My concern about Obama

[Perky]

Don't get me wrong he is such a breath of fresh air and I suspect he will be even moreso after two years of gridlock rolling into '08. He is polished, brilliant, thoughtful, charismatic and above all else genuinely nice.

And that is where I am concerned the problem may be. A presidential run is armed combat. A positive, values-laden, message of hope should resonate with lots of voters. But what happens when the repukes start with the attack ads? Everything in this guys character to seems to me to be incapable of responding in kind. I worry that he will be perceived in many quarters (including here on DU of being a political wimp).

So my question is this if the GOP nominee is a "Darth Vader" type, can Obama go toe-to-toe with him while maintaining a golden boy image? Or is he such a breath of fresh air that his personality trumps even an attempt to go nasty on him?

Remember this guy has never been tested in an election.

[Warren DeMontague]

1. I don't think Obama should be the '08 nominee.

I think Al Gore should be.
Obama might work in the #2 slot, but personally I'd prefer Feingold.

Obama is great, but he needs to put in some more time.

[Perky]

2. I do not think anyone would offer him the #2 slot

And I doubt very seriously that he would accept.

[Warren DeMontague]

13. Really?

Why not?

[Perky]

21. Too Smart...too charismatic

The comaprison to the top of the ticket are inevitable. And most nominees want the spotlight to themselves.

[blm]

25. I doubt that - the top of the ticket should have the confidence in their own

self and capabilities, that choosing a "smart charmer" wouldn't even matter. A REAL man wouldn't care one whit that Obama has those qualities.

In 2004, Kerry chose Edwards and chose Obama as the keynote speaker. But then, very few candidates have also been war hero, pilot, athlete and the man who investigated more government corruption than any lawmaker in modern history. Kerry had no man thing to prove once you face down an enemy shooting shoulder rockets at your crew and rescue another man underwater under heavy machine gun fire. Maybe that's why he takes slings and arrows that others won't.

[Warren DeMontague]

26. I don't think so. John Edwards is, in my mind, a lot more charismatic than Kerry.

Didn't keep him off the ticket.

[Perky]

27. Obama is a rock star and edwards is a teen idol

in my opinion.

[Warren DeMontague]

31. Rock star or no, I don't think he's ready for the top slot yet.

I think the nominee needs to be Al Gore, or failing that, I'd like Wes Clark.

I think Obama would make an excellent choice for the veep slot.

[politicasista]

32. That was the media spin and a RW lie

And you fell for it. There are pics posted from DUers that show Kerry interacting very well with the crowd and faces of enthusiasm on the campaign trail for 06 candidates.

Shouldn't we stop helping Rove do his homework?

[Warren DeMontague]

34. Oh, ferchrissakes.

Edwards is more charismatic, in my opinion. That's a simple aesthetic judgment and, in my mind, fairly obvious. I "fell for it". Really? If my opinion doesn't jibe with yours, that means I'm not capable of making my own assesment on these matters? :eyes:

(I think Bill Clinton is more charismatic than Hillary, too. Dag Blam Media Brainwashing!)

Doesn't mean Kerry couldn't do crowds, but frankly, I do think he has a tendency to sometimes come off as aloof, forced, and dry. And I have a decent sized list of people, starting with Al Gore, that I'd rather see as the 2008 nominee. But I also think Kerry's a good, decent, smart and committed man-- and a solid campaigner.

But, uh, back to the topic at hand, I don't think Obama's charisma would keep him from being offered, or from taking, the #2 slot on the '08 ticket.

[Swede Atlanta]

3. Agree..Obama needs time......

He needs to establish a strong leadership track record on issues important to the American people. Further while he certainly has had alot of attention in the press and media lately, I think he needs to build a public persona that is recognized for civility, intelligence and strength. I would like Gore to give it another try. I think he has grown alot during the last several years and would be an excellent candidate. Even if he wasn't the nominee he would inject some badly needed discourse about the environment, energy policy, etc. into the debate.

[Warren DeMontague]

14. Yep. If we don't address global warming pronto

everything else is going to become kind of moot, IMHO.

Al Gore is the guy to do it.

[goclark]

4. How much more time would be enough time?

If not '08 it would be '12,'16 what would make that the right time?

[Warren DeMontague]

10. Maybe.

I think a Junior Senator with two years experience isn't enough.

He's still young. Shit, Bill Clinton wasn't ready in '88, but by '92 he sure was.

On Edit: FYI, Clark is my second choice for '08, if Gore won't run. :thumbsup:

[asjr]

5. We need to be careful about

our nominee for 2008. I like Obama but he needs more seasoning. I would vote for Al Gore in a heartbeat or Howard Dean, but we need to vet everyone who is running in 2008. Election 2006 is crucial. I believe Dems will win, but only if the voting machines are not rigged. It seems Dems have the momentum but I put nothing past this corrupt regime in power now.

[Warren DeMontague]

12. I agree with everything in that post.

I'd really like Al Gore to run in '08. I think Wes Clark would be a solid nominee too.

[Kerrytravelers]

6. I'm focusing on '06 myself.

I'll reserve all judgments on any potential nominees until after everyone has thrown their hat in the ring and I've listened and carefully weighed everything they've had to say.

[goclark]

23. I'm with you, who knows which way the wind will blow

I like OBAMA, GORE, KERRY, DEAN, EDWARDS,CLINTON andif I thought he had a chance CONYERS!

I don't want to put anyone of them down because they are all the Brothers and Sisters of the Democratic Party.

If we trash them now, our words will be there for the Freeps.


No way a trash from me.

[politicasista]

33. Well said n/t

[bluerum]

7. Think about the future. 2008 may be good.

But he may be more seasoned in 2012, 2016.

If the "old guard" (Gore, Kennedy, Kerry, Dean, Pelosi, Clinton & Clinton, names of your favorite prominent Dem congress critters and Senators) can build something that has a chance of taking root and growing out we can have a rich field of candidates for years to come.

Let him run in '08. If he wind great. If he does not - he will have some campaign experience . He will also have more name recognition and thats a good thing as long as people attach something positive to it.

[Swede Atlanta]

9. Having Obama run in 08 as a candidate would be good

I think having Obama run as a candidate in 08 would be good. It would get him alot of exposure to national Democrats and begin to build name recognition. If we take back the Senate either this year or in 2008, I would like to see him demonstrate some powerful leadership in the Senate.

[Warren DeMontague]

17. Yeah. I think it would be great to have him as a candidate.

I just don't think he's ready to be the nominee. I could be wrong, and 2008 is still a ways away.

[tblue]

8. I just saw Tom Daschle speak on this subject

He said that multiple terms in the Senate can actually be DETRIMENTAL to a presidential candidate. Obama would be smart to get in before he gets bogged down with years of what could be distorted as harmful baggage.

I believe Obama is a fighter, I beleive he could be a better candidate than John Kerry was, but who am I?

I was really opposed to Hillary until I read this by Anna Quindlen:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15362334/site/newsweek/

I highly recommend you all read this.

[Radical Activist]

16. I agree that Obama is a better candidate now than in '12.

It won't help him to become infected with the Washington virus.

[Golden Raisin]

11. If we don't take back control

of Congress in 2006 Bush/Cheney have 2 more years to cancel elections and they are just the guys to do it.

[Radical Activist]

15. He was tested by getting elected in Chicago.

There is no more brutal or competitive place to be elected than Chicago. It's no place for amateurs. If he couldn't handle it, he wouldn't have won his State Senate seat.

[mohinoaklawnillinois]

18. Yeah, a lot of people outside of Illinois don't realize that

he handily defeated the machine's pick in the Dem primary in March 2004, Dan Hynes.

[Greyhound]

19. Not so much a wimp as a DINO prepared to throw women and the poor under

the bus to further his career.

[Radical Activist]

20. Oh, is that why he worked as a community organizer in poor neighborhoods?

What a bunch of bullshit.

[Greyhound]

35. That was long before he got "The Talk" when it became clear he would win.

It was like the evil twin was released from the pod.

BTW, how are those neighborhoods now?

[KharmaTrain]

22. Obama's Created His Own Box

Witness here all the "disenchantment" with Obama when he didn't appear to be the reincarnation of Martin Luther King Jr./Bobby Kennedy they dreamed for. He never was. In the Illinois legislature he was a relative unknown that moved up the party ranks in the rough and tumble of Chicago and Cook County politics. Liberals need not apply. He was a "moderate" in the state legislature and his relationship with Rezko...a big party donor who is facing criminal charges could put some real tarnish on that armor.

Personally, I'd love to see my senior Senator, Richard Durbin, as a future nominee...but, even moreso, as the next Democratic Majority Leader in the Senate. Obama is still a neophyte and really has no accomplishments to his name, just the press clippings.

As we've seen with Harold Ford, certain parts of this country are not ready to accept a black in public office. They may smile and say it's pretentious to say that's the case, but then in the privacy of the voting booth, they'll vote their fears. The Repugnican party has built its base on a pilar of racism and don't mind when the blacks play a support role, but would never accept one in a true leadership one.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

24. I Think He'd Handle It Just Fine.

In fact, I think he has the capability of handling the attacks with such grace, intellectualism and tact, that I think he could finally help people see how tired they are of smear politics.

[cry baby]

28. I like him...and if he runs, I'll be working on his behalf. nt

[deacon]

29. Now bush had zero experience- Obama is more qualified now

than bush will be when he leaves office.

His intelligence is far greater than bush's was before he was elected and after 6 years experience in the job.

So is he ready? I certainly would say absolutely. Bush has shown how dangerous and deadly stupidity can be. Is Obama the right choice? Not sure.

[NNguyenMD]

30. for lack of better words, Obama needs his own "Dick Cheney" to complete the package

And I'd support him in a primary if I knew who his number two would be. But that never happens so I'll just have to keep hoping that Gore throws his hat into the ring.

Its universally agreed, Obama has it all to have a truly transformational presidency. But he needs a VP who is experienced, tough, and MOST importantly has no personal ambition to be president himself.

Who can be this VP?

It can't be anyone who could potentially undermine him in their own quest for the presidency, so Clinton, Edwards and Kerry are out the window.

Clark is a possibility, but he's got more Pentagon experience versus the kind you need to help you navigate Washington's grime.

Ted Kennedy? No, too polarizing a figure, and it'll just unearth the Chappaquidick stories from decades ago.

Al Gore? Ideally the perfect person, but who wants the same job you had 8 years ago for 8 more years?

I think Tom Harkin would be a great pick. Powerful, experienced, and humble.

[LWolf]

36. I don't understand why you are worried about Obama

when he is not running for anything. Is there no one actually campaigning today for a vote on Tuesday to be concerned about?

As for Obama's political future, it will be what he makes it. I really don't care about what kind of air he is breathing or whether or not he is publicly presentable; I care about the actual action he takes on the issues that are important to me, and I base my support and votes on just that. Frankly, he's not on my list of candidates that could possibly earn my support at this time. He doesn't have the credentials I'm looking for. Who knows; more years working on a national level, and if I like his record during that time, I might consider him for 2016.

Meanwhile, should he throw his hat in the ring in '08, I'm sure he is intelligent enough to understand that it's not a cakewalk. I don't really see him as the golden boy that you do, but I do know that a person can be strong, can make their points without diminishing a positive message. I think the key is not to ignore or defend; to go on the offense with the facts. Whether or not he is up to that, I don't know.

[riderinthestorm]

37. Obama is an ILLINOIS politician. They are all dirty.

Look, Obama isn't a saint. He's had to do his fair share of dirty deals to get where he is. He ran an extremely successful campaign even with some of the sticky stuff clinging to the bottom of his shoes.

Now, he's not knee deep in shit like Blago or Topinka or Hastert or Big Jimbo Thompson or Da Mare Daley or (insert the names of at least 100 others)....

But he ain't squeaky clean either.

So he's already run and maintained the high ground despite the shit. Clearly the guy's a gifted politician who (I believe) will figure out how to do it nationally (Clinton anyone?).

Frankly, a longer Senate record will only make him LESS marketable in my opinion. The more votes/floor commentary/time spent as a Senator only makes him more vulnerable (Kerry anyone?)

It would be better for him to sit out '08 (claiming he's too "inexperienced" to be Pres), then get appointed to a Cabinet post by a Dem president, and make a run as a former Admin member than as a sitting Senator. I don't think he'll do this though. He's too ambitious.