Fair or unfair, the lack of impact progressive thinkers have had on American political discourse over the past several decades has left Democratic candidates all-too-vulnerable to “gaffes” such as this.

I also don’t think it helps that liberals constantly bow to the conservative talking points and let them control the agenda that’s discussed in the media. We see this time and time again, and in this instance, both candidates are guilty of it: Hillary for shamefully pressing this issue, and Obama for standing down from these comments after feeling the pressure. It’s the same bullshit all the time… John Kerry didn’t stand up to getting swift-boated, he let the right control the agenda, and look what happened? Hell, around that time the Rathergate story also broke and the right controlled the agenda again, getting everyone to discuss the memos when I emailed the lot of them a different aspect of the story to hammer, and hardly anybody responded.

It’s all about growing a set and fighting back.

It sure will be interesting to see how Obama finesses this one. This whole process reminds me of the flap over Reverend Wright, which led to that fabulously memorable speech about race. There was some short-term grumbling about the speech, but I think the 20/20 hindsight is that he handled that one pretty well. It seems that the CV now is that something came up that could have been very embarrassing and damaging in the long run, and he instead turned it to a showcase of his ability to bring the nation together in just the way he’s promising to do as President. In that case, he managed to make quite a successful political pivot and pull out a “win” from it, right under the noses of the pundits who bloviated about how it would sink his candidacy.

AAARGH! Now I’m sounding like as big an Obama fan as Kyle!

I don’t think it necessarily has sunk his chances in PA, although Mike could probably provide a more informed analysis on how this issue may have struck the electorate. AFAIK, PA doesn’t hinge on the rural vote; PA’s Democratic base pretty much = Pittsburg and Philly. What could “sink” him is the inconvenient fact that, for whatever reason, a majority of Democratic voters in PA just might happen to *gasp* prefer Senator Clinton.

Rather than short term consequences, I’m more worried about the general, where (if Obama wins the Democratic party nomination) McCain and Obama will be jockeying for independent voters (a number of whom resembling the caricature painted by Obama) in swing states. It wasn’t so much Obama’s underlying premise that I think was ill-thought, but more the presentation and setting (putting down teh rubes for the entertainment of rich donors in liberal SF!!1111). More than anything, that, to me, was extremely tone deaf politically. If Obama had instead made these comments (or a more artful version) on the stump in, oh, say, rural PA, I would have been the first to say “right the fuck on!”

With that said, again, I don’t feel that Democratic candidates should be forced–or put themselves in the position–to display reckless courage on the stump (especially in such a hotly contested contest) without having the foundation to set the ugly truth upon. Instead, we have a political ecosystem in which the post-Reagan revolution press corps, liberal punditocracy/intelligentsia and, to varying degrees, the electorate, are still suffering from, as publius calls it, “liberal self-hatred”, quick to prove their NASCAR bonafides (while simultaneously hiding their Starbucks cups). Again, the Obama campaign should be aware of this; thankfully, instead of denouncing and rejecting his remarks, Obama has run with it, so who knows — he might just be able to (at least temporarily) turn lemons into lemonade, if nothing else through sheer force of will.

I can easily see the esteemed people of Pennsylvania saying “Damn, they make it sound like he’s out of touch, but he’s the only one who really understands how we really feel. I’m not sure who’s right or wrong on the thing about us clinging to our guns and religion, but I don’t feel like he’s talking down to us or dissing us.” The esteemed people of Pennsylvania are not stupid. They know when they’ve been pandered to and when someone has genuinely tapped into their anger and understands it.

I wish I shared your optimism regarding the awareness (or lack thereof) of the typical voter, especially those who remain undecided.

Please remember, Obama may very well know more about what he was doing, and what he should do in light of the reaction, than any of us do. He spent a lot of time as a community organizer, and the people he was organizing were not the tennis club crowd.

And John Kerry was a legitimate war hero, while Chimpy languished stateside during Vietnam. Tell me again how that worked out for the Dems in ‘04 after the Swiftboaters were done with the Senator from MA? This time ’round, Freedom’s Watch has a quarter billion dollars in its war chest ready to fund this year’s inevitable up = down 527 smear campaign.

The debate, as you all have ably pointed out, will give Obama a golden opportunity to address the issue and he’s got the chops to back himself up.

I can easily see the esteemed people of Pennsylvania saying “Damn, they make it sound like he’s out of touch, but he’s the only one who really understands how we really feel. I’m not sure who’s right or wrong on the thing about us clinging to our guns and religion, but I don’t feel like he’s talking down to us or dissing us.” The esteemed people of Pennsylvania are not stupid. They know when they’ve been pandered to and when someone has genuinely tapped into their anger and understands it.

Please remember, Obama may very well know more about what he was doing, and what he should do in light of the reaction, than any of us do. He spent a lot of time as a community organizer, and the people he was organizing were not the tennis club crowd.

Okay now, tell me how I’m wrong about this. If there’s a flaw in my argument, if what I’m proposing is really all that improbable, help me see it.

At this point, like I said in Dustin’s post, I’m really waiting to see this debate next week, that will answer a lot of questions. In the near term, it was a stupid thing to say, right or wrong, which, as I think I’ve made clear, and as you point out, and a lot of people pointed out, what Obama has said was nothing different than one of the conundrums facing Democrats for a long while.

But it’s the debate this week that I think will show his measure. Any shot he had at actually winning Pennsylvania is pretty much gone now, (though he was making a helluva run for it), but there are other prizes, and other bars to see if he can clear or not.

As you know, I’m lukewarm on Obama (and, it should be noted, Clinton as well–her association with the DLC and support of status quo swing-state politicking, as opposed to Dean’s aggressive 50 state strategy, is not the direction I believe progressivism should be heading in).

Even though a lot of (but not all) of the outrage is largely manufactured, I do believe that his comments were ill-advised (especially considering the context–you don’t diss “the heartland” in San Fran-fucking-cisco). Though not intended for broader public consumption, in the era of cell phone video, YouTube, and citizen journalism, a campaign has to go on the assumption that statements such as these will eventually be exposed. Once again, as this latest incident illustrates, Obama gives really bad soundbite; this could prove to be a critical weakness in, again borrowing from Gandelman, 21st century politics that, if Obama does become the nominee, the McCain-infatuated press corps, always quick to rally around their straight talkin’ homeboy, will gorge upon like sharks on a drunken surfer.

The bullshit from Chris Matthews and Co. about Obama’s “elitist” beverage choice is foreshadowing of what either candidate will face in the general. The question is which campaign–Senator Clinton’s or Senator Obama’s–is best prepared to not only respond to these inevitable character assassination attempts, but also effectively counterstrike in a way that maneuvers past the media firewall that has been erected around McCain. Again, whether fair or unfair, as of right now, this is just the way it is; frankly, I’m still unsure which one is ready to bring it.

So let the primary continue.

And, hopefully, both Democratic candidates–the eventual winner and runner out–come out of all this intact, tested and ready to go to war against the real enemies.

It’s not like you to join us in the glue making.