are motivated entirely by fear of Obama and what he will do as president when backed by a solidly liberal Democratic House and Senate. They are not driven by love of the Republican candidate, and it shows in the anger present at McCain campaign rallies.
“Most conservatives will probably vote for McCain, but they also realize they are far less likely to persuade others, and they feel a disaster coming. The enthusiasm the Right felt during the 2004 election, which had been framed as a true ideological clash between Left and Right, simply does not exist this time around.”
Owner’s manual
“With under a month to go to Election Day, the McCain and Obama campaigns have collected two White House ’operator’s manuals’ just published by the IBM Center for the Business of Government, in which former top federal officials explain how the government works,” Paul Bedard writes in the Washington Whispers column at www.usnews.com.
“The books could provide invaluable information because, as main author Jonathan Breul told Whispers, neither candidate has vast executive experience. ’These are senators,’ Breul said at a book party this [past] week at the Mayflower Hotel. ’Their track record and experience is limited in this regard.’
“Unlike two previous White House primers published by the Brookings Institution, the two books from the IBM Center for the Business of Government feature chapters on key issues written by ’stakeholders,’ or former top officials in individual government arenas. ’That’s what’s unique,’ said Breul. ’We were looking for candor … straight talk,’ he said.
“The key book is titled ’The Operator’s Manual for the New Administration.’ It comes with a companion book, ’Getting It Done: A Guide for Government Executives.’ Breul explained that the works are written more for top federal executives than the president. They focus on how agencies work, how they interact, and how government contracting is conducted. They do not delve into policy since that is left to the president’s appointees.
“Breul said that both campaigns have reached out for copies, though with the campaign in its final month, it’s probably too early for the candidates themselves to be reviewing the books.”
ACORN’s role
“If you thought the New Left was dead in America, think again,” Sol Stern wrote in the spring 2003 issue of City Journal.
“Walk through just about any of the nation’s inner cities, and you’re likely to find an office of ACORN, bustling with young people working 12-hour days to ’organize the poor’ and bring about ’social change,’ ” Mr. Stern said of the group that is in the news today for voter fraud and and for its role in promoting subprime mortgages.
“The largest radical group in the country, ACORN has 120,000 dues-paying members, chapters in 700 poor neighborhoods in 50 cities, and 30 years’ experience. It boasts two radio stations, a housing corporation, a law office, and affiliate relationships with a host of trade-union locals. Not only big, it is effective, with some remarkable successes in getting municipalities and state legislatures to enact its radical policy goals into law.”
ACORN, he said, promotes “a 1960s-bred agenda of anti-capitalism, central planning, victimology, and government handouts to the poor. As a result, not only does it harm the poor it claims to serve; it is also a serious threat to the urban future.”
Greg Pierce can be reached at 202/636-3285 or gpierce@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.