So Michael Tomasky believes President Obama has a “cockiness” problem huh?
Well POU commenter Aleth has a response to the so-called cockiness problem imagined by this writer for The Daily Beast. Its a classic!
Allow me to VENT for a second… I am tired!!!
If there is one camp that has played the election game safe, it is the Obama campaign. Everyone of their team says it would be a difficult reelection and every dollar counts. It’s funny because if any OTHER president including Republican had Obama’s accomplishment, his approval would be in the 70s. But with authors like Michael, who seems to think he is sending the team an unwarranted advice but rather the headline is to gain attention.
In reading his entire article, you end up looking for the alleged “cockiness problem.” Where is it? You will not find it.
According to Webster, cocky means “to be boldly and brashly self confident.” Again, re-read the examples cited by this author and you see nothing, absolutely nothing.
Funny, the only person who is not allowed to eat argula; travel with his family; use air force one without silly complaints from irate journalist who could give two shits about clearing non-existent bushes; be confident; speak without progressive approval; dance without upsetting certain black academia’s assertion it’s a stereotype of black folk; speak firmly without upsetting the media’s tone bullshit; have coverage on his trips abroad; remain honest (while the competitor lies continuously yet enjoys bullshit statements like he’s smart); watched like a hawk; over-analyzed; mistreated and disrespected in every avenue from liberals to “you lie” conservatives; question his birth place; disrespect his wife and kids (yet it’s not on 24 hour analysis TV or seeking an apology like faux Ms Ann); create faux outrage; helps so many disenfranchised (at least native Americans acknowledge that he has done more for them than the last 5 presidents combined, while some of these faux LGBT folks who have made strides continue their bull); gives oval office address without making some TV pundit have to create their bullshit idea of what it should look like; polled on everything every damn day (i.e. do you think the president was nice today?); deal and smile with the most insecure bunch of representatives in the senate and congress (yep including democrats, yes I said it!); speak on women’s rights, men’s struggles; collective struggles (without a million interest groups complaining – funny enough these folks lost their voice with all those white presidents); unions and corporations (without upsetting their representatives who don’t read shit but follow the wind of outrage), on and on and on and on…is President Obama.
Stating the president should “start packing” or “it’s our turn” did not warrant an article from Michael. Oh no, that’s what in their world is allowed for a white male to say. Imagine the President, heck the First Lady… Let’s not even go there. I am preaching to the choir.
But don’t worry, somehow this silly article will find its way to Huffington Post, then CNN and MSNBC.
Projection is the name of the game.
I don’t mind articles that push the president’s team but this entire article reeks of privilege and “I know better.” It is Beltway 101.
The problem according to the esteemed author is because Obama’s team is determined to compete in all 50 states. I did not know there was a rule against a 50 state strategy. Wasn’t that what the entire Progressive line-up was telling us about democrats? We don’t compete everywhere. Don’t we all recall that the President was only mere points away from defeating McCain in his own home state? The crime according to the author:
So what is campaign manager Jim Messina doing telling the Times that Arizona “is going to be a swing state” and the only “question is, whether we can get enough people registered to put it in play this year.” I’d say that before he starts dreaming about Arizona, Obama has to defend about seven states he won that are right now pretty up in the air, or in one case gone: Indiana (gone), along with North Carolina, Virginia, Nevada, Iowa, and, of course the two biggies, Ohio and Florida
That’s right they want to defend Arizona, NC, Virginia, Nevada, Iowa, Ohio, and Florida — SO WHAT? It’s their strategy and they want to do it. Why should they just give up on Arizona? Because Michael Tomasky said so! You know I will take the Obama team over your silly analysis anyway.
The author goes on to say:
Here’s another thing I’ve been noticing quietly, which not enough people seem to be focused on: Obama’s fundraising numbers aren’t really that strong. Sure, on the one hand, it’s an obscene amount of money—$53 million raised in March—and it’s far more than Romney has raised. But Obama is several million dollars behind where he was in 2008, and is probably not on track to raise the $1 billion that some of his people used to brag about. Obama’s own super PAC got off to a rocky start.
LIE LIE LIE!
Answer: The media created the myth of the $1 billion campaign. The source of the $1 billion meme was POLITICO who stated “The campaign is expected to raise $750 million to $1 billion.” I have yet to read the source. No one in the Obama camp stated anything of that sought. If anything they indicated the problem with the floodgates opened by the Citizens United Ruling. “Obama is several millions behind 2008”– please do tell us by how much several? Does it account for the economic pressures the citizenry face and does it account the numbers of new donors that have swelled since his 2008 election campaign. And it is not against the progressive philosophy to cheer on the influence of money?
They never fail at just going after OBAMA, page clicks!! Book sales!!! Page clicks!!! Viewership!!
Mr. Author tells us more about this “cockiness” …
Finally, of course, there is the economy. If the tepid March job numbers weren’t a reminder to the Obama team that it was early to be choreographing end-zone dances, then it’s hard to say what would be. Two more months like that and we’ll certainly have a tight race again.
Isn’t it interesting that these assholes love to pull the one month of job growth not over 200,000 as the litmus test? When it was all good, it was silence of the lambs. “A tight race” is the entire aim of this ridiculous article with a yellow journalism headline. It’s funny how projection works; these folks do the dirty work for the media and it cohorts. The assumption is based on the authors view that the Obama team thinks its an easy race… Last I recall NO THEY HAVE not.
By the way, should the President’s reelection team be crying? I have never read such mindless drivel like I read in that article. I guess Clinton should have just said Dole win, FDR should have just said I loose etc.
Our author goes on to say…
In addition to all this, the inevitable day will come, sometime in June would be my guess, or maybe even earlier, when the media will start in with the “Romney’s back!” stories. He’ll give a good speech somewhere, a poll will announce some results favorable to him, or, best of all, some Hollywood type will say something unpardonably vulgar about him, which will set the Mark Halperin caucus whopping with derision about how out of touch Obama and his supporters are, and surely this will expose them and rally regular Americans to Romney’s cause. The press won’t want a runaway race all summer, so it will manufacture a close contest even if Romney doesn’t have the wherewithal to provide one.
Answer: Who does not know this is what will happen? According to the TPM article yesterday, Romney was ahead right. This is the same game that has been played with respect to President Obama since forever. Mark Halperin gave Romney an “A” in every debate all he needs is to add “this is great for Mitt” and we are done. Romney’s problem is not about a “good speech,” it’s about a bad policy for the last 10 years. He has been running for President since forever and still has nothing. The press has been running on the premise that it is a horse race even before the GOP primary began. The press has manufactured a close contest before the first GOP ballot count, we were told Romney would finish Obama. That is the premise that has been pushed on us from both sides of the political discourse. So the above paragraph is bullshit.
In the end, the author tells us Obama will win… so what was the point of the overall article?
PAGE CLICKS!!!