Analysis: Obama chose winning over his word

[Heisenberg]

http://www.newsweek.com/id/142287

Analysis: Obama chose winning over his word
Analysis: Opting out of public financing, Obama choses winning over his word
LIZ SIDOTI Associated Press Writer AP
Updated: 3:30 PM ET Jun 19, 2008

Barack Obama chose winning over his word.

The Democrat once made a conditional agreement to accept taxpayer money from the public financing system, and accompanying spending limits, if his Republican opponent did, too.

No more.

The chance to financially swamp John McCain — and maneuver for an enormous general election advantage — proved too great an allure.

Obama, a record-shattering fundraiser, reversed course Thursday and decided to forgo some $85 million so he could raise unlimited amounts of money and spend as much as he wants.

"It's not an easy decision, and especially because I support a robust system of public financing of elections," Obama said in announcing that despite his previous commitment, he would rely only on private donations because "the public financing of presidential elections as it exists today is broken."

And with that, the first-term Illinois senator tarnished his carefully honed image as a different kind of politician — one who means what he says and says what he means — while undercutting his call for "a new kind of politics."

McCain, for his part, painted the issue as a character test, saying: "This election is about a lot of things. It's also about trust. It's about keeping your word."

Not that the Arizona senator has much room to talk. He, too, has cast himself as a reformer who tells it like it is but his words and actions sometimes conflict with that identity.

Overall, the race between Obama and McCain amounts to an authenticity contest.

Voters are craving change from typical Washington ways and each candidate is claiming he offers a new brand of politics that transcends poisonous partisanship. Yet, each candidate, in what he says versus what he does, also is undermining his own promises not to become the politics of usual.

McCain, for instance, opposed President Bush's tax cuts in 2001 and 2003. Now, as a White House hopeful in 2008, he supports them; he says doing otherwise would amount to a tax increase. He also long advocated an eventual path to citizenship for many illegal immigrants. Then, while in the GOP primary, he emphasized securing the borders first; he says he listened to the public outcry and a defeated Senate bill.

The Republican also rails against special interests, yet he has faced criticism for having former lobbyists at his campaign's helm. And, just this week, McCain assailed Obama for proposing a windfall profits tax on oil, despite saying last month he would consider the same proposal.

"McCain's a four-star flip-flopper," said Chris Kofinis, a Democratic operative who worked for John Edwards in the primary. "The John McCain of 2000 wouldn't vote for the John McCain of 2008."

True or not, Republicans were quick to pound Obama over his money announcement.

"'Change We Can Believe In' has been thrown overboard for 'Political Expediency I Can Win With,'" said Todd Harris, a Republican analyst and aide to former presidential candidate Fred Thompson in the primary. "Every time Obama's change rhetoric meets his actual change record it evaporates in a cloud of hypocrisy."

Last year, as Obama competed against fundraising behemoth Hillary Rodham Clinton and before his fundraising prowess was evident, Obama proposed that both major party general election nominees agree to stay in the public financing system.

In a November 2007 questionnaire, Obama answered "yes" when asked: "If you are nominated for president in 2008 and your major opponents agree to forgo private funding in the general election campaign, will you participate in the presidential public financing system?" He added: "I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election."

Then, Obama raised enormous sums — and he started backing away from that position.

McCain, however, had indicated he would go along with the proposal and, since clinching the GOP nomination, has been trying to hold Obama to his commitment. Obama "said he would stick to his word. He didn't," McCain complained Thursday, and then told reporters in Minnesota, "We will take public financing."

Obama made his announcement as McCain was in the Democrat's hometown of Chicago — where McCain had come to raise money.

Obama's decision also came one day before the candidates were required to report their May fundraising totals.

The move could be the death-knell for the post-Watergate federal financing system designed to lessen the large donors' influence and reduce corruption.

It certainly will give Obama an extraordinary advantage over McCain and Republicans who have struggled to match Democratic fundraising this election cycle. Within hours, Obama showed his financial might by rolling out a 60-second television ad in 18 states, including several that have been reliable GOP strongholds.

Obama made the money announcement in a video message to supporters — and sought to empower them to give more.

"You've fueled this campaign with donations of $5, $10, $20, whatever you can afford," Obama said in an appeal seeking donations from $25 to $2,300 and beyond.

"Let's build the first general election campaign that's truly funded by the American people," Obama said — ignoring the fact that the system he's opting out of is paid for by taxpayers who donate $3 to the fund when they file their tax returns.

Obama blamed his decision in part on McCain and "the smears and attacks from his allies running so-called 527 groups." But he failed to mention that the only outside groups running ads in earnest so far are those aligned with Obama — and running commercials against McCain.

So much for being a straight shooter.

[hank2k]

McCain has flipflopped on more issues than 10 candidates put together so this is no big deal.

The bottom line is that taking public financing is an effort to make sure special interests and lobbyists don't unduly influence a campaign.

The fact that so many of Obama's donors are of the small money 5/10/15 dollar range accomplishes the same thing.

Incidentally, Mccains campaign is filled with lobbyists and special interest money despite his taking public financing.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...101131_pf.html

I used to think this would be a tight election but with this $$$ advantage , it might not even be close.http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2...5207140&page=1

Get ready for more desperate smears from the slime merchants.

[Heisenberg]

It's not like it wasn't expected. The moment he started breaking fundraising records, it was obvious he was going to opt out. It affords him such a great advantage that he would be an idiot not to go this direction.

I would have been much more disappointed if he would have gone with public financing.

You have to win the election before you can accomplish anything.

[burmafrd]

Why am I not surprised that one of our resident libs immediately attacks McCain for Obama going back on his word?

[AtlCB]

Originally Posted by hank2k

McCain has flipflopped on more issues than 10 candidates put together so this is no big deal.

The bottom line is that taking public financing is an effort to make sure special interests and lobbyists don't unduly influence a campaign.

The fact that so many of Obama's donors are of the small money 5/10/15 dollar range accomplishes the same thing.

Incidentally, Mccains campaign is filled with lobbyists and special interest money despite his taking public financing.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...101131_pf.html

I used to think this would be a tight election but with this $$$ advantage , it might not even be close.http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2...5207140&page=1

[View Full Quote]Get ready for more desperate smears from the slime merchants.

To me, this is a big deal. I think Obama has basically shown that he is a typical politician who will do anything to get elected. He was claiming that he was different for Clinton and McCain in this respect - he is not!

[SkinsHokieFan]

Originally Posted by hank2k

McCain has flipflopped on more issues than 10 candidates put together so this is no big deal.

The bottom line is that taking public financing is an effort to make sure special interests and lobbyists don't unduly influence a campaign.

The fact that so many of Obama's donors are of the small money 5/10/15 dollar range accomplishes the same thing.

Incidentally, Mccains campaign is filled with lobbyists and special interest money despite his taking public financing.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...101131_pf.html

I used to think this would be a tight election but with this $$$ advantage , it might not even be close.http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2...5207140&page=1

[View Full Quote]Get ready for more desperate smears from the slime merchants.

The small donor fallacy is just that, a fallacy

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...d=opinionsbox1

<H1>The Small-Donor Fallacy

TOOLBOX

Resize Text

Save/Share +

[View Full Quote]var yahooBuzzOnLoad = function () {var self = this;// this.style.background = '#00f';this.onmouseover = function () {self.style.background = '#fff';changebg('yahoobuzz');};this.onmouseout = function () {self.style.background = 'none';resetbg('yahoobuzz');};};Digg

Newsvine


del.icio.us

Stumble It!


Reddit

Facebook


*******

washington_po284:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...061903027.htmlYahoo! Buzz





Print This
E-mail This

if ( show_doubleclick_ad && ( adTemplate & TOOLBOX_LEFT_180X31 ) == TOOLBOX_LEFT_180X31 ){placeAd('ARTICLE',commercialNode,28,'',true) ;}

#ArticleCommentsWrapper {display:block};
COMMENT

washingtonpost.com readers have posted 42 comments about this item.
View All Comments »



if( COMMENTS_ACTIVE) { document.write('POST A COMMENT
'); document.write( getDisplayUserName()+'
') } POST A COMMENT
You must be logged in to leave a comment. Log in | Register Why Do I Have to Log In Again?
Log In Again?
CLOSE


We've made some updates to washingtonpost.com's Groups, MyPost and comment pages. We need you to verify your MyPost ID by logging in before you can post to the new pages. We apologize for the inconvenience.






Discussion Policy








By Jay Mandle
Friday, June 20, 2008; Page A19

Not long ago, Sen. Barack Obama criticized special-interest lobbies that "use their money and influence to stop us from reforming health care or investing in renewable energy for yet another four years." He has said that his army of small donors constitutes "a parallel public financing system," one in which ordinary voters "will have as much access and influence over the course of our campaign" as that "traditionally reserved for the wealthy and the powerful."
Obama has raised record-breaking sums from small donors, so his announcement yesterday that he would opt out of the public financing system for the general election did not surprise many. And the idea that the Internet and grass-roots donations will somehow reinvigorate our democracy is appealing. But this notion is not borne out by the evidence.
As of April 30, the Obama campaign had collected more than $120 million in contributions of $200 or less. In April alone, the latest month for which data are available, Obama raised more than $31 million, about 65 percent of which came from contributions of $200 or less. This seems good for democracy -- but it may not be as good as we think.
Despite the importance of small donors, both Obama and Republican Sen. John McCain are still taking lots of big donations from wealthy special interests. In fact, when the nominating system as a whole is studied over time, the evidence suggests that the role of big donors will turn out to be growing, not shrinking. ....click link for rest

</H1>

[ConcordCowboy]

Lets see Obama decided to forgo 85 million so he could rake in Hundreds of millions to win a election that needs to be won.

Seems pretty smart to me.

One hand...85 million.

The other hand...HUNDREDS of Millions.

Which do I take?

Lets see...Hmmm....

Oh...I better not change my mind....

Boo Frickin Hoo!

[COWBOYSNUM1]

Originally Posted by hank2k

McCain has flipflopped on more issues than 10 candidates put together so this is no big deal.

The bottom line is that taking public financing is an effort to make sure special interests and lobbyists don't unduly influence a campaign.

The fact that so many of Obama's donors are of the small money 5/10/15 dollar range accomplishes the same thing.

Incidentally, Mccains campaign is filled with lobbyists and special interest money despite his taking public financing.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...101131_pf.html

I used to think this would be a tight election but with this $$$ advantage , it might not even be close.http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2...5207140&page=1

[View Full Quote]Get ready for more desperate smears from the slime merchants.

I am a Republican who really doesn't think a whole lot of McCain, but to say he is a big flipflopper is a stretch.

As far as the money advantage, it's not like you think. Obama's campaign may have more money than McCain's, but the RNC will end up spending a whole lot more than the DNC.

[canters]

Obama must think he is going to win. Cocky fellow, ain't he?

He is and will always be unelectable. Let the elite rich whites, academics, and blacks send him $$. What a waste.

[Vintage]

Originally Posted by AtlCB

To me, this is a big deal. I think Obama has basically shown that he is a typical politician who will do anything to get elected. He was claiming that he was different for Clinton and McCain in this respect - he is not!

What are you talking about?

He claims to be the candidate of change.

And he proved it. He changed positions on this issue.

Candidate of change!

[Jarv]

Originally Posted by Vintage

What are you talking about?

He claims to be the candidate of change.

And he proved it. He changed positions on this issue.

Candidate of change!

Lol...Good one Vint.

[AtlCB]

Originally Posted by Vintage

What are you talking about?

He claims to be the candidate of change.

And he proved it. He changed positions on this issue.

Candidate of change!

Good point!

[hank2k]

Originally Posted by canters

Obama must think he is going to win. Cocky fellow, ain't he?

He is and will always be unelectable. Let the elite rich whites, academics, and blacks send him $$. What a waste.

Elite whites, academics, blacks? Sounds like Iowa to me (sarcasm).

No beer drinkers in this crowd?

[ConcordCowboy]

[SuspectCorner]

Originally Posted by Vintage

What are you talking about?

He claims to be the candidate of change.

And he proved it. He changed positions on this issue.

Candidate of change!

Actually Obama just evidenced he's way ahead of the Bush "learning curve" when it comes to an understanding of economies. This was a no-brainer.