Monday, February 04, 2008

Late Breaking Voter Comment of the Pre-Super Tuesday Weekend

I’m so tired of hearing how hopeful we’re all supposed to feel about Obama. With Edwards out, I guess I’m supporting him, but cripes, would it kill him to give us a freaking policy position on something instead of the bumper sticker platitudes we see from the GOP all the time?

- - Southern Beale

*The fine print disclaimer: criticism of any candidate expressed on Enclave is not a de facto endorsement of their opponent. Until I actually express an endorsement of a specific candidate, readers can assume that I am uncommitted. And supporters of candidates criticized should not assume that I oppose or "hate" their candidate because I choose to question rather than acquiesce to campaign strategy.


  1. This sort of reminds me of the 2004 election when Kerry got hit with the "flip-flopper" tag...after that, everyone was looking for instances where they could find some difference between a policy position held then, and one held previously.

    I think with Obama, some people have bought into the MEME that he lacks substance, and therefore anytime there is an ad, or in this case a supporter created video, which doesn't have the feel of a panel discussion, they go back to the "he's all fluff, no substance" line.

    To be fair, I do the same thing...I have pegged Hillary as dishonest, so I tend to overemphasize her dishonest moments, over those where she is honest.

  2. Um, yeah, it's possible to visit his website, which bloggers should find an easy exercise, and review the reams of policy documents there, including his Blueprint for Change, which is an excellent read. As is, y'know, his book.

  3. I agree with Sean. Obama has offered a wealth of detailed policy proposals, some of which--on health care, for instance--have been controversial and provided grist for the mills of policy wonks like Paul Krugman. All this stuff is, moreover, readily available on the Obama campaign web site, if Southern Beale would like to consult it. No, he doesn't spend time talking up detailed policy in his speeches or in his ads; but who does? Does Clinton? One can argue that the Republicans do, but that's mainly because their proposals, being simplistic and demagogic, are easy to convert to sound bites. I'm still undecided, BTW [albeit leaning Obama], probably until I walk in the booth tomorrow morning, but the "lack of substance" line leaves me cold.

  4. These comments remind of an insecure girlfriend who not only wants her boyfriend to do as she likes, but to do so and like it, too. Beale has already said that she is going to vote for Obama. Why does she have to have the right attitude to boot? Seriously. She's voting for Obama. What ever happened to the concept of quitting (or not debating) while you're ahead?

    And sure, we can always do more research, but 1) candidates with less policy experience should speak from the stump more on policy matters than those who have more (not that Clinton has more), 2) Obama has made the dubious admission that he does the vision thing, but he is not interested in steering the ship where the vision might lead; that's not policy-oriented and it makes his written policy look ghost-written, and 3) Obama made more of an effort in the last debate to focus on policy (although I still didn't think that he was as specific as Clinton was) more than he had in previous debates because he was getting criticized for it; that seems tacit admission to me that he's trying to shore up a perceived weakness.

    On those grounds it is entirely fair to ask a man who could be our next president to focus incessantly on policy in more ways than links on a website or cross references in a book. I don't know if Beale would make such an argument, but this late breaking voter believes such a thing, and if I eventually vote for Obama I would appreciate a simple "thanks" rather than a criticism that I didn't do it with the correct demeanor.