Obama’s flip strategy*

Looks like you're new here. Get all the fun of 52 Novels as it happens and subscribe by e-mail or subscribe using your favorite RSS feed reader. Might as well. Don't cost nothin.

Yesterday we learned that Barack Obama’s softened his position on Iraq, a move he said would be dependent on the outcome of his upcoming trip to the Middle East. To me it sounds reasonable enough. Coming home can’t possibly be as simple as packing up the toys and leaving.

But Republicans were quick to criticize:

There appears to be no issue that Barack Obama is not willing to reverse himself on for the sake of political expedience,” said Alex Conant, a spokesman for the national Republican Party. “Obama’s Iraq problem undermines the central premise of his candidacy and shows him to be a typical politician.”

Aside from the fact that the GOP’s got zero room to talk, there’re two things I notice about Obama’s move to the middle:

1. He’s been more up front with “we the people” when his position evolves (to paraphrase the McCain campaign), unlike Grandpa Bonkers who just denies he ever said what he said despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

   To be honest, I expect a presidential candidate — okay, every candidate — to change positions on stuff over time for, you know, “political expediency.”

   I get it. And like steroids in professional sports, I may not be entirely comfortable with it, but I understand it’s part of the game.

   What I’ve got a much larger problem with is exactly what Senator McCain’s been doing… just click those links above to see and read what I mean. Yeah, straight talk.

   Obama, on the other hand, is considerably more forthright. Is the campaign completely transparent? Of course not. Is the candidate perfect? Hardly.

   After nearly eight years of Obfuscation Nation, I do find it refreshing that Obama’s demonstrated an ability to say, “You know what, I may have to rethink this. I’ll see how it shakes out when I know more.”

   And before anyone goes on about decisive leadership just let me say there’s decisive leadership and then there’s fuck ’em… I’ll do what I want leadership.

   I know the difference and I’d bet serious money that most everyone else does, too.

2. It’s my sense that the things Obama’s coming to the middle on — reaching out to evangelicals, FISA, now the Iraq war — does more damage to the Republicans than they’d ever publicly admit. Beyond the obvious — that they can’t paint Obama as “the most liberal senator” — the GOPers are forced to shriek at him over the things they’d agree with if he were one of their own.

   When I think about it, all I can do is laugh because, in my head, it sounds like the old switcheroo argument:

   GOP: You’re a whackadoo lib who’s out of touch with the mainstream.
   DEM: No I’m not.
   GOP: Yes you are.
   DEM: No I’m not.
   GOP: Yes you are.
   DEM: No I’m not.
   GOP: Yes you are.
   DEM: Yes I am.
   GOP: No you’re not.
   DEM: So we agree.
   GOP: Gaaahhh!

   Of course, it doesn’t play out exactly like that, but the point above remains: I think Obama’s doing a much better job of reaching across to the right-of-center (i.e. Unaffiliateds and workaday conservatives, as well as pissed off Repubs) than McCain’s doing at reaching, well, just about anyone.

This is what I think… but I reserve the right to evolve.

*Now with 100 percent less “flop.”

Tags: Barack Obama, Iraq War, John McCain

Tagged as: Barack Obama, Iraq War, John McCain