
(AP Photo/Jae C. Hong)
A party that charged into campaign 2008 with such high hopes and unity has slowly become a rather angry one – or at least one that’s become about anger. The hullabaloo over Barack Obama’s “bitter” comments is just the latest example of it.
Speaking to a group of high-end donors at a private fundraiser in San Francisco last week (when will candidates learn that nothing is “private?”), Obama sought to explain the economic frustrations of voters in places like Ohio and Pennsylvania by explaining they had been promised things by administration after administration with nothing to show for it. “It's not surprising, then, they get bitter,” Obama explained. “They cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”
Hillary Clinton and various Republicans were quick to jump on the comments, shouting “elitism” and calling Obama out of touch with average Americans. (Check out CBS News’
From the Road blog for a superb recap of all the blow-by-blow action from the weekend on the campaign trail). And with upcoming primaries in states like Pennsylvania, Indiana, Kentucky, West Virginia and even North Carolina, you can expect to hear a lot more about it.
But the anger ascribed to small-town Americans by Obama was not a new element for the campaign. Such feelings have been an undertone to it almost since the primary season began. When Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s controversial statements hit the Internet and airwaves, it was largely about anger. Obama’s much-heralded speech on race in the aftermath of that flap included the direct acknowledgment of the anger that remains in both black and white communities.
Black leaders demonstrated part of that when Clinton campaign surrogates were seen as playing the race card with comments made around the South Carolina primary. It’s not just race and economic anger either. Geraldine Ferraro’s controversial comments have demonstrated the frustrations at least some women have felt though the campaign about the treatment of Clinton’s candidacy.
When the campaign began over a year ago, Democratic activists were angry as well, but theirs was directed toward a president and administration and the unpopular war in Iraq. Historic candidacies from Obama and Clinton – surrounded by a cast of well-liked characters in the field – were supposed to be the antidote to all of that. But the longer the campaign has gone on, the more the divisions within the party itself have come to the foreground. That’s what politics does.
Read full post…