How Damaging Will Reverend Wright Be in the General Election?
Let's assume for the moment that Barack Obama wins the Democratic nomination. The question on a lot of people's minds right now, especially the superdelegates who will end up settling the nomination fight, is how damaging Obama's association with Reverend Wright will be for him in the general election. For a number of reasons, which I'll explain, I don't think Wright will prove to be as much of a liability to Obama in the general election as many people seem to think he will.
1) November is still eight months away. That means there's a lot of time for this story to become old news, to become stale. At some point, probably pretty soon, reporters will become completely sick of this story and won't want to talk about it anymore.
2) Part of the reason this story has so much resonance right now is that many voters don't yet know Obama very well. Guilt by association always works best when you don't yet have a fully formed impression of the person being smeared. By November, most voters will know Obama pretty well. They'll have seen him give numerous speeches, including his convention speech. They'll have seen him in debates with John McCain. And as they get to know Obama better, most will see that he is absolutely nothing like the pastor they've seen in youtube clips or 527 commercials saying controversial things.
3) Part of what is fanning the Wright controversy now is the fact that a primary race is still going on. This allows critics and commentators to frame their concerns in terms of how other people might react to this in a hypothetical general election. In other words, the topic of discussion now is whether Obama's association with Wright would scare away white voters (and if so, whether Democrats should nominate Clinton instead). It's a safe predictive discussion about how other people might react. But once Obama becomes the nominee, that issue is moot. Then the discussion becomes whether white people should be scared away from Obama because of his association with Wright. That's a normative discussion that very few reporters and commentators will want to wade in to. And while I have no doubt that a few 527 groups will try to attack Obama on this issue, I don't think the McCain campaign is going to want to go anywhere near it. It will look like a direct appeal to people's prejudices and it won't play well in the media.
4) Because everyone in the media (left, right, and maintream) has been talking about the Wright controversy over the last two weeks, it has provided political cover for members of the right wing media (talk radio hosts, bloggers, pundits, etc.) to say a lot of ugly, racially-tinged things. In other words, because everyone is talking about this, a lot of what is being said is flying under the radar and not really being subjected to any scrutiny. That won't last. If Obama becomes the nominee, no one on the left is going to be talking about this issue anymore, and certainly not in a way that is at all critical of Obama. And, as I've already noted, the mainstream media is already getting tired of this issue. As time goes on, if right wing pundits and talking heads are still obsessively talking about Reverend Wright, it's going to look increasingly racist. When the white noise dies down, the things that people like Rush Limbaugh are saying will stand out more and will look more and more like a conscious attempt to stoke people's prejudices. Without the political cover provided by the heated Democratic primary race, that will become more and more of a liability for McCain. The press will not allow him to run a racialized campaign, even if all the dirty work is being done by surrogates. He'll have to rein those people in or risk paying a political price.
All in all, I think the Wright controversy is more of a problem for Obama now, in the midst of a primary race, where Democrats are trying to anticipate what strategy the Republicans will use against their nominee in the general election. That doesn't mean this won't hurt Obama in the general election. It probably will to some degree. But I think it will be much harder for the McCain campaign to use this issue against Obama in a general election than most Republicans (and many Clinton supporters) seem to think.
1) November is still eight months away. That means there's a lot of time for this story to become old news, to become stale. At some point, probably pretty soon, reporters will become completely sick of this story and won't want to talk about it anymore.
2) Part of the reason this story has so much resonance right now is that many voters don't yet know Obama very well. Guilt by association always works best when you don't yet have a fully formed impression of the person being smeared. By November, most voters will know Obama pretty well. They'll have seen him give numerous speeches, including his convention speech. They'll have seen him in debates with John McCain. And as they get to know Obama better, most will see that he is absolutely nothing like the pastor they've seen in youtube clips or 527 commercials saying controversial things.
3) Part of what is fanning the Wright controversy now is the fact that a primary race is still going on. This allows critics and commentators to frame their concerns in terms of how other people might react to this in a hypothetical general election. In other words, the topic of discussion now is whether Obama's association with Wright would scare away white voters (and if so, whether Democrats should nominate Clinton instead). It's a safe predictive discussion about how other people might react. But once Obama becomes the nominee, that issue is moot. Then the discussion becomes whether white people should be scared away from Obama because of his association with Wright. That's a normative discussion that very few reporters and commentators will want to wade in to. And while I have no doubt that a few 527 groups will try to attack Obama on this issue, I don't think the McCain campaign is going to want to go anywhere near it. It will look like a direct appeal to people's prejudices and it won't play well in the media.
4) Because everyone in the media (left, right, and maintream) has been talking about the Wright controversy over the last two weeks, it has provided political cover for members of the right wing media (talk radio hosts, bloggers, pundits, etc.) to say a lot of ugly, racially-tinged things. In other words, because everyone is talking about this, a lot of what is being said is flying under the radar and not really being subjected to any scrutiny. That won't last. If Obama becomes the nominee, no one on the left is going to be talking about this issue anymore, and certainly not in a way that is at all critical of Obama. And, as I've already noted, the mainstream media is already getting tired of this issue. As time goes on, if right wing pundits and talking heads are still obsessively talking about Reverend Wright, it's going to look increasingly racist. When the white noise dies down, the things that people like Rush Limbaugh are saying will stand out more and will look more and more like a conscious attempt to stoke people's prejudices. Without the political cover provided by the heated Democratic primary race, that will become more and more of a liability for McCain. The press will not allow him to run a racialized campaign, even if all the dirty work is being done by surrogates. He'll have to rein those people in or risk paying a political price.
All in all, I think the Wright controversy is more of a problem for Obama now, in the midst of a primary race, where Democrats are trying to anticipate what strategy the Republicans will use against their nominee in the general election. That doesn't mean this won't hurt Obama in the general election. It probably will to some degree. But I think it will be much harder for the McCain campaign to use this issue against Obama in a general election than most Republicans (and many Clinton supporters) seem to think.
posted by A.L. at 1:00 PM
27 Comments:
I got it. As long as Democrats are disgusted with Obama's racism it gives the evil right wingers cover to bring it up too. After the nominee is chosen, unhappy Democrats will be expected to shut up so Obama can just blame the right wing for racism.
Brilliant!
When I was about 35 yrs old, (I’m now 66) my long standing minister was being transferred to a new church in another state. I half jokingly told him I might have to change churches when he left as I really liked him and considered him to be a friend. He told me that one’s involvement in a church is about the people in it, the work and love they promote in the community and NOT about the minister. Having heard some of Wright’s OTHER sermons, they could have been given by any number of everyday ministers in any town USA that hosts multi-cultural congregations.
My grandfather was a racist against Jews, my dad against Blacks or “coloreds”as he called them. One of my sons calls Middle Easterners “ragheads”. Do these long term relationships with these people I love prevent my involvement in the public discourse? No, I actually think it makes me a better contributor as I can see the dangers and havoc produced by such racism. It certainly did not make me a racist.I have yet to hear a racist statement from Obama himself who would be the one on the ballot, not his minister or adviser.
I got it. As long as Democrats are disgusted with Obama's racism it gives the evil right wingers cover to bring it up too.
"Obama's racism"??? I think even in the fever swamp the allegation is that Obama's pastor said some racist things, not Obama himself.
At any rate, that was definitely not my point. My point was that when everyone is talking about Wright, the things right-wingers are saying about it gets less scrutiny. But if five months from now the only people still talking about this are angry right wing talk show hosts and 527 groups (which seems likely), it's going to look a lot more like an intentional race-baiting strategy, and that won't play very well. It might hurt McCain more than it helps him.
When Bill Clinton ran in 1992, I didn't think that the country would elect a commander in chief who had evaded military service during Vietnam. Having been proved wrong (4 times in a row), I won't venture any predictions as to how the Wright controversy will ultimately impact Obama. But if in the next 10 primaries Clinton significantly outperforms expectations, particularly among white and Latino voters, the superdelegates may start to get cold feet. So I don't think this is quite over yet.
Guilt by association always works best when you don't yet have a fully formed impression of the person being smeared.
"Guilt"? How about an utter failure of leadership? The guy who wants to have a national conversation about race hasn't moved his minister off of Square One in twenty years of not trying. And come November we will still know Obama is a great talker who never attempted to lead on these issues.
For example - United Trinity has a US senator sitting in the pews (and dozing off selectively, I guess). Why not ask him to get to the bottom of the AIDS conspiracy? Why didn't he volunteer to do so?
How are we going to have racial reconciliation when thirty percent of blacks think their own government invented AIDS to kill them? And why hasn't Obama confronted this? OK, other than the obvious reason that it was not politically expedient.
If Obama becomes the nominee, no one on the left is going to be talking about this issue anymore, and certainly not in a way that is at all critical of Obama. And, as I've already noted, the mainstream media is already getting tired of this issue.
Obviously - the whole issue will morph into "Vote for Obama or you're a racist" and no voter with actual concerns about this will express them or expect anyone in the media to do so.
Instead it will live on in blogs and talk radio and plenty of white folks will quietly vote for McCain without saying why.
This will work about as well as the media blackout on the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, which the responsible, respectable media ducked for weeks.
Tom Maguire
But if in the next 10 primaries Clinton significantly outperforms expectations, particularly among white and Latino voters, the superdelegates may start to get cold feet. So I don't think this is quite over yet.
I don't know whether this will do Obama long-term harm or not. But I do believe that if it becomes apparent that he cannot recover, he should be more statesmanlike than Hillary and withdraw to avoid Democratic bloodletting. But I do hope that he recovers.
I don't understand how George Allen's senatorial bid was torpedoed by the word "Macaca" and O'Bama gets a free pass when he has supported someone who, but for his church-related status, would be guity of treason and sedition.
I don't know how representative I am (not very, I suspect) but the Wright issue, Obama's speech & his interview on Newshour convinced me to switch my longstanding, rock-solid support for Clinton to Obama. While there's not much between them policy-wise, I'd long been sceptical of how Obama would respond to the kind of concerted attack to which Clinton has long been subjected/ successfully withstood & which would get much worse should Obama become the nominee. In boxing terms, I knew Clinton could take a fierce undercut & return with a mighty left hook, but I suspected Obama had a glass jaw. I liked both candidates as much as I disliked both of their campaigns/ tactics/ most fervent supporters. I thought, and think, either would make a great President. So what it came down to for me was my perception of their ability to survive & counter the inevitable tsunami of negativity that either Democratic candidate would face. Even as the delegate math became more unlikely for Clinton, my scepticism about his unpreparedness for truly vicious negativity wasn't lessened by his(or his campaign's) response to the relatively standard barbs of the Clinton camp.
But with the Wright issue Obama suddenly found himself in exactly the sort of full-scale, round-the-clock-cable-controversy he'll have to endure as a candidate. To my genuine astonishment & delight, he not only addressed the issue head-on, he did so with such grace, eloquence, honesty, maturity and intelligence that, for me, he managed to turn the worst (albeit, largely confected) episode of his political life into arguably his finest hour. Up until this last week I have to admit I'd found Obama's much lauded rhetoric oddly unmoving & maddeningly vague. I didn't doubt his enormous intelligence, I just wasn't hearing it in that repetitive stump speech or his often tentative debate performances. The Wright issue has changed all that. It enabled me to see Obama's utter uniqueness & electability as a politician, candidate & hopefully President.
So, yeah A.L., probably this whole Wright issue will eventually become as inconsequential as it should always have been. But for this longstanding Obama-sceptic it's had a hugely positive effect in my perception of him as a candidate I can not only accept, but passionately support.
Anyone like McCain who persists in reducing complicated issues like the war in Iraq should make the electorate embrace Obama's handling of the complicated subject of race as perennial American fault line.
So important has this issue been that the overwhelming silence on this issue from McCain and "compassionate republicans" (like Sen. Kyl who says we should blame the victims of foreclosure) says so much more about how status-quo a McCain presidency would be.
While not perfect Obama has fallen into the trap of having to justify his racial perspectives when we do not see the same test applied to Clinton and McCain. Obama should not have to defend his preachers opinions as his own. they are not and he made this as clear as possible. Those who persist in perpetuating this connection continue to make religion more important than it should be in a country that in its constitution separates church and state.
I think with enough time Obama has shown the audacity to rise above mud-slinging politics from every side to see the massive challenges we as a country need to face. This is crucial because instead of being incredibly inept and condescending we need someone who can lead and exemplify the best we have to offer. Clinton has this skill too but in this current stage her staff has been much louder about racial issues than her. That is not acceptable to me.
The more Senator Obama talks, the more I don't trust him. I can't blame him for his pastor's remarks, but I do blame him for sitting idle and not saying anything in public until things hit the fan.
A leader leads and not just when it's convenient.
I'm a diehard democrat and I always vote, but I don't believe I can vote for him if he's the nominee. I'm one of those liberals on the left and I'm very concerned.
Don't assume that everyone is going to back Senator Obama if he's the nominee as I don't believe that will be the case across on the board on either side.
I support Obama, but unfortunately I think his candidacy has already been damaged by Wright in a way that will affect the general election. If people had gotten to know Obama before this scandal had emerged, they would have a context that would give them reason to reject the negative information (unless, of course, they weren't that wild about him in the first place). As it stands, a lot of people simply aren't going to give Obama a chance now, and their negative impression will color all the news they hear from now until November.
I agree that Rev. Wright may fade from headlines with time, but I'm sure he'll be resurrected again come general election time. No matter what his political success may eventually turn out to be, I'm afraid Obama has now become the 'black' candidate, exactly what he didn't want to be.
He may simply be a man ahead of the times. Americans don't appear to be ready to either confront its past or to learn from it to forge a better future. We deal with notions like patriotism on a very shallow level, and we like our history homogenized and simplistic. It's our loss to do so.
-Vecene-
Certainly one of the best takes on this came from Hilzoy over at Obsidian Wings. There is a history to Wright's words that must be revisited before words like treason are tossed about. Truly, excellent reading.
http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2008/03/the-past.html#more
I just love the irony of these anonymous posters declaiming about how Obama should have "confronted" the beliefs of his fellows in the UCC and his pastor.
Hey, you brave souls, how about showing your courage enough to get a nom-de-plume? Also, tell us of your brave confrontation of your pastor, and how you convinced them of --- well, of anything.
I haven't been to church in a very long time, but I can tell you I sat through some really antagonistic sermons, castigating the congregation for all kinds of things, and (this is one reason I haven't been back) I never saw any evidence of two things:
1. That the pastor's words had any real effect on the congregation's collective actions, whether it was in aid of donations to the organ fund or the level of alcohol consumption, and
2. Anybody getting up, even in private, to take the pastor to task for something he said.
You can either be a member of a church and get along with the congregation, or you can pull a Martin Luther -- but in that case, history indicates that you aren't going to be a member of the church for long.
-
Things take a slightly different perspective when viewed in the right context.
Whether one agrees with Reverend Wright or not, it seems to me that he has been unfairly demonized to make a media controversy.
Watch Rev. Jeremiah Wright's 9-11 sermon in context on youtube and decide.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOdlnzkeoyQ
Jeremiah Wright's God Damn America in context on youtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvMbeVQj6Lw
I've listened to the entire 2 sermons (30-40 minutes long)
After listening to them, it's clear to me that Wright is NOT racist, anti-American nor a preacher of hate.
Listen for yourseves and you decide.
Confusing God & Government (GD America)
http://odeo.com/audio/17890793/view
The Day of Jerusalem’s Fall (9/11)
http://odeo.com/audio/17889043/view
I believe, after the dust settles, Obama will be vindicated for making a stand to not "throw Wright under the bus".
A.L., Wright will certainly be old news in a couple more weeks, but you neglect the fact that he may be the gift that keeps on giving for the GOP, albeit not in straightforward negative stories about Wright himself.
First, oppo researchers are almost certainly going to be able to dredge up new little inflammatory tidbits from him and spin them in ways that Obama has to answer. It doesn't take much before a story about something Wright said (boring) becomes one about how Obama responds to something Wright said (interesting). And, of course, the stories are more and more ineresting the closer you get to the election.
Second, you're assuming that racialist or racist discourse--from either side--helps Obama because it engenders revulsion that drives more people to him. I don't think that's right. At some point, Obama has to respond to the most outrageous claims. When he does, he falls farther into a trap that makes him look more and more like a run-of-the-mill politician, and not a very experienced one at that. That's the kiss of death for him. (Well, it would be the kiss of death if McCain were to run a halfway competent campaign, which I doubt is going to happen.)
Somebody further up the thread mentioned that they trust Obama less and less. There's just so damned little paper trail on the guy that incidents like this take on disproportionate importance. The more stuff like this comes out of the woodwork, the shakier the ground he's on. L'affaire Wright won't be one heavy hit going forward; it'll be a succession of little ones. I think they'll die down for a while but they have the potential to come back strong in the Fall.
I don't see the Wright issue fading as much as you do. If Obama ends up being the nominee, he may still win in November despite Wright, but it will hurt him. He won't win as big a victory or have as long coattails as he would if Wright hadn't made those comments.
One big problem for Obama is that Wright is more than just his pastor. An early commenter made a good point that there are many other things that may tie someone to a church other than the pastor. However, Obama made Wright a member of his African American Religious Leadership Committee, a spiritual advisor to his team. That makes it a much bigger problem for Obama than it would have been otherwise.
I don't for a second think that Obama shares the views that Wright expressed in those sermons. However, he did show poor political judgment in appointing Wright to a position (even a minor one) on his campaign. That makes Wright a bigger liability to Obama than, say, Hagee is to McCain. Hagee, as despicable as he is, merely endorsed McCain. McCain didn't give him a spot on his campaign team. That is the opening that Republicans will attack in the fall.
Also, in the current environment of post-parsing, I have to point out that your statement: "Then the discussion becomes whether white people should be scared away from Obama because of his association with Wright." is poorly worded. More than "white people" may be scared away. Latinos, Asians, and some African-Americans may be scared away, too. It's not just a potential problem for white voters.
Readers of this blog may be interested in Jake Tapper's post today at ABCNews.com. He quotes a Democratic official as saying that Clinton is exercising the "Tonya Harding" option, an analogy that I saw a while ago in the comments to AL's post "Winning Ugly."
>many voters don't yet know Obama very well
This is the key to everything, IMHO. Everyone knows Hillary and McCain, and McCain's favorables are doomed to go down the more he's forced to talk about the war the economy. Those two are like incumbents who haven't broken 50%. Obama is only beginning to be known and trusted, and he comes across as extremely likable and trustworthy to most people once they get exposed to him. I was for Edwards because he looked better on paper and I never even listened to Obama, except to confirm that he wasn't, in my opinion, a speaker on the level of JFK or MLK. In February, when my support defaulted to Obama after Edwards dropped out, I started listening to whole speeches and became steadily more and more impressed with Obama to the point that I've now donated 3 times and am more excited about this that any election of my lifetime.
Beyond individual issues, most people want to have a confident, relaxed, comforting, strong, capable president and I really think Obama radiates these qualities.
What's going to happen is that Obama's staff appts, and those surrounding him are going to confirm the worst of what we think about the MEANING of Wright.
There will be more and more indisputable historical facts, and actual events which tend to show that the church he chose SUITS Obama.
The only way they can possibly counter this is to claim it's really racist to call him on all this, since what is there is the basis for the 'black church'
Baloney, but then, I am a typical white person
I'm at a loss to understand the rationale behind this obsession some people have about the Reverend Wright and his comments. That somebody that Obama knew and respected, and even had a long association with, made some comments that indicate a less-than-complete approval of this country is hardly enough, in my opinion, to justify all this hyperventilating.
It seems more likely that the reaction of some is based on a fear of Obama, as evidenced by those like Epaminondas. This fear does not seem justified by anything in Obama's past or present choices for advisors, so it's irrational, based simply on race.
I do not wish to believe that anyone is a racist, but it would seem to me that anyone possessing or stoking in others an irrational fear of another person based simply on race is either a racist or someone who seeks to exploit racial fears, and I think they should examine their emotions and motivations carefully.
I don't have a problem with the Rev Wright. Only those who come after him did become a big deal. It's chump change
jo6pac
59yr old white guy
Wishful thinking!
Those people vandalized some great American pulpit speeches & shredded one of the most genuinely moving 9-11 sermons (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4x279GNMwvY) I have ever heard. Regardless of some of Wright's wilder ideas, to know that he was an inspiration to Senator Obama gives me real hope--not the campaign-slogan type (even if BO did act the Pol & pushed the old man off the bus).
Wright speaks for himself: http://skepticalbrotha.wordpress.com/2007/03/21/obamas-pastor-speaks-out/
Very reasonable post. But can anyone tell me how this crazy coincidence happened, where the top presidential candidate just happened to be a lifelong devotee of the most wacky and strangely politicized church in the State of Illinois. This is not a normal church where people go and say prayers and sing songs. This was a televangelistic extravaganza. I am not saying this to criticize Obama, but merely to wonder how such an odd coincidence could occur.
Hydrocodone order
Vicodin order
Order Ritalin Online
Order Percocet Online
Didrex 50mg
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home