1. Obama Campaign has been always saying that if there is sufficient time to campaign, the campaign would vigorously compete in every state of the union to win the contest. Then why Obama Campaign is conceding Pennsylvania so early? How come the campaign is defining vote gap of less than 10% as the victory? Obama is on record to say that presenting his case aggressively so that folks vote is ‘his duty’ and ‘his job’. Then why is he under selling here? It is good that the campaign is trying to address the question of ‘expectation management’ when indeed Obama campaign has been ‘cocky’ in past. But can such ‘spin’ management come at the cost of ‘logical consistency’? Clearly Obama campaign is contradictory here and in a weaker spot which can be avoided.
2. Early on Tom Bevan on RealClearPolitics asked this question – if Obama campaign rightly questions Hillary for her judgment about Iraq war; how can his self admitted ‘repeated lapses of judgment’ in Rezko case are excusable? How do voters believe that he is no different than Hillary – same lapses of judgment? Valid explanation is possible that these two cases are different and it is far more important and consequential to get ‘war judgment’ right at the first time itself. But we need some such valid and coherent case from the campaign to address this issue.
The reason this Obama supporter dares to ask these questions is we are expecting Obama campaign more than a simple congregation of hagiographers.
Comments are closed for this post.
