Friday, July 27, 2007

Obama's been defined

Obama's weakness is that he just doesn't have the experience that most candidates have when running for President. That has always been both his Achilles' heel and a real strength, depending on what type of voter you ask. Those seeking a strong hand for stormy waters want a captain with a lot of experience. Those wanting a complete change of course are drawn to the new and fresh candidate.

Clinton was able, with a phrase, to define Obama. She said he was "naive on foreign policy." And since Obama has done a poor job of defining himself, that struck home with voters and suddenly Obama found himself on the defensive for his new approach to foreign policy, when that is exactly what the electorate seems to want. In my opinion he made two mistakes with his "rebuttal" when he declared that Clinton was Bush-Cheney light. The first is that it is virtually everyone knows that is ridiculous to the point of absurd. The second is that Obama pledged to run a new kind of campaign and negative attacks on another candidate are not "new" and may turn off the high level of grassroots support he has garnered from people that are growing cynical about politics.

Not content to let Obama just fumble his response, the Clinton's campaign has gone on the offensive making Obama defend the likes of "that Holocaust denier Ahmadinejad" - Watch the video - and tell if you don't see Obama playing defense.

Edwards is already the phoney-rich guy and now Obama is the wide-eyed newbie. Perception is reality and those aren't good perceptions for either candidate.

On a side note: My candidate had the best answer, "But I'm not just going to say, 'Yeah, I'll meet with you - for what? For coffee?' No, you have to have hard-nosed negotations."