Tuesday, 04.29.08
Signed, Sealed, Not Yet Delivered
Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images
It was a college crowd: young women with Kool Aid-dyed hair, mop-topped men in novelty bow-ties, kids wearing t-shirts that advertised ironic slogans ("Super Jew!") and summer holidays to Angkor Wat -- all grooving to "Big Yellow Taxi." But it was also more. A scan of the seats revealed lots of normal people as well, including a robust and enthusiastic contingent of African-Americans, thrilled to be in an Obama coalition, and by all evidence grooving to the Joni Mitchell just as to the Motown.
The coalition looked broad and deep. It did not, however, look like America, or even North Carolina.
Obama boasts of bringing together a diverse group, an alliance from demographics that had never previously united. But in a state with few areas that have the vibrant diversity of an Obama rally, it felt like the campaign's possible undoing, probably not by next week's vote, but someday. The Chapel Hill senior who introduced Obama spoke of his having inspired her friend Hans, a Swedish exchange student, to volunteer. If all North Carolina voters were Swedish exchange students, or even people who have Swedish exchange students as friends, I'm sure the candidate will do fine. The Dean Dome was not a scene that I imagine would have comforted an electorate looking for a better version of something cherished and familiar.
In any case, between the strains of Stevie Wonder and the live band, Liquid Pleasure, there was an unfamiliar weariness in the air. Was it that Tom Petty's "I Won't Back Down" no longer seemed like an Obama song, but rather like one adopted by his opponent? Was it that all this music, while good, still felt like the stuff of entertainment, not of politics, and the groove of a liberal college town, not of the heartland? I felt a twinge of dread for the Obama campaign: no candidate ever got far with an iTunes playlist that resembled my own.
Jigga what?Barack Obama -- Presidential candidate, Jay-Z fan -- brushes his shoulders off after Clinton campaign attacks, confusing "clueless" old white guys Richard Cohen and Joe Scarborough, writes Ta-Nehisi Coates. |
Whose party?Before the Pennsylvania Primary, Byron York finds vastly dissimilar audiences at Obama and Clinton rallies and large numbers of Clinton supporters who say they would not vote for Obama. |
Barack Hussein Sinatra?While Frank Sinatra had bobby-soxers fainting as he crooned; Breitbart TV chronicles a string of similar incidents at Obama's rallies. |
(23)
You're criticizing Barack Obama for the music that was played before he spoke? Is this really relevant or constructive? Why don't you talk about his speech, which was moving, specific and inspired 19,000 people to walk out eager to help better our society? Why won't anyone talk about what these candidates can do for our country, as opposed to how they are campaigning?
I don't understand this. I just don't identify with it at all.
If the broader critique is that Obama coalition is too small or narrow, then I can understand that. I think that's probably wrong as demonstrated by polling data and other indicators, but it's something reasonable people can disagree about and have a conversation on.
But more generally, it appears to me that this little mini-article tapped into something in the zeitgeist I find poisonous and disgusting: the idea that the only "real" Americans are people in the heartland.
"The coalition looked broad and deep. It did not, however, look like America."
Wow. You know, I thought that being broad and deep and racially heterogeneous was quintessentially American (vs. many a European country say). The urban population in America outnumbers the rural population. I can lay claim to living in the so-called heartland but I don�t feel any more American than someone living in San Francisco or New York. And I think someone that believes that urban living is somehow un-American internalizes some of the worst kinds of inter-group disrespect.
And sure, you see it on both ends. I�ve been on the east coast. I�m well aware that many people in New York or D.C. or Philly seem to think that there�s the East Coast, Chicago, the West Coast, and everything in between is garbage. So I�m not trying to say the guy in Scranton or Kokomo has any particular blame for this sort of thing. Obviously people tend to have misconceptions about any "other" they're not exposed to, and that ignorance leads to stereotyping blah blah blah.
My problem is when so-called elites or latte liberals or whatever you want to call them internalize that narrative. I'm pretty confidant about being an American -- and I can reconcile that pretty easily with enjoying espresso and listening M83 or My Bloody Valentine. The idea that you could be embarrassed by your tastes -- the idea that you think your identity makes you inherently less American than other identities -- it's sheer cowardice. It's disgraceful to have your patriotism questioned, but it's cowardice to allow these sorts of narratives to have any legitimacy by refusing to deny them in the strongest possible terms.
I plan to attend a similar Obama rally this week in my college town. The doors open at 6pm and the rally starts at 8:30. Like this rally, it's in a giant basketball stadium with steep, concrete steps leading to the seats--and that's once you get inside. How many middle-aged and older people do you think want to drive to a giant parking lot after work, then stand in line for an hour or more since there will definitely be a long line when the doors open at 6, negotiate finding a seat in a packed basketball arena, and then wait for two more hours before the event starts? For many devoted middle-aged supporters, perhaps esp. for devoted supporters who have already voted for him or plan to, this is too much. Having watched older people trying to negotiate crowds and seating in such buildings, it's next to impossible. Hence the skewed demography of these rallies.
gh
DEBATE! DEBATE!! DEBATE!!!
It's time for everyone to face the truth. Barack Obama has no real chance of winning the national election in November at this time. His crushing defeat in Pennsylvania makes that fact crystal clear. His best, and only real chance of winning in November is on a ticket with Hillary Clinton as her VP.
Hillary Clinton seemed almost somber at her Pennsylvania victory speech. As if part of her was hoping Obama could have proved he had some chance of winning against the republican attack machine, and their unlimited money, and resources.
But it is absolutely essential that the democrats take back the Whitehouse in November. America, and the American people are in a very desperate condition now. And the whole World has been doing all that they can to help keep us propped up.
Hillary Clinton say's that the heat, and decisions in the Whitehouse are much tougher than the ones on the campaign trail. But I think Mr. Obama faces a test of whether he has what it takes to be a commander and chief by facing the difficult facts, and the truth before him. And by doing what is best for the American people by dropping out of the race, and offering his whole hearted assistance to Hillary Clinton to help her take back the Whitehouse for the American people, and the World.
Mr. Obama is a great speaker. And I am confident he can explain to the American people the need, and wisdom of such a personal sacrifice for them. It should be clear to everyone by now that Hillary Clinton is fighting her heart out for the American people. She has known for a long time that Mr. Obama can not win this November. You have to remember that the Clinton's have won the Whitehouse twice before. They know what it takes.
If Mr. Obama fails his test of commander and chief we can only hope that Hillary Clinton can continue her heroic fight for the American people. And that she prevails. She will need all the continual support and help we can give her. She may fight like a superhuman. But she is only human.
Sen. Hillary Clinton: "You know, more people have now voted for me than have voted for my opponent. In fact, I now have more votes than anybody has ever had in a primary contest for a nomination. And it's also clear that we've got nine more important contests to go."
Sincerely
Jacksmith... Working Class :-)
MY FELLOW "BITTER", STUPID, WORKING CLASS PEOPLE :-)
If you think like Barack Obama, that WORKING CLASS PEOPLE are just a bunch of "BITTER"!, STUPID, PEASANTS, Cash COWS!, and CANNON FODDER. :-(
You Might Be An Idiot! :-)
If you think Barack Obama with little or no experience would be better than Hillary Clinton with 35 years experience.
You Might Be An Idiot! :-)
If you think that Obama with no experience can fix an economy on the verge of collapse better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) led the greatest economic expansion, and prosperity in American history.
You Might Be An Idiot! :-)
If you think that Obama with no experience fighting for universal health care can get it for you better than Hillary Clinton. Who anticipated this current health care crisis back in 1993, and fought a pitched battle against overwhelming odds to get universal health care for all the American people.
You Might Be An Idiot! :-)
If you think that Obama with no experience can manage, and get us out of two wars better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) went to war only when he was convinced that he absolutely had to. Then completed the mission in record time against a nuclear power. AND DID NOT LOSE THE LIFE OF A SINGLE AMERICAN SOLDIER. NOT ONE!
You Might Be An Idiot! :-)
If you think that Obama with no experience saving the environment is better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) left office with the greatest amount of environmental cleanup, and protections in American history.
You Might Be An Idiot! :-)
If you think that Obama with little or no education experience is better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) made higher education affordable for every American. And created higher job demand and starting salary’s than they had ever been before or since.
You Might Be An Idiot! :-)
If you think that Obama with no experience will be better than Hillary Clinton who spent 8 years at the right hand of President Bill Clinton. Who is already on record as one of the greatest Presidents in American history.
You Might Be An Idiot! :-)
If you think that you can change the way Washington works with pretty speeches from Obama, rather than with the experience, and political expertise of two master politicians ON YOUR SIDE like Hillary and Bill Clinton..
You Might Be An Idiot! :-)
If you think all those Republicans voting for Obama in the Democratic primaries, and caucuses are doing so because they think he is a stronger Democratic candidate than Hillary Clinton. :-)
Best regards
jacksmith... Working Class :-)
p.s. You Might Be An Idiot! :-)
If you don't know that the huge amounts of money funding the Obama campaign to try and defeat Hillary Clinton is coming in from the insurance, and medical industry, that has been ripping you off, and killing you and your children. And denying you, and your loved ones the life saving medical care you needed. All just so they can make more huge immoral profits for them-selves off of your suffering...
You see, back in 1993 Hillary Clinton had the audacity, and nerve to try and get quality, affordable universal health care for everyone to prevent the suffering and needless deaths of hundreds of thousands of you each year. :-)
Approx. 100,000 of you die each year from medical accidents from a rush to profit by the insurance, and medical industry. Another 120,000 of you die each year from treatable illness that people in other developed countries don’t die from. And I could go on, and on...
OBAMA AIDE: "WORKING-CLASS VOTERS NOT KEY FOR DEMOCRATS" :o
DEBATE! DEBATE!! DEBATE!!!...
As Sen. Hillary Clinton has ‘managed’ to take the Pennsylvania state, the Democratic race for nomination is very much alive – and most likely to be decided by superdelegates. Nevertheless.. Indiana ,Idaho and West Virginia are still to come.
If you’re tired of waiting around for those super delegates to make a decision already, go to LobbyDelegates.com and push them to support Clinton or Obama
If you haven't done so yet, please write a message to each of your state's superdelegates at http://www.lobbydelegates.com
It takes a moment, but what's a few minutes now worth to get Obama in office?!
Sending a note to current Obama supporters lets them know it's appreciated, sending a note to current Clinton supporters can hopefully sway them to change their vote to Obama, and sending a note to the uncommitted folks will hopefully sway them to vote for Obama. It's that easy...
Clinton Supporters too …. !
It takes a moment, but what's a few minutes now worth to get Clinton in office?!
Sending a note to current Clinton supporters lets them know it's appreciated, sending a note to current Obama supporters can hopefully sway them to change their vote to Clinton, and sending a note to the uncommitted folks will hopefully sway them to vote for Clinton. It's that easy...
REALLY easy to identify the superdelegates and reach out to them! It includes a list of names, addresses, and affiliations of superdelegates from each state including your state
(a) Can someone please remove the trolling spam messages?
(b) I second the comment made above. You cannot say that his rally does not look like America then fail to explain what America looks like. It seems to me that perhaps you don't see Black people as American? Or is this another stab at the "blue-collar" jibe, which never refers to Black voters for some reason. Anyway, I think you should think again before you write such silliness.
Thanks for all the comments, even the weird ad hominem ones about my name.
Commenters have challenged me to say what America looks like, since I claimed above that the rally didn't look like America. I'll dodge that request by saying that America does not look like Chapel Hill, North Carolina, nor does it look like any other college town. What appeals about Obama to college crowds (namely everything) is a reflection of those crowds' youth, cosmopolitanism, diversity, and liberalism. At Chapel Hill, the crowd contained, among many others, a Swede, a Canadian, a girl engrossed in an untranslated book by Lorca, and two women in full niqab. (I am cherry-picking slightly, but the ease with which I can do this drives home my point.) Obama's is a broad coalition if there ever was one, but its broadness is unfamiliar to a lot of people. And many of those people will be frightened by the unfamiliar.
As for my name, the commenter makes my point for me:
http://www.google.com/trends?q=graeme
My name reflects a certain amount of foreign extraction. That Obama (and his campaign's aesthetic, including its music) appeals to someone with one foot in another country bodes poorly for his campaign in this one.
We have had the return of Jacksmith the idiot.
This article deeply disappointed me as did the author's response to critisism regarding his statements. I expect better from a magazine as reputable as The Atlantic.
I'm sorry, but that's ludicrous.
If one takes your position seriously, then one must conclude that being cosmopolitan, diverse and liberal are somehow un-American.
"My name reflects a certain amount of foreign extraction. That Obama (and his campaign's aesthetic, including its music) appeals to someone with one foot in another country bodes poorly for his campaign in this one."
You therefore concede that you are not America. That you're somehow divorced from America because of your "tastes."
To concede that is to accept the narrative that you're un-American somehow. It's equal parts cowardice and condescension. You're afraid to boldly claim your values as exactly as American as those held in the heartland. And you couple that with this "Oh no, he's like me therefore the rubes and rabble won't like him because I'm so much more open-minded than they are" sensibility.
I refuse to concede it. And the propagation of that meme is disgusting when done intentionally to demagogue. But it's downright tragic when the very same people painted by this ridiculously offensive tar accept it themselves.
At the very least, being a so-called effete hipster liberal is value-neutral in determining whether or not someone is American.
The narrative your earlier post was driving at is that there is something un-American about it. That American values are better represented by so-called "small towns" where the "real" Americans live.
And I refuse to pretend that's OK.
Kiran writes:
If one takes your position seriously, then one must conclude that being cosmopolitan, diverse and liberal are somehow un-American.
The phrase "un-American" is not mine, and I don't espouse the quasi-takfiri notion of American identity it represents (at least in its prescriptive sense).
I merely point out that the crowd Obama attracted Monday night was cosmopolitan, young, and internationalist in a way that does not resemble the experience of most Americans. Am I wrong?
Graeme: The crowd did not "look like America" because it was cosmopolitan, young and internationalist, something that does "not resemble the experience of most Americans". Do I have that right?
By that logic, none of the candidates themselves would look like America, because their experience and life stories do not resemble anything close to the experience of "most Americans". Despite ABC's best efforts to the contrary, that is absurd. Each candidate has experiences of their own that, despite the fact that they are not common with the experience of most Americans, does not make them any less American. (And you may protest the phrase un-American, but this is clearly the insinuation you are hoping to draw.)
(I've posted a few times, but nothing seems to get through).
Chillout guys. I think it is reasonable to say that a particular group is not representative of America. However, to extend this to an individual is absurd.
And what is wrong with a POTUS that does not look like America anyway? The article is about Obama likely losing due to lack of support from most Americans (because his supporters are not like most Americans). It is not saying that anyone who is not like most Americans, cannot or should not win the Presidency.
Presidents are extraordinary people. Most Americans, are not.
The article is about Obama likely losing due to lack of support from most Americans (because his supporters are not like most Americans).
Really, not like most Americans? Most Americans oppose the war in Iraq and favor withdrawal. Most Americans believe the country is on the wrong track. Most Americans now say they want Democrats to re-capture the White House. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120959262155757509.html?mod=hppuswhats_news
So, again, the reporter's premise that the crowd didn't "look like America" is, frankly, stupid. To suggest that his coalition consists only of young voters and foreign exchange students ignores nearly 50 nominating contests to date. He was speaking at a college town. One expects to find college students in a college town. He's also spoken to large crowds (and convincingly won nominating contests) in Idaho, Wyoming, Maine, Nebraska ("heartland"), Kansas ("heartland"), and other states with working class populations. This piece was just another lazy attempt to push the "Obama has a working class whites problem" narrative.
(Website Sysadmins, I couldn't post earlier. I think it was because I had a URL with an ampersand. I've converted it using www.tinyurl.com but you guys really should have this fixed. There was no error message, nothing. Looked like a succesful post, only my post didn't appear. And it looks like the Email Address field is mandatory? Again, no error message when it is blank.)
(1) Yes, you do expect to find college students in a college town. But you could also argue that Obama chose to campaign in a college town because he knew that his support there was the strongest and would therefore look good on TV.
You could also argue that politicians campaign in areas where they are weak (why waste time convincing the converted), so the above doesn't make sense. But then look at item (2) below.
(2) Obama does have a working class whites problem
The New York senator won 54% of voters 45-59, and 62% of voters 60 and older. Among voters without a college education, 58% voted for Clinton, while Obama, an Illinois senator, won among college graduates.
Gun owners constituted a bit more than a third of the Democratic electorate in Pennsylvania, but they voted for Clinton 62% to 38%. Obama won 51% of voters in households without guns.
Sixty percent of self-described moderates voted for Clinton, and 52% of conservatives backed her.
In Pennsylvania as in previous states, Obama attracted a coalition of upscale liberals, blacks, young voters and college students.
(3) I'm afraid the link you gave doesn't support the point you're trying to make. Yes, a majority of Americans favour a nameless generic Democrat in the White House. But Obama's support is so weak that in a direct comparison between him and McCain, they are in a "statistical dead-heat".
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120959262155757509.html?mod=hpp
A majority of voters now say they want Democrats to re-capture the White House again, a finding that makes Sen. McCain's position remarkable: He's in a statistical dead-heat against either Democrat in the poll. Sen. Obama, the Democratic front-runner, leads Sen. McCain 46% to 43%, and Sen. Clinton has a 45% to 44% edge over the Republican. A big reason for the closeness: More voters said they could identify with Sen. McCain's "background" and "values" than with those of either of the Democratic contenders.
Mr. Wood. Take some advice from this older (65) white guy - Obama is the future, not the past.
Much of the heartland will vote for Obama (remember Iowa?) if he can defend himself against the race-mongering of the Clintonistas and Republicans. Once Obama shows voters that McCain wants to waste their children's lives in yet another Mideast conflict, favors continuing Bush's social Darwinist economics and has no viable healthcare plan, they'll respond differently. When women think about a couple of new Supreme Court justices determined to end Roe vs. Wade, they'll also rally to Obama.
In short, yes.
Your posts read as if you assume that the culture is static. What you would probably describe as "American values" are probably not held by a majority of Americans. The consumption and dissemination of narratives that pretend real American values are white people playing baseball while riding pickup trucks etc. etc. etc. are not representative of what American life is actually like now. It's as if you believe UNC is some alien land unknown to "real Americans." UNC doesn't represent all of America. But it represents a younger slice of America. It represents where America is going. The cultural wedges of yesterday disappear as cultures inevitably liberalize. You can see a similar phenomenon in immigrants (I'm familiar with Indian culture since that is my own) -- where immigrants raise their kids in a "traditional" way, then go back to their country of origin only to find it more similar to the U.S.'s culture than the idealized version their kids were raised by.
Your second failure is an utter ignorance of what America is actually like. More Americans live in an urban setting than a rural one, and those in rural settings I've met (I live in Indiana) probably don't conform to this fictional idealized "American culture" you implicitly espouse.
You say you don't adopt the view that UNC is un-American, or at least not in the prescriptive sense. I'll certainly take you at your word. But read what you wrote in your initial Current: "It did not look like America." Regardless of your intentions, your post is guilty of beginning with an ideaof "American" that is -- at best -- a gross caricature. And I urge you to think about what Americans you actually meet and know are like, rather than pretend there's this hickish hoi polloi out there who don't much fancy booklarnin' or them darkies.
The deeper this meme gets into the public consciousness, the more insidious and dangerous it becomes. It only reinforces horribly mistaken assumptions and stereotypes.
Also, I'm not sure what the problem with the site was, but I tried to reply a few days ago to no avail. Hopefully whatever the problem was is gone now.
I think people are taking this way too seriously.
This is a light, atmospheric piece. The iTunes was a joke, a throwaway line.
A serious piece would quote political pros, be filled with statistics, draw historical parallels.
There's no need to lecture people, brow-beat them into accepting your view of America. State your objections respectfully (without name-calling), quote your facts, and let the other readers decide.
Being hyper sensitive and humorless isn't going to convince anyone of your point of view.
TO THE WRITER OF THIS ARTICLE, I MUST ADMIT THAT I AM APPALLED. THIS IS DIVISIVE. WE THOUGH, ARE THE FUTURE OF AMERICA. THIS WILL BE OUR COUNTRY. THE OLD TIMERS WITH THEIR OLD IDEAS MATTER. BUT THIS IS THE REAL NEW WORLD ORDER. THE COLLEGE YOUTH. OUR FUTURE. AND TO ANGER YOU, BARACK IS OUR MESSIAH, YALL CAN TAKE YALL HILLARY, JOHN MCCAIN, OLD SCHOOL CRIMINAL LOVING, WHO PREY ON THE YOUNG AND STUPID AND ESPECIALLY THE TAX PAYERS, SENTIMENTS THAT YOU ARE TRYING TO CONVINCE US TO ADOPT, BECAUSE WHAT? SOME DAY WE CAN BE JUST LIKE YOU. WE WILL NOT BE PERPETUATING YOUR KIND. GIVE IT UP. PASS ON THE BATON.
By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although The Current does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.
-->
So what is 'America' supposed to look like, Graeme? Just because Obama's rally didn't contain a sea of old while people, it then doesn't 'look like America'?
So following your logic: What kind of name is 'Graeme? Doesn't sound 'American' to me.
Posted by Mark | April 29, 2008 3:21 PM