Obama will not "dilly dally" over 2008 decision

[Alhena]

This is the first indication I've seen that he has a seemingly short timetable for deciding on 2008. It will be devastating to me if he does not run, but I'm glad we'll hopefully know soon regardless.

http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2006/11/obama_will_not_dilly_dally_on.html

I ran into Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) outside the Senate chamber this afternoon, and got this update on his presidential decision timetable. He is not going to “dilly dally,” he told me. Meanwhile, he will deliver a major speech on Iraq Monday and will talk to Wal-Mart critics as will 2008 potential White House rival former Sen. John Edwards. All this, plus new Obama committee assignments just

[JNelson6563]

1. Sorry, he's too green

Maybe in time, not yet.

Julie

P.S. This doesn't meet LBN criteria for an OP

[azurnoir]

2. He could easily be a running mate

I agree he's too green for the presidency, but he would be perfect as VP which would put him in line to run in '12 or '16.

[rocktivity]

3. I think Clark/Obama is our best ticket for '08

What better way for him to lose his "greeness" than to spend eight years looking over a president's shoulder?

:headbang:
rocknation

[Auntie Bush]

21. That's a perfect ticket.

Obama would have 8 years to learn the ropes and be ready for the 2012 election and then 8 more years of Obama and Democrat rule.

[jefferson_dem]

59. Flip the names around and we're good...

:bounce:

[Clark2008]

62. Why?

The Commander in Chief should be the commander in chief and the head of the Senate should be a senator.

Makes sense to me in the original.

[jefferson_dem]

65. True. We could quibble over who is better suited for the position of president,

which includes, but is not limited to, critical responsibilities as "commander in chief."

I am a huge Clark fan. Indeed.

However, Obama is my #1 choice for president...provided he decides to run. This is based on a sundry of qualities that he brings to the table. Among them is his intellect, policy positions, professional character and personal integrity, not to mention his charisma and terrifically inspiring "life story."

[Clark2008]

67. I'm in Tennessee - and if you know what happened in my state -

then you'll forgive me if I just don't believe that a black man (or a woman of any color) could win a national election - but I do like Obama - I just don't think this country, while ready, would vote for a black man, charisma or not.

[lynne]

27. Agreed -

- let him get some experience under his belt first. I'd rather see him wait and succeed than hurry and not make it. If he runs and doesn't make it, the media will throw up his failure at every chance when he goes for it again.

[beaconess]

28. What kind of experience do you expect him to get in the Senate in the next 6 years

that will make him more qualified to be president than he is now?

[lynne]

36. Several years of OJT never hurts anyone seeking a "promotion" -

- his lack of experience and time in DC could hurt him if he ran too soon. Why the rush???

[beaconess]

38. How is being 1 of 100 senators "on the job experience" for the presidency?

The two jobs are so completely different that I find it laughable that people seem to think that spending a few extra years in the Senate will make Obama better prepared for the presidency than, say Bill Clinton or FDR - neither of whom had "on the job experience" or "time in DC" you insist that Obama must get before he can qualify.

[beachmom]

41. Foreign policy experience -- the hearings, all the material you read

the foreign visits, observing diplomacy.

That's very important to me that a president has previous experience in this.

[beaconess]

43. So, Bill Clinton didn't have the requisite experience to be president, under your standard

By your measure, George H.W. Bush and Richard Nixon were much more highly qualified to be president than Clinton or FDR were.

[beachmom]

49. FDR had more experience since he was a assistant sec of the navy

as well as governor of NY. Plus I think his experience with polio and the poverty he saw in Warm Springs, Georgia were priceless for dealing with the Great Depression.

Bill Clinton had a very painful first 2 years -- and he never did give foreign policy the time it deserved. His lack of experience in FP made him seem amateurish at times. Yes, he was a good president, but I do feel that lack of experience hurt the U.S. at times.

And George W. Bush has been, of course, absolutely godawful.

So experience matters. But the TYPE of experience also counts. Bush and Nixon had lots of experience in how NOT to do things (especially Poppy Bush and Iran/contra), so that argument doesn't work for me.


Look, I like Obama, and he's #3 on my list, but his lack of experience in a dangerous world will be a major form of attack from the other side. He'll need a VP who is HIGHLY experienced to even begin to counteract that.

[beaconess]

56. So we agree that there are all sorts of ways people can get experience

and it's not limited to time in the Senate, attending hearings and making official foreign visits.

Obama already has more experience with foreign visits than most people in the Senate. He has lived in at least one other country (Indonesia) and has spent more time in Africa than most Senators have. Did you see any of the footage of his most recent trip to Kenya? He is looked at as a hero there. And, in my view, a Black man who has come as far as he already has shown many of the qualities that I am looking for in a president - I know he has had to be three times as good in everything he's done in order to be thought of as half as proficient as his White counterparts.

FYI - I was referring to George H.W. Bush, not W - the father had all sorts of the experience you described but I think most people would agree that Bill Clinton was a far better president than he was.

[anotherdrew]

4. why the hell should he run? he doesn't have even close to the experience needed

neither did bush, but just cause the repukes run a too inexperienced candidate doesn't mean we should too.

[liberalpragmatist]

14. I'm not sure

Granted, two examples of inexperience are George W. Bush and Jimmy Carter, the former, of course, MUCH worse. But as much as we detest Bush, he was able to be an effective president, by which he mean he was able to get what he wanted (which was terrible stuff, but still.)

Obama will have had 4 years of experience in the U.S. Senate, seven years in the Illinois state senate, a history as a constitutional lawyer, a community organizer, and president of the Harvard Law Review.

As for experience, as Obama himself points out, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld were highly experienced. That didn't necessarily give them better judgment.

Our worst president by many counts was James Buchanan, who had spent a lifetime in government. And the man who was our greatest president, Buchanan's successor, Abraham Lincoln, saved the union and ably held together a country at civil war despite the fact that his entire political experience consisted of a FAILED senate run, a couple 2-year terms in the Illinois legislature, and a single undistinguished term in the House of Representatives in the early 1840s. In other words, if we were nominating someone with Lincoln's experience, we'd be picking a forgotten, one-term representative from 1987-1989.

Woodrow Wilson's sole political experience consisted of being Governor of New Jersey for two years before becoming president (although I think Wilson is overrated by historians, so perhaps that doesn't help my case).

So experience may not necessarily be the key thing. Experience is important, but lots of different types of experience may be relevant and ultimately they have to be backed by intelligence, the ability to work well with others, and solid judgement.

I think the jury is out on Obama for '08. But I'm willing to give him a chance to prove himself.

[loyalsister]

23. Community organizing experience

is underrated in it's importance.

It requires working people with a wide range of backgrounds and dispositions, often under some stressful conditions and finding ways to make difficult projects work with little money and a lot of creativity.
It requires talking a lot of people into getting interested in what they should have been caring about all along.
It requires building bridges and finding common ground.
This is a stronger skill set than what a person can learn by simply being a Senator.

[bling bling]

68. GREAT POST. Everyone should read this post.

Very well reasoned and well thought out argument. Much better argument than what I've heard so far from those who want Obama to sit and simmer in the Senate till "he's ready" to run for President.

Experience is one aspect but to so many it's the end all be all. I honestly don't think I've ever considered a candidate running for office and combed through their experience as though it was even in the top 5 priorities. I look at who they are, what they stand for, how they would vote on issues, how they've voted in the past.

Come to think of it, Obama needs to run BEFORE he has too much Senate experience. Those Senate votes are so complicated that they're too easy to spin and manipulate in attack ads.

[beaconess]

72. You are SO right

All that many years in the Senate has given candidates is a long record of votes and floor statements to distort and use as a club.

For all those who insist that more years in the Senate will make Obama more qualified than he is now, I say:

President Lieberman
President Kerry (John)
President Kerrey (Bob)
President Biden
President Graham
President Dole

or how about:

President McCain
President Frist
President Hagel

[bling bling]

75. OMG.

That's perfect. That's the perfect response, especially for DU, to this argument about Obama not having enough Senate experience. I hope you don't mind if I copy your post and save it for future use. There's no way that I could illustrate the silliness of that argument more clearly than by your list topped by DU's favorite super-experienced Senator who's experience played the role of SQUAT when he ran for President.

And what's funny is that if I was PUSHING for Joe to run for President this time around because he's so experienced the argument from these same people against Joe would be "who cares how long he's sat around in the Senate, what matters are his positions on Iraq" or "what matters is what he'll do as President."

[mtnsnake]

61. The reason he should run is because he'll stand a better chance of winning

than just about any other Dem we currently have as listed potential candidates.

[frylock]

5. it will be devastating to you?! why the rush?

[pinerow]

6. It's called "ego"...happens to the best of them...

they start believing their own hype...let him serve his constituents in Illinois for awhile...sheesh...!

[bling bling]

69. Define "awhile". He's been serving Illinois for 9 years.

Did you know that? Doesn't sound like it. Sheesh is right.

[goclark]

7. I'm with you, we need some bright new stars

in our party and they need to be encouraged and respected.

I will gladly wait and see who will be on our TEAM and would gladly welcome OBAMA to the race.

It fascinates me that some are putting our own down before they even reach the starting gate.

We play directly into the hands of the RepubliCONS when we do that "Swift Boating" of our gems.

[beaconess]

29. Some of the same people who beat up on "career politicians" & "Congresscritter"

on the other hand now insist that Obama hasn't spent enough time being just that.
Which is it? Do we want fresh new faces that bring intelligence, common sense and a diverse background of experience and perspective or do we want the same old same old?

[Clark2008]

63. That's not my problem with him.

My problem with him is that I simply don't think this country will elect either a woman (HRC) or a man of color.

The corporate media and the Republican Noise Machine have driven us back to the early 60s in those regards.

[beaconess]

64. So, he's disqualified because of his race?

I don't agree that "this country" won't elect a woman or a Black man. This country wasn't ready to do lots of things until it was put in front of them.

I don't buy this argument. And I certainly don't think that Black people should be expected to just sit on the sidelines, watching the main event, sending in money, voting and doing everything else they can to support the White folks who are allowed in the ring (regardless how mediocre, corrupt or unqualified) but are told that they had better not try to get in the ring themselves because "this country's" not ready for them.

I call bullshit on that meme.

Bottom line for me - if Obama's not good enough to run for president, then nobody better ask him to go out and campaign for them. After all, we certainly wouldn't want him to offend anyone, would we?

[Clark2008]

66. I'm a Tennessean.

Enough said, don't you think?

I didn't want to believe it, either, but when a corporate-owned redneck who can't speak plain English beats a well-polished, intelligent black man by three percentage points, then all bets are off.

My point is that, in order to win, we HAVE to flip some red states - and, after what happened in my state - I'm sorry, I don't see that happening any time soon.

Oh - and don't give me the BS line about the South - it's everywhere - and Tennessee has Democrats controlling our governorship and state General Assembly, so it's NOT the "Democrat" thing.

[bling bling]

71. And Obama is black.

I think Obama, realizing that he is black, has already taken the color if his skin into consideration. I trust that he wouldn't consider it and put his family through the awful process if he thought it were futile. If he decides to run I think we ought to believe in him.

Plus being from Tennessee doesn't really back up your argument. Just because Ford lost in Tennessee means exactly squat. Obama would have won it in that state.

Furthermore, implying that someone should not apply for a job based on the color of his/her skin is discrimination, regardless of the reasons. It just is. You can blame the other Americans for your position all you want but YOU'RE the one who is telling the public via a message board that Obama shouldn't run because he's black.

I just want to make it clear, because I really want to do what I can to make people aware of their attitudes and see them for what they are, even if it's uncomfortable. It's the right thing to do.

[beaconess]

74. Beautifully said.

[beaconess]

73. All bets are off? Because a Black man lost a race, that bars other Blacks from running for anything

else?

Tennessee isn't the United States. And Harold Ford isn't Barack Obama.

Just because one Black man lost a Senate race in Tennessee doesn't mean that another Black man could never win the presidential race. It certainly doesn't mean he shouldn't try. If Obama runs and loses, he runs and loses. What's the big deal?

Rick Santorum lost his race in Pennsylvania, but that doesn't seem to be deterring all manner of White men from running for president. George Allen lost his race in Virginia, but I haven't seen one single White man declining to run for president based upon Allen's defeat. Deval Patrick kicked Kerry Healey's butt in Massachusetts. Certainly, no one would suggest that this means that White women should drop out of competitive politics.

Urging Barack Obama not to run based upon how someone else with whom he shares partial racial heritage performed is, in my view, ridiculous.

[beachmom]

44. Swiftboating means attacking the military record of someone

with lies to distract from the real issues of the day.

Since Obama never was in the military, he will nor never will he be "swiftboated".

Pointing out that he has very little experience is not swiftboating. And all the other stuff -- the corporate money, the housing deal -- is just standard vetting stuff if it looks like somebody might run for president.

Get yourself a thick skin and get used to it. It'll probably get a lot, lot worse.

[longship]

8. He needs to dilly dally for a few years.

Obama is perceived as a front runner solely because of two things.
1. He has knock-dead charisma.
2. He is ambitious.

I do not consider either one of these a strong recommendation for a President.

Two examples.
#1 - Many touted Dubya as being "likeable" and charismatic. Look what we got.
#2 - Bald ambition got us Nixon. Enough said?

I am not comparing Obama to these two fools, only his choice as a Presidential candidate on such criteria.

Let him mature in the Senate for a while. Then, we'll see. He's young and needs to grow a bit before I can support him.

[beaconess]

30. Don't underestimate his charisma -

His charisma would be nothing if he didn't have the goods to back it up. One of the main reasons that Obama is such a hot commodity is that his charisma is more than just "star power" - he's got intelligence and mother wit (and awesome combination), an ability to articulate the most complex concepts to any audience without ever talking down to anyone (a la Clinton), a willingness to work his ass off, tenacity and grace.

He's not just a pretty face.

[queenbdem87]

9. An experienced washington insider does not a good president make!

People need to get over the fact that he has little experience in the Senate and see that that can be an asset. Plus, he is a great orator, hold pretty much good positions on everything, and is from the midwest. He can do it, he has mass appeal, and the racists who wont vote for him because he is black most likely wouldnt vote for the democrat anyway.

[ripple]

10. You nailed it

Too much time in the Senate would become a liability, rather than an asset for Obama. He has the vision, the background, the intellect, the charisma(that dirty word again), he is a fresh face, and he offers a powerful message of hope. People are sick of politics as usual. This is his time.

[Imagevision]

11. Obama is green? yeah right, and Mayor Giuliani is seasoned...!

[ripple]

13. And McCain has completely spoiled

:P

[Superman Returns]

16. in defense of guiliani

a mayor of new york probably has a bigger workload and responsibility than lets say...the governor of Texas- a weak governorship. Guiliani also did good when he was a lawyer working out against organized crime and corrupt business. don't matter because he won't win the primary.

[beachmom]

45. You'd be surprised. A lot of wingnuts love him, including

my very nutty neighbor, who, btw, hates McCain. The far right people like Guiliani better than McCain, and are willing to ignore the "baggage" because they think his one speech on 9/11 means he'll keep them safe.

[Vinca]

12. The sun, the moon and the stars seem to be aligned for Obama

right now. I hope he runs.

[nickshepDEM]

42. Indeed. I hope he runs, too...

[beachmom]

46. Hmmm . . . who was that HIGHLY intelligent man who decided

to pluck the old Obama from relative obscurity and make him a star in a keynote address at the Democratic convention? The name escapes me at the moment . . .

[nickshepDEM]

54. ... Barack Obama

[Bucky]

15. If he doesn't decide soon, they'll call it Dillydallygate

[IndianaGreen]

17. I am looking forward to his Iraq speech on Monday

Obama spoke against the war in Iraq while the "more seasoned" members of Congress were falling all over themselves to vote for the Iraq War Resolution.

[W.E.B. Du Bois]

18. Obama should not run

I love Obama. He is the one Democrat I would like to meet. However, he IS too green and also his name is too much like Osama. I don't give a fuck about that, but other people will. I think it is better to win the Presidential election than run someone you really like and lose.

[Bullet1987]

19. What?

What does he mean by he won'r "dilly dally" over a 2008 decision? Does that mean he's not thinking about it right now, does it mean he's already made a decision?

Also, STOP WITH THE EXPERIENCE EXCUSE!!! It's an overrated and largely hypothetical argument against his abilities.

[BluegrassDem]

20. Does anyone saying Obama doesn't have enough experience

say the same thing about John Edwards in 2004? Just curious. I was on DU in 2004 and I swear, I could count the number of times on 1 hand that I saw postings about how Edwards shouldn't run cause of his lack of experience. I'm just wondering if anyone will admit to this double standard?

[Bullet1987]

22. Honestly...

...I think many DU'ers are afraid of what Obama might mean in terms of their boy Gore running. I think many on this board would just rather have Obama back out to give Gore a better shot. I don't think experience has anything to do with it honestly...because like I said, you can't measure experience.

[sandnsea]

25. Yep, it's called politics

And it's not just the Gore people either.

[sandnsea]

24. Chief complaint against Edwards, as I recall

He didn't have enough foreign policy experience. I saw it all the time. :shrug:

[beaconess]

33. Yes, people said he didn't have enough foreign policy experience

But that was generally used as an argument not to vote for him, but people did not insist that he not run because of it.

Obama is being held to a different standard altogether. He is not being accused of lacking foreign policy experience - we're being told that he is too green overall to be president - that he needs "seasoning," not that he lacks a particular type of experience.

[sandnsea]

34. He ran before anyone knew who he was

I think that's kind of nitpicky, whether to run or vote for him is different, I think people mean it exactly the same. Except maybe they think Obama will do better for himself not to hang too ambitious or have some major error made, because most people expect him to actually be the first African-American President some day. Edwards had clearly made up his mind to run, there was never any doubt of it. The question with Obama right now is whether he will run, so naturally that's what people are going to respond to. There's no double standard. And he is green, and unless he's the architect of solving some major crisis in Illinois, it's going to be a problem for him. That's just a fact. Not insurmountable, but a problem. It was for Edwards. It would have been nice if he'd built a really following like Feingold before he ran.

[beaconess]

37. I don't think it's nitpicky at all

There's a big difference between saying you won't vote for someone and saying that someone shouldn't run because, if they lose, they will hurt the party or hurt the future. prospects of their entire race.

And do you really think that unless someone is the architect of solving some major crisis," they are unqualified to be president?

What major crisis did FDR solve prior to running for president? What major crisis has any current potential candidate, with the exception of Clark, solved? That's a pretty insurmountable standard.

Because the presidency is so unique, there are very few previous jobs that anyone can have that provides experience that translates directly. That is why I think it is more important to look at what they've done, how they've performed and what qualities they have demonstrated - intelligence, common sense, world view, etc. Additional time in the Senate, in my view, doesn't necessarily give anyone the additional experience they need to have to be an effective president - it certainly didn't do Kerry or Dole or Gephardt any good.

[sandnsea]

40. Obama's question is whether to even run

That's why people are addressing that particular question. And he does need to consider his own baggage, everybody has some, and whether it might go better at some future time. Not because it might hurt the party, because it might hurt him and his own future chances.

I did not say a candidate HAD to have some major crisis solving plan under their belt. But they ought to have something. FDR was both in the New York State House and Governor. And, btw, that Bush trip to Vietnam is almost completely due to the work of John Kerry.

I'm leaning towards thinking he should run, btw. I don't think the fact that we're living in such a superficial time is going to disappear in the next two years. He does seem to have the most important quality, which is listening.

[beachmom]

48. Yes, you've hit it on the nail. I'm a little sore with him for considering

jumping the gun like this. I was SOO looking forward to the time he was going to run, once he perhaps finished his term in the Senate, and maybe took a shot at governor or perhaps in a Democratic administration. And, then, he could run with all that gravitas.

Right now seems too early, and yeah, I am worried that he is ruining his chances of when he will be READY to run.

[depakid]

26. I was one of those posters

And I still believe that, as a one term Senator, he doesn't have enough experience.

Obama has even less experience and has show poor judgment more than a few times these past 20 months.

He still has much to learn.

[beaconess]

32. Of course not. . . .

And the few people who criticized Edwards for a lack of experience generally just said they wouldn't vote for him. I don't remember anyone instructing him not to run.

It seems that only Obama is being subjected, not only to the glut of "he's not experienced enough" and "he shouldn't run because he's Black, so he can't win," but lectures by people who feel that they are capable of determining for him whether or not he should run.

He has every right to run, just like anyone else, if he so chooses. And if he doesn't win, it won't be the end of the world. And, please people, spare me the "If he runs and loses, it will hurt Black people." That's bullshit. If he runs and loses, it means that he runs and loses, just like it means for any other candidate who doesn't make it.

[BluegrassDem]

35. That's what bugs me about the whole thing...

I don't mind people saying they won't support Obama. Hell, I'm not even saying I'd support him in a primary. But to say that he 'shouldn't run' is ludicrous! He has every much a right to run as any other WASP politician. If he's too 'green' and doesn't have enough seasoning, let the primary voters decide!! He will not waltz to the nomination. There'll be debates, there'll be media scrutiny. If he's not experienced enough, then it will show. But to say he shouldn't he even run for president, while other inexperienced pols like Edwards gets a free pass, smacks as a serious double standard to me.

[beaconess]

39. Amen, amen, amen!

I think there's a lot behind the double standard. For some people, it may be bigotry masquerading as a condescending paternalism. But I also think there are some who are afraid he will blow their favorits out of the water.

[Withywindle]

52. Yeah, me too.

I think everyone who wants to run should run! The primary process is pretty grueling and it puts everybody to the test.

I think it's good for the party in the long term if LOTS of our best and brightest run. It shows off how deep our talent pool is (I think it's something to be proud of); it teaches all the candidates a lot of lessons they can use in the future even if they're unsuccessful this time, it brings a wide variety of voices into debates on the issues, and it increases our chances of getting the best possible person for the job.

The only downside I see is that when the infighting gets too vicious it creates lasting grudges and schisms (you see it at DU all the time), but I don't think fear of that should stop anyone from running. It just means we've got to check our own heads.

[beachmom]

47. Actually, yes. That was my problem with JE in '04, and it

continues to be my problem with him for '08 -- because he's gotten NO MORE experience in the last two years in foreign policy.

[beaconess]

31. He shouldn't run because of his name?

Give me a break!

[Mass]

50. People who are asked not to run are people who have a chance.

Nobody would care about Obama if they did not think he could hurt their favorite candidate, be sure of that.

I think that, if he decides he is ready to run, he should do it. It has to be his choice because it is a commitment for him and his family, so people should not pressure him to do so, but if it is his choice and he thinks he has something to offer, he certainly should run.

[Bullet1987]

51. EXACTLY!!!

BlueGrassDem(#35) and Mass(#50) hit the nail on the head!!! If he thinks he has what it takes then he should run. Just for a heads up though, Barack Obama has said that we can expect to hear an answer within the next few weeks. But this Monday at 1pm, some CNN guy is doing a special interview with Obama and the name of the segment is "Will He Run?" So anyone interested should definently watch since we may be hearing an answer a lot sooner than a few weeks. The anchor said somebody was asking Obama about '08 after a session and Obama said something along the lines of "not wanting to be pushed." I don't remember her exact wording, but it struck me as odd and implied that Barack may feel many people are pushing him to do something he doesn't want to do (ie. run for President). The media has all but said that Barack is already running. I don't know...it could've been nothing and just a way to get away from the reporter.

[beaconess]

57. Agree 100%!

[Fleshdancer]

53. I see no problem with him running

I think a healthy debate during the primaries are good for political parties. Why not embrace the idea of Obama or any other Democrat running? Seriously, what's the harm in having the conversation?

[BluegrassDem]

55. I think it's healthy for the party too

I don't know why we have to clear the deck for a certain candidate? Let them all run and let the chips fall! The real candidates with presidential material will stand out, and those who aren't will get exposed. Obama meets the constitutional qualifications to be president, so he has every right to have his voice heard. If he's not presidential material, he'll get exposed...if he is good material, then he'll be the man the beat. But he has every right to run.

[joeprogressive]

58. Throw the experience argument away

The #1 attribute a president needs is common sense. Obama has it and Bush doesn't.

[Justice]

60. He does not have the experience.

[thatsrightimirish]

70. As a young person

I will be able to vote in my first election in 2008. I really hope Obama runs because I think that he connects with younger voters and people would feel good about voting for him. We wouldn't have to "plug our nose" to vote for all the other candidates that are mentioned.