A surprising admission from Barack Obama on why he will not run for president again if he loses this go round. A conversation he had with his wife, Michelle:
“And she said, you know, eight years from now we will have lost a little bit of touch with regular ordinary families . We will still be good people, hopefully. But we will be in a different orbit, a different circle….We’re already there. But we still remember what that was like.
“And I thought that that was a wonderful insight,” he concluded. “We still remember what it’s like to be normal. And I think that’s part of what happens when you’re in Washington for a very long time. You lose touch with that. And then it becomes harder to relinquish power. Because you think that your worth is high up or there’s this title or chauffeur or people open doors for you.”
While I appreciate the honesty, this actually reduces the respect I had for the man. If he doesn’t get the nomination, or if he gets it and loses, then he’s just given everyone the sound bite they need to ensure he doesn’t have a chance at remaining a Senator. I know he’s just being honest, but for a person to say he knows he’ll lose touch with his constituents is politically stupid. I know I wouldn’t vote for a person who makes such an admission. I wouldn’t be surprised if this gets played out in a Clinton ad.
Wilfred
Huh? If cynical, two-faced, back-stabbing political opportunism deserved respect we would end the nonsense of a campaign and just hand the nominations to Ghouliani and Clinton and get what we deserve.
Things like this make me more committed to voting for Obama.
Splitting Image
I don’t see it as a bad thing. Other Senators have said things like “two terms for me and that’s it”, and held themselves to it.
There are probably people who have served for longer without losing their “common touch”, but I don’t know if people like Edward Kennedy, Robert Byrd, Strom Thurmond, or Orrin Hatch are good examples of it.
On the other hand, some of the classiest people in the government seem to be the ones who have made the decision to get out. Chuck Hagel and Chris Dodd, to name two. Obama seems to think that the longer you’re there, the harder it is to make that decision, and he’s probably right.
myiq2xu
Being a U.S. Senator is a full-time job, especially when you consider the amount of time spent fundraising, which under our current system is not an option if you plan to seek reelection. I would guess that it requires far more than 40 hours a week, at least if you take your job seriously.
Running for President is also a full-time job, and it starts at least 2 years before the general election if you are one of the “unknown” candidates. Being President will occupy all your waking hours, and take away some of the hours you should be asleep.
During that time, you don’t get to be a real person, let alone do more than shake hands with one. Remember how they made fun of Poppy Bush when he saw a supermarket scanner for the first time (years after they were in widespread use?) It was used as an example of how he was “out of touch” with regular people. It really wasn’t his fault, he had spend the previous 14 years running for President, being Vice-President and being President.
Gee, what a lame-ass pussy that Obama is, not wanting to spend the more than one decade of his life like that.
Robert Johnston
Eh, just another example of puffy rhetorical feel-good kumbayah nonsense from the Obama campaign that utterly avoids discussion of actual policy. “Look at me! I’m bipartisan splendor! I’m not a politician at heart. I’m just like you! I’m good enough, I’m smart enough, and doggone it, people like me!”
I really can’t trust any candidate running the Stuart Smalley campaign. Which is a little funny, because I really like Franken for Minnesota Senator.
myiq2xu
This is an example of the CW of the Nattering Nabobs of Negativism.
No Democrat is ever genuine, it’s all an act.
MAX HATS
A post so devoid of credential, substance or meaningful commentary I’m beginning to wonder how long before Michael D is given his very own cable news program.
Michael D.
While I wouldn’t be as harsh on myself as Max, after going to bed, waking up, and re-reading this post, I have to admit it’s pretty lame.
Jake
If being honest is politically stupid then we must assume being dishonest is politically smart. Therefore we must laugh very hard at people who say “I like Candidate X” because he says he’ll do Y.
By the way, I followed the link and read the entire op-ed and found this quote from Ms. Obama:
Hmmm. What’s a common complain about the Dems? Too … something.
Look, if you don’t want to vote for the man that’s fine. But coming up with half-assed reasons just makes you look stupid.
But honest.
myiq2xu
Whenever a Democrat runs for office they should be read their rights:
You do NOT have the right to remain silent. Anything you say or do will be twisted around and used against you.
Everything you say and do will be too much, too little, too soon, too late and/or fake.
You will not be permitted to “control the message” or “frame the narrative,” nor will you be allowed to discuss substantive issues. You will instead be forced to address more important issues like your hair, voice, clothing, and recreational activities.
You are presumed guilty of being a liberal until proven to be a moderate. You can only be proven to be a moderate by full capitulation to and agreement with the farthest right-wing members of the GOP (and maybe not then either.)
With these rights in mind, do you still want to run for office you godless dirty fucking hippie scum?
The Grandest Panjandrum
I hope a video appears of this particular “event” shows up on Youtube. Words on a page can be very misleading if not quoted verbatim or the characterization is inaccurate. Ask Fred Thompson.
RSA
If Giuliani’s campaign can survive his estimate that milk currently goes for $1.50 a gallon, Obama can weather this very serious misstep as well.
Jake
Nuh-uh. See myiq2xu’s rights for Democratic candidates. The only thing she (?) left out is the following:
Anything your campaign aides, friends, relatives, neighbors, current or former employer/es, kindergarten classmates, in fact anyone you’ve ever spoken to in your entire life, say or do will be used to prove you are the sewer scrapings.
If your campaign aides, friends, relatives, neighbors, etc are all so good and kind they make Mother Teresa look like a $5 whore with a crush fetish, we’ll make something up.
Downpuppy
Oddly enough, Kennedy is an excellent example of maintaining touch. For 40 some years he’s spent vast amounts of time at crappy tables in parish halls & suchlike, talking to old ladies having problems with their Social Security checks or pensions. It’s the old Tip O’Neill style, & how Massachusetts became a one party state.
You don’t see it on the national news, but if you turn on city cable or know your aldermans family, you realize that keeping in touch has been drilled into all of these guys from their first run.
Watching Deval Patrick get the lesson has been quite diverting.
The Other Steve
BREAKING NEWS!
Michael D won’t vote for a politician who is honest.
The Other Steve
Oh, see you are just too stupid to appreciate Giuliani’s brilliant insight.
Class III milk is trading at around $19 a CWT. There are around 12 gallons of milk in a hundredweight. So that works out to be about $1.58/gallon
So you see, Giuliani wasn’t giving you a number based on what the stores sell it for, but it was based upon the real commodity price of milk given to the producer. He’s thinking 12 steps ahead of your question.
He’s obviously way to advanced of an intellect to be our president. They should make him CEO of General Motors or something.
ThymeZone
I give Obama props for the remark. He’s exposed a profound reality of national politics.
Maybe we can take another pass at the idea of term limits? I personally think that term limits are a necessary antidote to Status Quo politics and Big Money politics.
With term limits, more seats in congress would be in play in each election cycle, and I don’t the money people would nearly as able to manipulate the process under those conditions.
As for the comment at the top of this thread?
All I can say is, Michael D? You aren’t good enough to do spoof. Your comments have now descended into farce. You are headed for being the laughingstock of the blog.
Just my opinion, have a nice day.
LiberalTarian
If Obama thinks he is in a rarified atmosphere now, what does he think will happen when he is president? If he really wants to have policy that will work for “normal” people, he’ll need some progressive bulldogs in his cabinet and he’ll have to leave a lot groundwork to them.
Mr. and Mrs. Obama make my heart pound in my chest with their oratory, but voting “present” or missing important votes at all in the Senate sheds the wrong kind of light on him from my vantage. Good intentions aren’t enough–a burning passion to restore us to truth, justice and the American way is a grand possession, but unless it is back up by deeds and some leadership jujitsu that turns the attacks of the rabid right back against themselves, then it is simply a nice sentiment.
Regardless, the Democratic candidate will have my support, as will anyone non-GOP. And I agree with the Kos folks–primary season is the time to duke it out.
ThymeZone
Maybe, but the Bush era proves that bad intentions aren’t enough, either.
TheFountainHead
While I admit this probably gives his opponents some fodder of some kind since many Americans will misinterpret this or be willfully ignorant of what is really being said here, I personally think it’s one of the more honest things said on the trail this year. If we can all agree that being in power removes one from the perspective of one not in power, over time, then how can anyone, particularly all of us not in power, criticize this remark. I was going to vote for Obama anyway, but to my mind this is another reason to, not a reason not to.
Ted
But it’s true for the whole lot of them. What you’re saying, idiotically, is that you wouldn’t vote for someone who admits it. Instead, you’d pick the candidate who denies it, and every 6 years stages barbecues and photo-ops to maintain the illusion.
Robert Johnston
This is just silly. Obama is, of course, already out of touch, whatever politicians use that to mean. He’s not the common man; he’s the insider elite. The common man, whoever he is, does not edit at the Harvard Law Review and hang out with Oprah.
There’s nothing wrong with being insider elite, or at least nothing we can do to prevent most reasonable candidates for President from being that way. Obama’s lying about it by proxy, however, in a ridiculous effort to set himself apart from the Democratic field, is wrong. Obama’s implicit claim not to be currently out of touch is fluffy piffle that wouldn’t really matter if it were true but is, in fact, false.
Jinchi
The only part I found interesting was
This implies that not only are the Obamas convinced that a Democrat will win in 2008, but that Barack will support that president’s reelection in 2012.
ThymeZone
If I’d lived in a box all my life, and only knew the world through the media, I might believe this to be true.
But I haven’t and it isn’t.
I lived in the same house with a person who was definitely what you would call “insider elite” who could, and did, sit down with the commonest of the common and was one of them when he was with them. Worked as a roofer to put himself through school. Taught me how to put on a roof. Also led and played accompaniment for the Back and Madrigal Society.
People are not their activities, or their surroundings. They are what they are inside. The idea that a person can’t edit at Harvard and be of that context when in that context, and then be with “common” people and be with them when with them … in other words, be both … is just bullshit. It degrades both ideas, elite and common.
You have no idea what the fuck you are talking about.
You apparently think that “common” means not educated, or not rich, or not powerful. Or something.
ThymeZone
“Bach and Madrigal,” for you common people.
Ted
Your self-fluffery knows no bounds.
TheFountainHead
I agree with this and will go one further. You do not get to have the kind of Charisma and likability that Obama has by existing in an “insider elite” bubble. You have to have spent some time among all types of people of all walks of life to have a personality that well rounded. You can not relate to what you don’t know, and I think Obama has certainly proven that people of all types relate to him on many levels.
ThymeZone
Go fuck yourself.
Jorge
We are watching a candidate who isn’t willing to compromise himself to be POTUS. From what I’ve seen and read, Obama isn’t just interested in being POTUS, but in being a certain kind of POTUS.
While Obama has missed some votes, he also doesn’t have to triangulate and parse away some of the most important votes on his state and legislative career. Edwards and Hillary are currently running against two major policies they voted for – No Child Left Behind and the Iraq War Resolution.
From what I’ve read here and in other blogs, Obamas weaknesses are: he hopes, he isn’t antagonistic, he stays positive, he is optimistic about America, he worries about losing touch with rank and file America, he wants to be a President of all Americans, not just Democrats.
Oh, and spending 4 years getting people jobs and starting after school programs, being editor of the Harvard Law review, 4 years as a civil rights attorney, 4 years as a constitutional law professor, 8 years as a state Senator and 2 years as a US Senator isn’t the kind of experience we want for someone to be POTUS. But in a few minutes some liberal will post about the plight of the inner city, our erroding civil liberties and the lack of compassion of our politicians.
Robert Johnston
Manifestly false, and unrelated to what Villagers mean by “out-of-touch”–if they mean anything by it at all–in any event.
People can certainly relate to things they don’t directly experience. That’s called empathy. People can also certainly appear to relate to things without regard to whether they really do. That’s called charisma. And politicians who focus on talking about how well they relate to people rather than propounding policies to actually help people lack the former even if they have the latter.
Politicians don’t need to relate; they need to do. If the electorate isn’t capable of judging candidates by what they say they’ll do rather than how they say they’ll feel, then democracy is just a lost cause. Give democracy a chance.
ThymeZone
That is, so far, apparently true.
I’m not totally convinced that this fact (if it is fact) is enough to either qualify him, or to overcome his weaknesses (let’s say, for the sake of discussion, that he is not that strong on foreign policy, for example. I’m not saying that he is, only that he can be argued to be. I’m not saying that I care, either, whether he is or not).
This thread might be more fun if we all revealed who we voted for in the poll this weekend. I voted for Bill Richardson. All in all, in terms of personality, experience, and attitude, I find him the most palatable. Not necessarily electable, but palatable to me. He’s a liberal Democrat, he seems to have a containable ego, a rational and balanced view of the world, and not a lot of that politician thing, or at least not so much that I can’t stand it. He isn’t about being rich, or powerful, or sanctimonious, or faux tough. I just like him.
ThymeZone
I generally agree with that, but I don’t see how it jives with what you said about Obama upstream.
Your assertion that he “lied” aboaut his in-or-out-of-touchness is just made up, isn’t it? Where would you get something like that?
Jake
Yeah. ‘Cos Barak is the product of a special breeding program at Harvard’s SoL. Both of his parents once worked HLR and he was raised in a creche with children who’s parents once worked HLR and when the kids turned 12 their tutors gave them iron bound copies of Black’s Law Dictionary, put them in a cage and Barak was the only survivor.
Then Oprah adopted him.
Cain
I voted for Kucinich but Dodd would fit right in as well. I guess I felt that we needed a non-mainstream candidate who understood that we need to fix things and would blow the colletive heads of the press and washington insiders. I understand there are issues with corruption but not enough for me to change my mind. Any allegations of corruption would pale against what most of the Republicans have done. It must have been written in their contract with America.
Nothing would please me more than to see the 4th estate be proven wrong completely and watch them scramble to re-adjust. Especially the fucking washington press corp who seem to have their heads up their collective asses when it comes to reporting things.
cain
Tevian
This country is so messed up we can’t appreciate a truth spoken in public that resembles what plenty of people have been saying around their kitchen table all this time?
Well anyway I am not sure the issue here is whether politicians can stay in touch with (or even just empathize with) the lives and concerns of their constituents after they’ve been in DC for awhile.
The real issue is this: when are we going to stop allowing campaigns to devolve into meaningless parades of scripted television soundbites and scripted stump speeches, running up to a vote the results of which do not have a whole lot to do with subsequent governance???
Picking a president is becoming the least of our problems. We need to pick a Congress that will say no to megabiz lobbyists. For the first time in my life I am not very interested in the Presidential campaigns.
I will cast a vote for President but I am entirely focused on what Congressional candidates will have to say when they’re asked some tough questions as the fall elections draw near. This is not a kingdom with a king and a collection of princes running the place. It’s a representative democracy and it’s time for the Congress to remember who pays their salaries and stop thinking about who buys their fancy dinners.
LiberalTarian
I voted for Edwards. I would, however, be overjoyed with an Edwards/Obama ticket. Should anyone be curious (lol, yeah, I know, you aren’t), I am thrilled to death these are the folks on our side seeking to be the highest-profile public servant in the world.
My preference of Edwards over Obama is sheer gut feeling. Granted, two lousy husbands does not speak well for my gut feeling, but as accomplished as Obama is, and even though I love his serious face, I want ass kicking in DC next cycle, and I think Edwards will kick some serious ass and take names.
Sigh. I wish I hadn’t equated my gut instinct with two bad marriages. Kinda feel like George Castanza. But, my ass is covered after the primary regardless of the candidate, cuz I think they are all decent. I wish we would debate the substance of their policy proposals and the proof of their ability rather than trying to suss out their truthiness.
TheFountainHead
And no leader can “do” without the mandate of the people and no leader gets such a mandate without relating to those he/she wishes to lead. Show me a leader of a Democracy who accomplished things, and I’ll show you a leader who was charismatic first.
Buck B.
Give me a break. Speaking as a resident of Illinois, Obama will remain our Senator as long as he wants the job.
Leo
Isn’t this just an obvious dig at Clinton? Basically, what he’s saying is that Clinton is disqualified because she has been in Washington too long and doesn’t understand “what it’s like to be normal.”