Obama’s pride a stumbling block: Fineman
posted at 12:00 pm on September 11, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Howard Fineman gets closer to the mark in diagnosing the nature of Barack Obama’s stumble than did Lynn Forester de Rothschild today. From refusing to debate John McCain in town-hall forums to public financing, Obama has a problem the Greeks would have easily recognized, even sans Barackopolis. Fineman says that Obama’s pride has created a perhaps insurmountable obstacle to his success:
For two years, Obama played the golf course of presidential politics with the ice-cold self-assuredness of a Tiger Woods. But since securing the Democratic nomination, he’s made a series of strategic errors that could jeopardize his chances in November.
After traveling with him on the trail, watching him in Denver and talking to Democratic operatives and insiders, here’s my list of his errant shots …
Forester de Rothschild also had a similar list of transgressions as Fineman’s, but Fineman understands the root cause better. The pass on the town-hall debates? He was flying high in public opinion and didn’t see the need to risk it. Public financing? He gave in to the adulation, and the money. The 50-state strategy (which Fineman limits to a 22-state strategy)? Obama saw himself as a Second Coming and wanted a national mandate.
Perhaps Fineman makes his best case, though, when analyzing Obama’s rejection of the Clintons. It’s no secret that he wants his own imprint on the Democratic Party, but that was more or less assured when he won the nomination. Instead of embracing the Clintons, Obama has gone out of his way to sideline them — and their considerable clout within the party and at least Bill’s more-than-considerable political talents. At this point, the Clintons will barely lift a finger now to assist Obama, and for good reason; he couldn’t even bring himself to add Bill to the list of Democratic presidents who defended the nation in his acceptance speech, a glaring snub that no one in the country missed.
Fineman says that Clintonistas would swoon if Obama picked up the phone and asked for their help. At this point, I’d suspect that Fineman overstates their ability to be swept off of their feet by Obama, but the gesture would have meant something as recently as two weeks ago. Now, with Obama sinking, it will smell like desperation, and an eleventh-hour bailout by the Clinton crowd will be perceived as a rescue of a failed candidate — and perception in this case would match reality.
The real problem for Obama now isn’t pride at all, but the sense that he’s nothing more than an empty suit. The fake seals, the fake Greek temple — all of that façade has given American voters a sense that the façade is all there is.
You must be logged in to post a comment.

















Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
When The Chosen One meets Bill, he’d better have $21 million reasons with him as to why Bill or Hillary! should campaign for him.
He’s going to live to regret snubbing the Clintons and refusing public financing. As his numbers drop, so will the amount of money coming in.
GarandFan on September 11, 2008 at 2:31 PM
Rush predicts BJ will agree, in return for a heavy benefits package, to join Obama on the campaign trail, knowing it will unite the opposition and doom the Obama candidacy. Also that Hil will low-key it, waiting for 2012.
petefrt on September 11, 2008 at 2:31 PM
But Obama is just an empty suit.
Billy Jeff and Hillz are not. They are people of substance. You might not like that substance all that much, I never did, but they weren’t vapid rudderless gas-bags powered by high octane ambition.
Ares on September 11, 2008 at 2:42 PM
Paul-incy and NNtrancer on September 11, 2008 at 1:18 PM
Your analyses of Obama are actually quite adept. I am confident that “lunch” today was truly a meeting of kindred minds and psyches. As I recall, many of Obama’s traits are shared by Bill Clinton.
marybel on September 11, 2008 at 2:43 PM
I’m sure Bill had one song running through his head during their lunch today: “Addicted to Love.”
Jim Treacher on September 11, 2008 at 2:47 PM
Just like in the Tom Delay case, there are very strict time limits of when a party can change the ballot…
If Biden got sick? not good reason to cirvumvent the law… there are even cases of DEAD people remaining on the ballot.
Now, if he says he can’t run due to illness, but is elected, sounds to me like the Constitution takes over, and Pelosi becomes the VP under Obama…
Romeo13 on September 11, 2008 at 2:53 PM
Barry Potemkin Obama. A rose by any other name.
eaglewingz08 on September 11, 2008 at 3:00 PM
People always get Proverbs 16:18 wrong. What it actually says is:
Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.
tballard on September 11, 2008 at 3:09 PM
That’s what the Republican’s believed in New Jersey. But all you need is one judge who believes that the needs of the Democratic party out weigh something as trivial as the law, and it will happen.
A few years back, the Democratic nominee for Senate Toricelli, got himself in some legal hot water, and resigned from the race after the deadline had passed.
The Democrats shopped around and found a judge who was willing to accept their argument that a law that was passed to handle the case of a candidate dying could also be interpreted to include resigning.
MarkTheGreat on September 11, 2008 at 3:18 PM
Thanks, Romeo. That’s good news… I think. I’m glad to hear it.
petefrt on September 11, 2008 at 3:18 PM
Changing candidates on the ballot after deadlines have passed would require state judicial review as in New Jersey with respect to Toricelli. Each state would have to come up with a decision based upon the circumstances/reason for the change. Some states would allow a change, others would not. How it would play out on any appeals that go to the Supreme Court is anyone’s guess. Once a State Court rules against a deadline set by the legislature (as in Florida, 2000), a Pandora’s box opens and anything can happen.
This just might be a ‘NUCLEAR’ option should Obama/Dems decide they have lost, throwing everything into a big mess. Florida 2000 on a national scale.
jerseyman on September 11, 2008 at 3:19 PM
Toricelli? Here I was just starting to feel better, and you have to bring this up.
petefrt on September 11, 2008 at 3:21 PM
I don’t believe Edwards would have helped Obama much. Two pretty boys, both empty suits. One half way through his first term, the other had to retire after his first term because he knew he couldn’t be re-elected.
MarkTheGreat on September 11, 2008 at 3:22 PM
My bet is the Dems have a variety of ‘NUCLEAR’ options, such as this, on the shelf. I don’t expect them to accept an election defeat without a court fight of some sort.
petefrt on September 11, 2008 at 3:26 PM
Problem is that under the Constitution, you can’t make Ip post facto law… so the law has to stand or be overturned as unConstitutional at the Supreme level…
Dam, if that happened I’ve have to go buy stock in a popcorn company….
Romeo13 on September 11, 2008 at 3:28 PM
freeus,
I don’t think the problem is that the Democrats don’t learn from history. It’s more that Democrats don’t believe history has anything to teach them.
I’m reminded of a Marxist I once debates. He was quite willing to admit that every time communism has been tried, it has failed. His response that the reason communism failed had nothing to do with the theory. Rather it was the flawed men that tried to implement it. This time, with better men in charge, it will work.
The Democrats know in the core of their being, that whatever they try, will succeed, so they don’t need to worry about studying other people’s mistakes.
MarkTheGreat on September 11, 2008 at 3:34 PM
NNtrancer,
There is much wisdom in your words.
MarkTheGreat on September 11, 2008 at 3:34 PM
maverick muse on September 11, 2008
NNtrancer on September 11, 2008 at 1:18 PM
Blimey you guys are scaring me. Sometime in the 30s the Germans elected a former street thug community organizer with links to known terrorists, a narcissist, but an electrifying orator with serious issues with women and repressed (or was it?) homosexuality, and a vicious hatred of part of his own ancestry…he also had some strange pseudo-religious beliefs…what was his name a again????
Fortunata on September 11, 2008 at 3:41 PM
If you think the Dems are panicking now, just wait ’till the debates start.
Star20 on September 11, 2008 at 3:48 PM
The clothes have no emperor.
(Empty suit)
MarkTheGreat on September 11, 2008 at 3:59 PM
You filthy racist heathens!!!! Wow didnt you hear him say “There will be a voice from heaven and you will experience an epiphany ,saying you must vote for Barak” Gee you think he could just make this stuff up?
Marines for Mccain on September 11, 2008 at 4:04 PM
If the Hill actually assumes the VP slot, that implies that they actually think (enough) American women are shallow enough to jump back to the Dimwitt side !!?? What an insult !
After having seen and met Sarah ? ROFLOL !!
T’aint no way !!
pambi on September 11, 2008 at 4:30 PM
Obama is a sociopath. Period.
He despises women.
texette on September 11, 2008 at 5:14 PM
Toto.
We always knew.
The country looked up, and learned.
Thankfully, not when it would have been too late.
Entelechy on September 11, 2008 at 6:18 PM
He’s a short-term thinker like most Democrats and not a few Republicans.
baldilocks on September 11, 2008 at 6:26 PM
All you amateur shrinks are dead on I think. One thing you’re missing about O’s feelings toward women: he doesn’t hate all women, just white ones. I think that the reasons are obvious.
baldilocks on September 11, 2008 at 7:08 PM
Obama isn’t afflicted with pride, so much as hubris and conceit.
Just as profits shouldn’t have a negative connotation, pride should not either.
E.T.Cook on September 11, 2008 at 8:03 PM
Pride is the worst of the 7 Deadly Sins.
It was Satan’s sin.
Read Dante’s Inferno, Obama!
At the gates of Hell it reads:
“Abandon hope, ye who enter here.”
Disturb the Universe on September 11, 2008 at 8:06 PM
I had a politically aware friend tell me in the summer that BHO’s pride would be his undoing. Pride ruined the Dukakis campaign and it’s ruining Barry’s.
Mojave Mark on September 11, 2008 at 8:54 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2