FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Obama the Negative

by BINOY KAMPMARK

As the Democratic Convention begins, President Barack Obama seems a shadow, an incumbent who, while he will be hoping that Mitt the Invisible stays back in the polls, is fighting for his political life in the White House.

Negativity is a symptom of the unimaginative mind.  It is clear that the Obama campaign has, for some months, decided to attack Mitt Romney rather than extol the virtues of its own position. Obama has been playing the man, badgering Romney into releasing tax returns and encouraging advertisements with limp conviction. “Makes you wonder if some years he’s paid any taxes at all.”  Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid has decided to throw combustible fuel on the fire, suggesting that Romney has managed to bypass the tax man for 10 years, a claim that comes close in calibre to assertions made by the birthers about Obama. (Imagine a contest where one candidate waves his birth certificate while the other, in retort, waves his tax returns.)

The GOP has made a sustained campaign at dirtying the Obama brand, which was not a difficult thing to do given the claims made by the President under four years ago.  Taking journeys to the stratosphere without the necessary equipment is never wise, but 2008 was a catharsis that distorted expectations.  As Ryan Lizza observed in the New Yorker, “Obama promised to transcend forty years of demographic and ideological trends and reshape Washington politics.”  High claims indeed.  A closer look at Obama the political animal would have revealed few surprises – it was bound to come. Presidential politics alters, reshapes, and tinkers with its subjects.  Men of substance fast become men of straw.  Election campaigns might be studded with poetic stanzas, but governing can be dull prose indeed.

Obama, no longer keen on idealistic mettle, is back to his true lobbying self, pushing hard and attempting to shovel an abundance of dirt on his opponent.  Senior campaign strategist David Axelrod is unconvincing in justifying the negative approach.  “If we were passive in the face of this onslaught we are facing, our folks would be unhappy.  There are a few on our side who are counselling us to sit idly by” (NYT, Jul 28). Hence, such feeble attempts as Romney singing “America the Beautiful” before an outsourcing bonanza, and tags of an aloof, distant “Richie Rich”.

There is no need to sit idly by at all.  A campaign that focuses on the necessity of various economic measures, a bailout strategy, of policies that, whilst not being galloping job producers, did prevent job losses, would be appropriate.  One takes such measures to avoid calamity, though how to prove that it worked is never an easy task. If Obama wishes to be more boisterous to the hawks, he can always claim that under his presidency, drone warfare has vastly expanded, with a promise of greater expansion in the future. Liberals can be savage too.

On both sides of the political fence, negative strategists have proliferated like bacteria.  As a piece in Time (Aug 20) tritely observes, “Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are high-minded and policy-oriented; the campaigns they are presiding over are not.” The “scorched-earth” election victory is a familiar outcome and experts such as Larry McCarthy, author of the Willy Horton advertisement that railroaded Michael Dukakis’ campaign in 1988, are in vogue.

The existence of super PACs, or political action committees, and the whirl of social media make resorting to “hopeless” negativity irresistible.  (On the former, Obama’s super PAC, Priorities USA Action raised $10 million in August.)  Remaining buoyant and optimistic during a twenty four hour news cycle is a tall order when muck is just around the corner.  Character, presuming a political candidate has one, is there to be assassinated and every swill bucket shall have its fill.

“Hope for change” has not been so much hope as “less change”.  While an administration run by Mitt the craftily invisible is an unpalatable prospect, the messages from Obama have assumed a machine-like quality.  What we are seeing before us is an attempt, less to emphasise achievement and promise, than emphasise terrifying alternatives.  A doomsday narrative here takes the stance that Romney is Bush incarnate, a creature who will assume the worst features of that nefarious administration.  Trucking in fear, however, is always a dangerous ploy.  Its currency is volatile and, in the end, cheap.

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne.  Email:bkampmark@gmail.com

COMING IN SEPTEMBER

A Special Memorial Issue of CounterPunch

Featuring recollections of Alexander Cockburn from Jeffrey St. Clair, Peter Linebaugh, Paul Craig Roberts, Noam Chomsky, Perry Anderson, Dennis Kucinich, Michael Neumann, Susannah Hecht, P. Sainath, Ben Tripp, Alison Weir, James Ridgeway, JoAnn Wypijewski, John Strausbaugh, Pierre Sprey, Conn Hallinan, James Wolcott, Laura Flanders, Ken Silverstein, Tariq Ali and many others …

Subscribe to CounterPunch Today to Reserve Your Copy

More articles by:

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

Weekend Edition
February 23, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Richard D. Wolff
Capitalism as Obstacle to Equality and Democracy: the US Story
Paul Street
Where’s the Beef Stroganoff? Eight Sacrilegious Reflections on Russiagate
Jeffrey St. Clair
They Came, They Saw, They Tweeted
Andrew Levine
Their Meddlers and Ours
Charles Pierson
Nuclear Nonproliferation, American Style
Joseph Essertier
Why Japan’s Ultranationalists Hate the Olympic Truce
W. T. Whitney
US and Allies Look to Military Intervention in Venezuela
John Laforge
Maybe All Threats of Mass Destruction are “Mentally Deranged”
Matthew Stevenson
Why Vietnam Still Matters: an American Reckoning
David Rosen
For Some Reason, Being White Still Matters
Robert Fantina
Nikki Haley: the U.S. Embarrassment at the United Nations
Joshua Frank
Pearl Jam, Will You Help Stop Sen. Tester From Destroying Montana’s Public Lands?
Dana E. Abizaid
The Attack on Historical Perspective
Conn Hallinan
Immigration and the Italian Elections
George Ochenski
The Great Danger of Anthropocentricity
Pete Dolack
China Can’t Save Capitalism from Environmental Destruction
Joseph Natoli
Broken Lives
Manuel García, Jr.
Why Did Russia Vote For Trump?
Geoff Dutton
One Regime to Rule Them All
Torkil Lauesen – Gabriel Kuhn
Radical Theory and Academia: a Thorny Relationship
Wilfred Burchett
Vietnam Will Win: The Work of Persuasion
Joyce Nelson
Why Mueller’s Indictments Are Hugely Important
Thomas Klikauer
Umberto Eco and Germany’s New Fascism
George Burchett
La Folie Des Grandeurs
Howard Lisnoff
Minister of War
Eileen Appelbaum
Why Trump’s Plan Won’t Solve the Problems of America’s Crumbling Infrastructure
Ramzy Baroud
More Than a Fight over Couscous: Why the Palestinian Narrative Must Be Embraced
Jill Richardson
Mass Shootings Shouldn’t Be the Only Time We Talk About Mental Illness
Jessicah Pierre
Racism is Killing African American Mothers
Steve Horn
Wyoming Now Third State to Propose ALEC Bill Cracking Down on Pipeline Protests
David Griscom
When ‘Fake News’ is Good For Business
Barton Kunstler
Brainwashed Nation
Griffin Bird
I’m an Eagle Scout and I Don’t Want Pipelines in My Wilderness
Edward Curtin
The Coming Wars to End All Wars
Missy Comley Beattie
Message To New Activists
Jonah Raskin
Literary Hubbub in Sonoma: Novel about Mrs. Jack London Roils the Faithful
Laura Finley
After the Parkland Shooting … Teach Youth About Dating Violence
Binoy Kampmark
Frontiersman of the Internet: John Perry Barlow
Chelli Stanley
The Mirrors of Palestine
James McEnteer
How Brexit Won World War Two
Robert Koehler
The Cheapening of Human Life
Ralph Nader
Absorbing the Irresistible Consumer Reports Magazine
Ted Rall
Never Mind Millennial Apathy, Here’s Generation Z Inbox x
Cesar Chelala
A Word I Shouldn’t Use
Louis Proyect
Marx at the Movies
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail