The well paid honcho's of the (cash rich) Obama campaign ignored the old adage "when in Rome, do as the Romans do" and didn't pay the street organizers the (perfectly legal, and traditional in urban areas) "walking around money" for the GOTV (get out the vote) effort. Which resulted in the lack of a huge turnout in Philly. Which probably cost Barack a point or so in the statewide margin.
Be that as it may, would that have been a wiser course of action for the Obama campaign? In the end, Hillary didn't pull off a double-digit lead afterall. And Obama would have looked rather desperate if he were to have altered tactics at this stage. This is all guess work on my part, of course, but it seems (looking at all this from the outside) that Obama has created a situation within his campaign (the upper-road approach) that could possibly cost him vital superdeligates in the end. The reason I suggest this is because many of these superdelegates "think" much like Hillary. They'd rather continue 'business-as-usual' not because it's advantageous for the People, but rather due to the fear of actual
I'm fairly certain that in their minds, there is a level of uncertainly as to what new roles there will be under Obama. People have established ties that have taken, in some cases, decades to create. The question is, do they establish new ones, or stick with the old? Even knowing that the system is broken, doesn't necessarily mean that they want it repaired---by Obama or anyone else for that matter.
maybe I'm over thinking all this, but politician are scheming animals of a completely different nature than the common man/woman.
Again, this is all theoretical on my part, but as I speak to folks on this side (liberal Californians) who are familiar with abrupt political changes (Pete Wilson, to Grey Davis, to Arnold Schwarzenegger)
it seems as though they may not be so embracing of Obama's message. I'm speaking specifically of the corporate/economic P.O.V.
Still, Obama needs to re-invent himself at this stage in order to further distinguish himself and enhance his message. It's a mighty huge task, but that's what it will take to influence (sorry for this, but it needs to be stated) White Americans, because of the years of ingrained fear.
Regardless of what people might want to believe, this race hinges more on the White vote than it does the African American.
And more importantly, the Tuesday night/Wednesday morning reports of Hillary winning by double digits. Such greed on the part of campaign hierarchies is one reason I haven't done volunteer work for one in 16 years, and never will again until and unless this changes. (Ditto many issue groups, which rely on "voluntary slave labor" while their exec's rake in the dough).
Truer words have never been spoken. *nods emphatically!*
Would you believe that at my wife’s place of employment (an very large and reputable investment firm), there are key executives on "PAID"
sabbatical campaigning for McCain?!?! the disgusting part is that they are riding a thin 'Conflict of interest' line here. The company lawyers are even involved in this.
This country is really funny in that way.
What I mean to say is that when most in this country are discussing the political interplay between the Presidential candidates, there are backroom schemes going on to create situations that are disadvantageous for those of us who are considered 'lesser folks'.