« Phelps! | Main | Pushkin And Georgia » 21 Aug 2008 08:04 am Obama, Underdog?Andrew Romano talks to Tom Holbrook, convention bounce sage:
I'm not sure any of this is worth guessing or anticipating. I do have one observation about the campaign so far, though. Obama's candidacy makes the most sense as an insurgency. The point of his campaign is change - change from the last eight years and from the way Washington plays politics in the Morris-Rove era. When he became the front-runner, got anointed as the establishment candidate, this point got blurred. The worst thing to have happened to him is this premature ascendancy. He actually needs a period when he's behind to get out of this dynamic. Otherwise, McCain becomes the insurgent change-agent against the prematurely anointed one. (Al Giordano's related thoughts are here.) That's why the Bayh pick, if that's what it turns out to be, could be a very shrewd idea. It creates a Clinton-Gore 1992 dynamic in which a young duo - visually different - somehow amplify the themes of newness and generational change. Against McCain, the theme of generational change is essential to the Obama message. The themes write themselves: change, not more of the same. And: It's the economy, stupid. (Photo: Emmanuel Dunand/AFP/Getty.) TrackBack URL for this entry:http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451c45669e200e5541250738834 Listed below are links to weblogs that reference 'Obama, Underdog?' |

