One of the functions of the Antagonist in a campaign story
is to clearly define the hero. Hillary’s long struggle against the insurance industry for universal
health care, and Obama’s principled stand against Bush on Iraq defines both
their campaigns and their characters. Drawing those distinctions is important.
But the ultimate Antagonist of both candidates isn’t each other, it is the
Repubs. What does the reaction of the Repub punditry tell Dems – particularly
the all-important 796 super delegates - about what to expect next?
David
Seaton has a great blog over on his site titled “Why do Peggy Noonan, George
Will and David Brooks favor Obama” that
definitely deserves a look. He isn’t
the only one to notice the tendency of Repub pundits to jump on the Obama
bandwagon, but the quotes he uses to bolster his case that he “smells a rat”
definitely give a strong whiff of what he means. It may just be knee-jerk
Hillary hatred but it could be more coordinated. Particularly when the effort
is bookended by Karl Rove’s opening shot in the Financial Times and William Kristol’s long piece in yesterday’s NYT which is basically a
rallying cry for Obama forces on the convention floor. The more Republican
Strategists who go on Tucker Carlson’s show on MSNBC to say how they would
really, really rather run against Hillary the more this feels like an obvious
set up.
Of
course it isn’t Obama’s fault that he is attracting riff raff from across the
aisle. To the extent that it brings in new voters it is a good thing. But if
you are a Dem delegate and you think Rove and
Kristol are offering their advice because they want to be the Dem's new best friends you should
immediately seek professional help.
Comments