NEWS TALK RADIO Our Hosts
Powered by: Townhall.com
Sign Up
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Mary Katharine Ham :: Townhall.com Columnist
Too Nice to Win: Will Obama's 'New' Politics Survive an Old Game?
by Mary Katharine Ham
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Do you think Senator Obama's pick of Senator Biden will help him in the election?

My, how times have changed.

Hillary, whose candidacy rationale was once that she should be the nominee simply because it was inevitable is now clinging to the promise of internal polling in Pennsylvania and the whims of shaky superdelegates for a longshot at delivering the prize she had counted on in the halcyon days of early 2007.

Once she was evitable, so to speak, she had no back-up, no secondary rationale. In the months since inevitability fell apart, Hillary has flailed for a new central message. She's been "tested," "vetted," "ready from Day One," and who could forget that she's a "fighter" who's been up against the "noise machine" during her "35 years of public service?"

For Obama, the rationale has been that he is a uniter, a new kind of politician, a post-racial advanced breed of public servant fit only for uplift and unfit for mudfights. But, as the Jeremiah Wright dust-up and his small-town voter remarks have begun to reveal an arrogance behind his honor, to hint at a shyster behind the smile, does Obama have a secondary rationale to offer?

Now that the race has become a mudfight, and he may have to get his hands dirty to win, hasn't he gotten himself into a situation where standard campaign-trail toughness undercuts the very rationale for his candidacy? Slamming Hillary on every stop of a whistle-stop campaign isn't new politics.

Despite his protestations that he's not running "to play the game better, but to stop the game-playing," it's standard fare, very, very old politics, and the voters of Pennsylvania and media alike are noticing.

On a train tour of Pennsylvania this week, Obama took a tougher tone with Hillary, and not everyone appreciated it: http://www.observer.com/2008/obama-gets-nasty

One woman in the crowd, Lisa Barsky, 55, a psychologist from nearby Bala Cynwyd described herself as a "shifter" who had moved her support from Clinton to Obama because she considered him a greater unifying force. Still, she was a little put off by his attacks.

"I wish he wouldn't," she said. "He can be strong. But you don't have to get down to somebody's level -- you don't have to get into the fistfight."...

"A couple of times I said to myself, 'That's not true,'" Jill Carney, 51, an undecided Democrat and college teacher from Lancaster, said of Obama's comments about Clinton and her policies. Asked what effect his more pointed comments had, she responded, "It makes me go the other way."

Continued...

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Mary Katharine Ham is a contributor to Townhall Magazine.

Be the first to read Mary Katharine Ham's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

Subject: Relevancy
Whether Obama's getting in the mud undercuts the rationale to his candidacy is irrelevant. Any reasonable conservative should be cheering Obama on because the best time to prevent the Clintons from doing their end run around the Constitution is now. I even contributed to Obama's campaign the morning after the PA primary. That doesn't mean I will vote for him in November.

Oborta
My litmus test in any candidate is always abortion-on-demand. I'll listen if they can pass that. Everything else about a candidate becomes frivolous and does'nt register with me if he/she can satisfy that.

If you don't support the Human Right of Right to Life, and cannot demonstrate a willingness to fight for fundamental human life upon conception, then you have no principles, morals or ethics, and I don't care if you're running for President or the Local City Council, you have no business what-so-ever holding ANY position of authority in this country over ANYONE!

How can people vote for a party who's platform says, We will rule over you people if you elect us... while we support the slaughter of your posterity to the tune of 1 million annually and 64 million since 1973?? And they want to point at guns as the problem. They make Hitler and Stalin look like Dahmer and Bundy.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State: