BarackObama.com Literature

Noam Cohen looks at Obama’s online success in the Sunday Times. Placed alongside similar recent pieces from Umair Haque, David F. Carr and Marc Ambinder , and we have a trend, (which makes me skeptical.)

In Obama and the Rise of Asymmetrical Competition, Haque’s thesis is that the Obama campaign “reversed tremendous resource asymmetries” by “shifting from core to edge” and “leverag[ing] resources at the edges of the firm, instead of at it’s core…:[O]ften, in a hyperconnected world, instead of hoarding a critical resource, more value can be created by sharing it at the edges….[Today, ] “pint-sized revolutionaries are able to pop seemingly out of nowhere and topple yesterday’s giants – fast.”

David F. Carr, a BO volunteer in Florida, explores “the Barackobama.com Difference.”

Obama’s strategy didn’t rely on unique or bleeding-edge technology—far from it—but on using established hardware and software to empower a highly decentralized, largely self-organizing, network of volunteers…. The secret sauce is not so much the software as how the campaign uses it. The Web tools that let volunteers organize themselves happen to mesh particularly well with Obama’s message [of] “this is your campaign, this is not about me.”

Cohen:

Mr. Obama’s notion of persistent improvement, both of himself and of his country, reflects something newer — the collaborative, decentralized principles behind Net projects like Wikipedia and the “free and open-source software” movement. The qualities he cited to Time to describe his campaign — “openness and transparency and participation” — were ones he said “merged perfectly” with the Internet. And they may well be the qualities that make him the first real “wiki-candidate.”

The flood of praise for the campaign’s online successes often obscures the real-world challenges that accompany it. Obama campaign CTO Mike Slaby addressed those challenges at a forum organized by Northwestern’s Media Management Center and the Kellogg School. Your believers are the best advocate for you, he said. But since you you don’t get to tell people what to say, the key is communicating to your peopole the values you want them talking about. In any case, it’s “scary to give up control.”

Aminder takes on another theme we’ve looked at here– how the online campaign could translate into governance:

What Obama seems to promise is, at its outer limits, a participatory democracy in which the opportunities for participation have been radically expanded. He proposes creating a public, Google-like database of every federal dollar spent. He aims to post every piece of non-emergency legislation online for five days before he signs it so that Americans can comment. A White House blog—also with comments—would be a near certainty. Overseeing this new apparatus would be a chief technology officer….But the Web, like the politics it seeks to transform, is unruly and fickle. The online networks that have turbocharged Obama’s candidacy could end up hemming him in, and even stalling his agenda, as president.

Nagourney’s Black/Brown Tension Piece Based on Anecdote

In Tuesday’s New York Times, Adam Nagourney picks up on the Blacks and Latinos don’t get along and that’s bad for Obama meme that I’ve seen elsewhere, and blogged about. Nagourney provides lots of anecdote, but only two pieces of data– both of which run counter to his argument that Latinos won’t vote for African-Americans:

Mr. Obama confronts a history of often uneasy and competitive relations between blacks and Hispanics, particularly as they have jockeyed for influence in cities like Chicago, Los Angeles and New York.

The statement is not invalid– as Antonio Villaraigosa says in the article, “There are tensions among all groups,” and Black/Brown feelings have been hot at times in LA recently, as JDL recently noted. But Nagourney sites solely on quotes from a handful of people to make the case.

We hear from Natasha Carrillo, 20:  “Many Latinos are not ready for a person of color…I don’t think many Latinos will vote for Obama… I helped organize citizenship drives, and those who I’ve talked to support Clinton.” Javier Perez reports that his Grandmother doesn’t like Blacks. Nevada assemblyman, and Clinton backer, Ruben Kihuen says Latinos gravitate towards Hillary because “the Hispanic community is very family oriented, and we respect our mothers.” And Albert M. Camarillo, founding director of Standford’ Center for the Comparative Study of Race and Ethnicity concludes that Latinos “might not go into the direction of the Obama camp,” not based on any data, but rather on his observation that “there have been enormous misunderstandings and conflicts over local resources and political representations between the two group.”

(Nagourney could have cited the support Obama picked up Sunday from state senator, and former labor leader, Gil Cedillo and ex-senator Martha Escuita. Or, from California Senate majority leader Gloria Romero. or, for that matter, the endorsements he received Monday from Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Pasadena; former Rep. Mel Levine; Assemblyman Ted Lieu, D-El Segundo; Los Angeles City Councilman Bernard Parks; West Hollywood Mayor John Duran and Los Angeles County Supervisor Yvonne B. Burke, not to mention from Rep. Zoe Lofgren. )

The only numbers Nagourney cites to support his thesis are the percentage of the Black vote that LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa received in his two runs for City Hall: 50% in his successful 2005 run, up from 20% in 2001, according to reports of exit polls. That’s right: Nagourney’s one example of a Latino politician enveloped in Black/Brown strife won half of the Black vote in his last campaign.

Nagourney would have done well to take a look at the piece John Judis wrote last month, Hillary Clinton’s Firewall, in which he cites academic scholarship that shows ingrained racist attitudes among a large number of Latinos.

African American and Latino sociologists have been conducting extensive surveys in Houston, Los Angeles, Miami, New York, and Philadelphia. These surveys have generally found that Latinos display more prejudice toward African Americans than African Americans do toward Latinos or than whites display toward African Americans. In the words of University of Houston sociologist Tatcho Mindiola, Jr. and two associates, “in general African Americans have more positive views of Hispanics than vice versa.”

Judis also cites an early December poll from the Pew Hispanic Center in which Obama’s Latino support was 15%.

Could hostility toward and rivalry with blacks be a factor in Obama’s abysmal support among Latinos? It’s hard to say, but it’s certainly possible. And if it is a factor–and not simply the result of the Obama campaign’s inattention to Latino voters–then Clinton should benefit from this vote in the primaries and caucuses in states like California even if she loses in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.

How Will Obama Effect the Cook County State’s Atty. Race

The latest issue of the Chicago Reporter (not yet online) posits that Obama enthusiasm could boost Ald. Howard Brookins’ chances of becoming the first African American to lead the State’s Attorney office here. They point to note that the March 2004 primary, in which Obama was nominated, had a turnout that was “5.6 points” more than that of March 2000. The highest upswing was in 10 largely black wards and 5 dominated by white liberals.

ObamaMedia: Are Endorsements More Valued in Communities of Color?

The John Kerry (nary a mention of the endorsement on Kerry’s own site) and Ned Lamont stories are official. Steve Kornacki on the importance of Kerry:

Obama needs to convey the impression that his campaign is still on the offensive and that the loss hasn’t stalled his momentum at all. The willingness of a big name in the Democratic Party to embrace him two days after New Hampshire caters to this mperative, giving Obama a favorable headline that helps put the New Hampshire mess in the rearview mirror.

More important to South Carolian, the NYT reports that Rep. Jim Clyburn is reconsidering his earlier commitment to remain neutral: “But he said recent remarks by the Clintons that he saw as distorting civil rights history could change his mind.” Oops, indeed.

More on endorsements in the Hotline,  WSJ and the Swamp. And the Las Vegas Sun’s J. Patrick Coolican has reveals that caucus rules allow for “at-large” sites that could make the Culinary Workers’ endorsement even more vital:

Although the union is coy about how many of its members are registered to vote, the endorsement is expected to give Obama at least 10,000 supporters in the caucus, in a contest whose turnout estimates have ranged from 28,000 to 100,000.

In a caucus, supporters of a candidate literally stand together on one side of the room, demonstrating to everyone who is supporting whom. Many Strip shift workers, Culinary workers, will be voting at so-called “at-large” caucus sites on the Strip. This means Culinary members, for whom unity is a creed, will be able to enforce discipline. Clinton can no longer expect to win many delegates at those at-large sites.

The infusion of locked-down voters is only the most obvious benefit, however.

The caucus process requires participants to show up at 11:30 on the appointed morning and at the correct precinct location, which means organizations must identify supporters and ensure they show up. The Culinary is known as the most politically active and organized union in the state and one of the most active in the country. Political observers in Nevada have long assumed the union would provide the kind of organization that could deliver victory.

The Obama campaign, which has been working to win Latino voters with a sophisticated effort to woo them in their workplaces, can now do so with Culinary support and encouragement. A significant though ultimately unknown portion of Culinary membership is Latino, and the endorsement could have a prairie fire effect, spreading from workplaces to Latino homes and communities.

Finally, Culinary leadership, including Secretary-Treasurer D. Taylor and political director Pilar Weiss, are two of the most politically savvy — and feared — players in Nevada Democratic politics. State legislators and others are wary of crossing them.

A final thought, not directed at Coolican:  political pundits seems to imply that endorsements carry more weight with African American and Latino voters than it does with white folk. If true, is that perception accurate? Certainly, one can imagine, and see historically, that first time voters and new citizens may be more inclined to look to community leaders for guidance. Still, something rankles about the notion that in order to sway “minorities” (Blacks could be the majority in the South Carolina ballot), all one need to do is get their leaders on board, like Machine politics at it worst.

ObamaMedia: Chain emails, Robin Williams, Left-Libertarianism and a Skeptical Lupe Fiasco

In a comment on Rick Klau’s blog, Allison, apparently a New Hampshire voter, offers her analysis as to what happened Tuesday:

1) I think Obama overplayed his hand. Sorry Rick, but we’re not big on vague here, and he wasn’t selling anything specific. Yes, people want change, and they want hope, but they want details and he was woefully short on ‘em.

Rick responds thoughtfully in the comments (and in a new post):

the knock on Barack in IL was that he was a detail guy to a fault. He loved rolling his sleeves up and immersing himself in the minutiae of legislation. And he was really good at it.

Allison didn’t, however, leave me answer the question on so many lips this week: what was wrong with the New Hampshire pre- (and post-) vote polls? For my money, the Pew Research Center’s Andrew Kohut may be onto the most likely explanation:

Poorer, less well-educated white people refuse surveys more often than affluent, better-educated whites. Polls generally adjust their samples for this tendency. But here’s the problem: these whites who do not respond to surveys tend to have more unfavorable views of blacks than respondents who do the interviews.

Did Obama get his “We are not a nation of red states or of blue states; we are the United States of America,” line from Robin Williams’ Man of the Year?

The Annenberg Public Policy Center’s FactCheck looks at two widely-spread and scurrilous anti-Obama chain emails.

Dueling chain e-mails claim he’s a radical Muslim or a ‘racist’ Christian. Both can’t be right. We find both are false.

If these two nasty e-mail messages are any indication, the 2008 presidential campaign is becoming a very dirty one….These false appeals to bigotry and fear remind us of the infamous whispering campaign of eight years ago, when anonymous messages just before the South Carolina primary falsely accused Republican candidate John McCain of fathering an illegitimate child by a black woman…Such attacks usually can be disproved with less effort than it takes to forward them to others. The statement that Snopes endorsed the false claim that Obama is a Muslim radical is an example. So we find it disappointing that they continue to circulate. But we expect to see more of them as the election year wears on,

Like many of us, Chicago rappers Lupe Fiasco and Rhymfest have been engaged in a friendly Clinton-Obama debate. Lupe on his lack of Obamania:

[A]t the end of the day [all of the candidates], the first thing that comes out of their mouths is that they wanna continue this so-called war on terrorism, which is illegal and false.”

Daniel Koffler’s essay, in which he calls Obama a left-libertarian, was widely discussed in the libertarian blog world today:

Obama’s slogan, “stand for change”, is not a vacuous message of uplift, but a content-laden token of dissent from the old-style liberal orthodoxy on which Clinton and Edwards have been campaigning.

The Tribune’s John Kass riffs on Bubba’s “fairytale” criticism:

as we wait for Obama to transform our politics, let’s hold our breath and see who turns purple first…This fairy tale doesn’t begin in Kenya or Hawaii or Kansas or at Harvard. Obama’s political fairy tale really begins in Chicago. That’s where Obama’s own real estate fairy loved to play in Illinois Democratic — and Republican — politics.

Chicago is not really an enchanted land, unless you’ve got clout at City Hall…. And no Democrat — not even our national change-agent Barack Obama — would dare demand answers.

Latino Voters in Nevada and Califas: “Outside the wave of Obama-mania?”

Given Michael Whouley’s latest revival job and Bill Richardson’s apparently imminent departure, Latino voters, in Nevada on January 19 and California on Feb. 5 , are being hotly pursued by the remaining Democratic candidates.

For starters, we’re unlikely to see Hillary tryto paint Obama as overly pro-immigrant, as she did earlier this month. Absentee voting began Monday in California. In LA, JDL links to a Daily News article that notes that half of all 18-24 year-old voters are Latino. Jaime Regalado of Cal State LA’s Pat Brown Institute: “The negative focus on immigration could also get more young Latinos to the polls. This is one way for these young people to express their anger and exercise their political rights.” JDL further places the election within the context of SoCal (racial and generational) politics:

Current Black-Brown tensions and the recent focus on immigration will make the Obama – Hillary fight a microcosm of Los Angeles class and racial politics. Latino political heavy weights like Antonio Villaraigosa and Fabian Nunez have lined up behind Hillary. Other Los Angeles-based politicians, Assembly Majority Leader Karen Bass, City Council President Eric Garcetti, and Senate Majority Leader Gloria Romero, have thrown their support behind Obama. Labor is split on the two candidates. …[I]t will be an entertaining month.

In addition to immigration, California’s economic crisis will be a central issue for Latino and non-Latino voters (the mortgage crisis, the state’s $14 billion budget deficit, the Hollywood writers’ strike, the price of gas), as will issues of police brutality and gangs. That’s a lot to fit into a 30-second spot in any language.

But first Nevada, where Obama picked up the immigrant-driven SEIU and Culinary Workers endorsements. Will Clinton ally, and Cuban-American, Sen. Bob Menendez’s weekend’s foray into the state have an impact on the mostly Chicano, Mexican, and Central American voters?

Writing from New York for New America Media, Robert Lovato points out that another effect of New Hampshire is that the Dems aren’t the only ones chasing the non-Cuban Latino vote:

McCain’s unique challenge to Democrats for the Latino vote comes down to simple math: his GOP rivals’ zeal to win white votes with anti-immigrant appeals is perceived by my father (“I’ll be below the earth before voting for any of them”) and other Latinos, as severely anti-immigrant and anti-Latino, if not racist. McCain’s calls to treat immigrants “humanely” during the Spanish-language GOP debate contrasted strikingly with the smiley “get tough” talk of his shrill opponents…

[W]hen Democrats are evasive -– as in Clinton’s driver’s license flip-flop or when Obama vacillated after being asked by Univision anchors about his vote for the border wall — I see the moral and political opening exploited by Bush in 2004, and McCain before 2008. My father and most Latinos reject the wall as a “muro de la muerte” (wall of death). That the immigration debate merits neither Clinton’s attention nor Obama’s abundant rhetorical powers explains Latinos’ frustration (documented in the recent Pew Hispanic poll) and leaves many of us outside the wave of Obama-mania.

Onto Nevada, SEIU for Obama, Culinary Workers Next?

No news from the Culinary Workers endorsement decision until this afternoon, but the Las Vegas Sun reports that Obama won something yesterday: the support of the Nevada chapter of the SEIU. The article reminds us that Edwards retains the support of the 600,000 member-strong California SEIU– I wonder how much of that support will melt away towards Obama, both in California and Nevada. Will Edwards even be standing come the California primary on February 5? Reno Gazette-Journal blogger Anjeanette Damon asks:

with SEIU’s well-documented dysfunction, it’s not exactly clear how much of a turnout boon they will be to Obama

Joe Ralston offers five tips to the candidates, including:

Rule No. 3: There are three different states here.

The most important is called Southern Nevada. That’s where Las Vegas is, and thus where the votes are.

And inside the state of Southern Nevada, there are two very important cities with the same name — Sun City. Why go to them? It’s the Willie Sutton Law of Politics: They are where the votes are.

The second-most important state in Nevada is called Rural Nevada. Hint: Don’t call it the Cow Counties. They don’t like that out there, and they can be ornery.

If you are a Democrat, make a few token visits but don’t spend a lot of time there — most of the
Democrats out there are not exactly Kennedy or Obama or Clinton Democrats. If you are a Republican, spend more time there — they love Republicans. Extra hint: Trash Harry Reid wherever you go — they really aren’t wild about Harry.

The least important state in Nevada is called Reno. It’s the smallest little city in the big world — or something like that. It is also known as Yesterday’s Town. Don’t misunderstand — I love Reno, mostly because you have to fly there to get to cool places such as Lake Tahoe and, four months out of 24, Carson City. But Reno doesn’t have much effect on elections anymore, unlike big-turnout Rural Nevada and big-population Southern Nevada. But if you like to bowl, Godspeed.

Via Marc Ambinder, Ralston also adds, “This could be the best 10 days of covering politics in Nevada history. “

Bradley Effect in New Hampshire?

The Clinton-Obama race in New Hampshire is still up in the air, but procrastinators are full of theories as to why Hillary has apparently outpaced the final polls. Many theories center on Hillary’s tears on Monday. Dan Kennedy and John Wirzbicki, however, are asking if the discrepancy between the polls and the votes may be attributable to the Bradley Effect. Kennedy:

Obviously you can vote for Hillary Clinton without being a racist. But the results so far certainly don’t jibe with the polls.

Although the Bradley Effect was not seen in Iowa last week, as Jon Ponder says, Wirzbicki notes that the social aspect of a public caucus could mask such racist tendencies.  I’m sure real political scientists will be exploring this tomorrow and into the future.

NH Primary Morning Links: Anatomy of a Smear, Obama’s Brain and Kenya

Joe Klein reports (via Andrew Sullivan) that Obama’s been involved in trying to stop the political (or ethnic?) violence in Kenya:

In the days since his Iowa victory, Obama has had near-daily conversations with the U.S. Ambassador in Kenya or with opposition leader Raila Odinga. As of late this afternoon, before his rally in Rochester, N.H., Obama was trying to reach Kenyan President Kibaki.

Now has An Anatomy of a Smear:

To illustrate how a rumor based on falsehoods can spread, NOW takes a look at one claim that has received a lot of media attention recently: the “Barack Obama is Muslim” rumor.

And Steve Clemons is looking for Obama’s brain and finds Karen Kornbluh and Austan Goolsbee.

NH Eve Links: Fact Checking Obama; Immigration and Views from Iran

FactCheck.org, a project of Penn’s Annenberg Public Policy Center, has been reviewing statements from candidates on a nearly daily basis. Their analysis of Saturday’s debate included this on Obama

Obama claimed we are “back where we started two years ago” in Iraq. Actually, all indicators of violence show dramatic improvement compared with two years ago.

And a look at recent Obama health care ads:

Obama’s ad touting his health care plan quotes phrases from newspaper articles and an editorial, but makes them sound more laudatory and authoritative than they actually are.

David Weigel of Reason’s Hit & Run blog heard Hillary try to get to the right (and left?) of Obama on immigration:

She took another chance to nick Obama on a question about illegal immigration. “I don’t support drivers licenses for illegal immigrants,” she said, and referred a little to the infamous Philly debate. “By the way, Senator Obama does support drivers licenses for illegal immigrants. He’s on the record supporting them.” Hear that, delicate middle-aged white women in the audience?

That illegal immigration answer was a little nutty, weirder even then an answer on Latin America when she said she could understand why Evo Morales was popular and that we should reach out to Third Worlders who want health care and benefits. On immigration she said she’d thought about the logistics. “Can you imagine here in the Live Free or Die state if people knocked on your door and said, ‘We’re checking to see if there are illegal immigrants here’?” Second later she said she favored asking illegal immigrants to “come out of the shadows” and offer themselves to be deported….

Global Voices’ Hamid Tehrani summarizes Iranian blog reactions to the Obama Iowa victory. GV also points to a post from Nouri, the Moor Next Door on Obama and Aslan:

I wonder how that little boy watching Senator Obama become President Obama would feel knowing that the American President avoided being associated in any way with his father’s religion like a plague, and that leaders in the party of this president treated that same religion as if it were a genetic disease? He would probably turn out even less enthusiastic for American foreign policy, than he would have been otherwise, when he found out that this black president was not making any changes to his nations conduct in his country and region.