Posted on 09/10/2012 3:26:05 AM PDT by Kaslin
The consensus on Barack Obama's acceptance speech Thursday night, and in effect on the Democratic National Convention as a whole, is that it was a bust.
One reason may be optics. Obama was scheduled to deliver the speech in a stadium seating 64,000 people. But on Wednesday, after Charlotte, N.C., had been pummeled by periodic rainstorms all week, organizers moved the event to the convention hall.
The last two stadium acceptance speeches, in 2008 and 1960, were delivered in Denver and Los Angeles, where it seldom rains in the summer. That's not true of Charlotte -- or of Tampa, Fla., where Republicans took a risk by scheduling their convention at the start of hurricane season.
So Obama spoke at the same podium as Bill Clinton had the night before. The comparison was not flattering to the 44th president.
Clinton was animated, loose, constantly ad libbing, varying his gestures and expression. Obama seemed more mechanical, less fluent. The contrast with the videos shown earlier of his campaigning in 2008 was not helpful.
And, perhaps unexpectedly, John Kerry and Joe Biden delivered more interesting speeches before Obama spoke.
Kerry effectively exploited Mitt Romney's inexperience in foreign policy and his omission of a tribute to the troops during the GOP convention. Biden painted a picture of Obama decisively making difficult decisions 30 paces from his own office.
The major problem with Obama's speech, however, was content: It was the same old, same old. Just as he didn't pivot on policy after his party's thumping in the 2010 elections, so he didn't pivot from his accomplishments in his first term to what different things he hoped to accomplish in a second.
He said he would pursue certain "goals" in a second term. But the goals were vague -- invest in the economy with the money we're no longer spending on war -- and in many cases rehashes of things he has said before. And there was not even the vaguest description of how specific policies might achieve these goals.
In his peroration, Obama made appeals to different core Democratic constituencies, like those made repeatedly by other speakers in Charlotte, sometimes even after 10:00 Eastern time, when the broadcast networks began their coverage.
The delegates roared again and again at endorsements of access to contraceptives (actually, free contraceptives), same-sex marriage and non-deportation of young illegal immigrants who meet certain conditions. Requiring picture identification at the polls was described as similar to beating up blacks trying to vote 50 years ago.
Young people, single women, gays and lesbians, blacks and Hispanics came out in large numbers and swelled Obama's majority in 2008. He needs them to turn out heavily again. The Obama brain trust could only hope that these people followed the lengthy proceedings at the 5,000 "watch parties" organized by the Democratic Party or by the constituent groups themselves.
But the evidence from polls, and the fact that the Democrats felt they had to make these appeals, suggests that enthusiasm for Obama, except among African-Americans, is lagging behind 2008. Did the convention and Obama's speech rekindle the spark of his first presidential campaign? It doesn't seem likely.
The Democratic Party throughout its history has been a coalition of disparate groups that, at their strongest, add up to a majority. But when the party has to rally them with appeals that turn off moderates and independents, it's hard to get to 50 percent.
Especially when you make unforced errors, like writing a platform that didn't mention God or Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and then having the oversight corrected to resounding boos on the floor.
Polls tell us that the Obama Democrats were at the cusp between victory and defeat after Mitt Romney's selection of Paul Ryan and before the two conventions began.
Polls next week will tell us where the race is now. Pundits are looking for bounces, but polls conducted over weekends, and especially over the holiday weekend that separated the two conventions, are problematic.
Two events after the Democratic convention threaten to undermine any positive bounce.
One is the unemployment numbers released Friday morning. The unemployment rate is down to 8.1 percent but only because the labor force is shrinking. Fifty-somethings are going on disability, and twenty-somethings are living with their parents.
The other is the devastating portrait of Obama in Bob Woodward's latest book. "Presidents work their will -- or should work their will -- on important matters of national business," Woodward writes. "Obama has not."
Doesn’t matter how bad it was or the content. His followers are mezmorized every time the deity speaks.
The problem with Marxism is that it eventually collapses under its own weight. Imposing it in a system that is already flat broke means it runs its course in a matter of months or a few years, not decades.
That was the only thing he has gotten through in 4 years and the American People are against it.
Thanks. That's an excellent point. I wonder what nobama's presidency would have been like if we hadn't had the financial crisis of 2007/2008?
Thanks. My guess is that Obama probably wouldn’t have been elected in the first place.
I agree. He is obviously off his game, and it shows. The polls are a sham-it's as if the 2010 mid-terms didn't happen. They are attempting to demoralize us, I'm not so sure the Dem convention and subsequent faux "bounce" haven't energized us further.
They KNOW. The consoling motherly hug from Michelle is the image that sums up where they believe they are.
I'm talking about that Henry Louis Gates episode in mid-2009, and Obama's "cops acted stupidly" remark. I would make the case that his presidency effectively ended right there ... not because it was a matter of grave national importance, but because it wasn't. That was when a lot of people (mostly white independents) who had voted for him in 2008 realized that he was just another surly, bitter race-obsessed black man despite all the "hope and change" crap from the 2008 campaign. Research will show that his approval numbers went into the tank almost immediately after that, and the Democrats haven't won an election of any consequence since then. In fact, even Ted Kennedy's "sacred" U.S. Senate seat in Massachusetts is now held by a Republican.
“I agree. He is obviously off his game, and it shows. The polls are a sham-it’s as if the 2010 mid-terms didn’t happen. They are attempting to demoralize us, I’m not so sure the Dem convention and subsequent faux “bounce” haven’t energized us further.”
The job numbers caused them to activate their internet trolls and media helpers.
This little effort they tried to pull over the weekend was no coincidence.
Are we sure this column even belongs here on FR? Kind of bucking the trend of the last couple days.
“had been pummeled by periodic rainstorms all week, organizers moved the event to the convention hall.”
...they wish! “Lack of enthusiasm” is why period!
Here's a recent thread from over the weekend about Obama's many lies, that some people have have missed:
Here are 95 examples of Barack Obama’s lying, lawbreaking, corruption, and cronyism
Last week's DNC thrice denial of GOD and Jerusalem coupled with the Puerto Rican DNC Delegate's murder threat and myriad unscripted surprisingly revealing interviews with DNC delegates ABRUBTLY morphed into a barrage of push polls and MSM diversionist push pieces....truly amazing to witness.
One reason may be optics.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yes it is optics, the whole nation got to see a charismatic fascist at work.
They did not like it.
Good Read on Obama Fascism:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/barack_obama_the_quintessentia_1.html
We have been slowly moving toward Marxism for many decades already. In recent years so-called “conservatives” have supported ideas that would have been called Marxism a few years earlier social security and medicare are Marxist ideas.
Had an interesting discussion with a black man the other day. He said that people always said that a black person couldn’t succeed at being President. Now they have Obama and he is truly in over his head, but pride won’t let them admit it because it would be like accepting that a black person couldn’t handle it. Even though he finished with a ‘but not all black people are smart, just like ya’ll got Biden, we got Obama.’
It was hilarious the way he said it. However, I think he hit on something. A lot of AA cannot admit it to themselves, much less to anyone else that Obama just SUCKS. Either by design (on purpose) or because he’s that stupid.
That's a) ridiculous, and b) very racist.
THIS black man can't succeed because he's a doctrinaire, narcisstic communist whose goal is to remake America into visions from his father.
And America doesn't like it.
Herman Cain is the black man who immediately comes to mind who could succeed - despite the allegations of some lying, disappearing cheap sluts.
Why is his comment racist? He said IT’S WHAT HE HEARD OTHERS SAY. And down in the south, it was said. Of course we know that’s not true (I love Herman Cain and campaigned for him), but it’s what they feel they need to protect.
Thomas Sowell would make an excellent President.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.