Opinion

Yes He Can

Obama's no radical, but he's been empowered by his fellow citizens to do big things.

By Michael Fellman, 5 Nov 2008, TheTyee.ca

Obama talking to crowd

President-elect Barack Obama

Text size:

Rate this:

Login/Register

On the afternoon of a rainy fall day in 1962, when I was a 19-year-old sophomore at Oberlin College in Ohio, I rushed into massive Finney Chapel, late as always, down a side aisle near to the front to see Martin Luther King Jr. speak. Maybe it was the light from the windows behind his head from where I was standing, but I swore I saw an aura around his head as he made a short but stirring speech to a rapt college audience. I remember thinking that that youthful, magnificent man would be president one day, and then dismissing the thought. This was the United States, I immediately reminded myself, where blacks still could not vote in the South and where most of the brutal institutions of segregation were still in place. Not in my lifetime, I concluded then, 46 years ago.

But that day has come; another brilliantly gifted and youthful black man has now become the president of the most powerful nation on earth.

Dozens of web sites are analyzing that victory and I cannot add much to what they will inform the Internet-savvy readers of The Tyee. Also, the results of many races are still inconclusive. For example, in Alaska, Ted Stevens, the 84-year-old king of pork, and a recently convicted felon, holds a slim lead in his re-election campaign. And the presidential results remain undecided in Indiana, North Carolina and Missouri.

Measuring the victory

Quick snapshots. In the popular vote, Obama won by around 6 per cent , the biggest victory margin by a non-incumbent president since Eisenhower's election in 1952. He won 43 per cent of the white vote, the highest number for any Democrat since LBJ in 1964. In the increasingly heterogeneous United States, Obama won 62 per cent of the Asian vote, where John Kerry won 56 per cent in 2004; 66 per cent of the Hispanic vote, 10 per cent more than Kerry; and an astounding 95 per cent of the black vote (Kerry won 88 per cent). Blacks compose 12 per cent of the American population, but they cast a disproportionate 13 per cent of the votes (up from 11 per cent in 2004).

Maybe someone who reads this column could do the math to figure out how big the impact of the black vote was this time. I would guess that it made the difference in Florida, Virginia and North Carolina, states going Democratic for the first time in a very long time.

Similar calculations of the Hispanic vote shifts in Nevada, New Mexico and Colorado would demonstrate similar effects in those states that changed from traditionally Republican to Democratic.

Class mattered in this election as well as race and ethnicity, particularly among poor and working class voters. Although it is hard to define class precisely, if one takes educational levels as a measure, Obama won 63 per cent of voters with less than a high school degree, where Kerry only won 50 per cent four years ago. Clearly the economic crisis trumped so-called value issues as well as bigotry for these voters, many of whom were the sort that McCain counted on to carry Ohio and Pennsylvania, which he did not.

Youth mattered as well: 66 per cent of voters aged 18 to 29 voted Obama, as did 69 per cent of first time voters more generally. The Obama campaign clearly energized the enormous electorate, around 135 million Americans voted this time, about 30 per cent more than four years ago.

McCain's self-destruction

Why did Obama sweep the board? Lots of pundits will tell you that the Palin choice was harmful for McCain, and that that he could not separate himself from W -- Mr. Unpopular. Certainly the economic crisis must have been the deciding factor for many voters, for which they blamed the Republicans.

In addition, I think McCain is a rather stupid man who let himself be captured by the nastiest of operatives at a time where meanness was counter productive. His gracious concession speech last night indicated that an alternative persona might have run better.

Obama's contrasting calm and disciplined manner made a huge difference. Over time, his presence reassured voters that he was the real deal, that he had presidential gravitas.

During the three debates, as if to prove that he was erratic and ill-natured, McCain rolled his eyes and gnashed his teeth while angrily attacking his opponent. In response, Obama just calmly laid out his talking points while smiling a rather bemused smile as McCain shot off his mouth. It reminded me of the contrast between Richard Nixon and John F. Kennedy in the 1960 debates -- JFK had that same cool detachment, that same ironic grin as he watched his opponent sweat and fulminate.

The challenges Obama faces

OK, winning was the easy part. How about presiding over the disaster zone?

As I argued in a previous essay in The Tyee, I believe that Obama is an instinctive centrist who by nature would not push the envelope of governance all that far in normal times. But I also believe that during this financial crisis, the whole political spectrum has just jolted to the left, and that Obama and the increased Democratic congressional majority will therefore go in that direction. Here I depart from the wisdom of the talking heads who seem to agree that the Unites States is an inevitably conservative nation.

Reaganism -- "the government is the problem" -- is dead, and so is deregulation. Liberalism will be reborn in the ashes. Financial regulation will return, and in an international framework. The government will intervene in the mortgage crisis and will likely produce a national health scheme. The rich will be taxed. The government will get involved in macro-economic projects, not only bridges and highways, but a massive project in alternative sources of energy.

Coming: the 'Big Deal'

Obama will now put together an ambitious economic plan that he will introduce at his inaugural on Jan. 20. If not another New Deal, it will be a Pretty Big Deal. There will be action.

Obama had better hope that the United States emerges from what promises to be a deep recession by the mid-term elections in 2010. If it does, he will cement a new liberal departure in American politics, as big a shift as Reagan's election in 1980. And the Republicans will have to choose between wallowing on the reactionary right or contesting the votes in the new centre, just moved leftward.

On foreign policy, Obama will begin a phased withdrawal from Iraq. Alas, he also will commit more troops to Afghanistan in another losing war. He has to go there to prove that he is a tough guy, too, even though he should know better.

As for Canada, I predict that the free trade treaty will not be re-opened and that our blue-eyed Albertan sheiks will continue to clean up while polluting their province with the ooze from the oil sands.

Obama will radically improve the American image in the world, and a reinvigorated Unites States will inspire other people, even Canadians, who are not that easily impressed. Our own Liberals will take heart, and even Stephen Harper will discover something progressive in his clammy tactician's soul.

Related Tyee stories:

[Tyee]

Michael Fellman, a historian and former head of SFU's Liberal Studies program, writes regularly about U.S. politics for The Tyee.

12 Comments:

Login or register to post comments

  • freebear

    3 years ago

    and Canada?

    Wow, compared to the character (from what I have seen so far via media) of Obama, Harper is a wet noodle!

    Unfortunately, I do not think it will make much of an impact on Canadian politics and the conservative government's agenda, for now.

    I am sure we have a number of 'simmering' leaders on the stove, but many often can not in good conscience, be a member of any of the current federal political parties!

    In the meantime we will continue to be the harvesters of fir, food, fish and fuel; and the U.S. and us are a long way from being weaned off oil (applause heard from the blue-eyed shieks in Alberta!).

  • mopled

    3 years ago

    He can, but will he?

    He's the same old same old, just in a different color. I understand how heartwarming that is to all who fought battles over racism, but he's window dressing.

    Fox News was very upset about what Nader wrote and accused him of racism in an interview.
    http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=ibsP6XN2dIo&eurl=http://www.prisonplanet.com/fox-news-angrily-smears-nader-for-daring-to-criticize-obama.html

    An Open Letter to Barack Obama: Between Hope and Reality

    by Ralph Nader
    Excerpt
    (Obama)received enormous, unprecedented contributions from corporate interests, Wall Street interests and, most interestingly, big corporate law firm attorneys. Never before has a Democratic nominee for President achieved this supremacy over his Republican counterpart. Why, apart from your unconditional vote for the $700 billion Wall Street bailout, are these large corporate interests investing so much in Senator Obama? Could it be that in your state Senate record, your U.S. Senate record and your presidential campaign record (favoring nuclear power, coal plants, offshore oil drilling, corporate subsidies including the 1872 Mining Act and avoiding any comprehensive program to crack down on the corporate crime wave and the bloated, wasteful military budget, for example) you have shown that you are their man?

    To advance change and hope, the presidential persona requires character, courage, integrity-- not expediency, accommodation and short-range opportunism. Take, for example, your transformation from an articulate defender of Palestinian rights in Chicago before your run for the U.S. Senate to an acolyte, a dittoman for the hard-line AIPAC lobby, which bolsters the militaristic oppression, occupation, blockage, colonization and land-water seizures over the years of the Palestinian peoples and their shrunken territories in the West Bank and Gaza. Eric Alterman summarized numerous polls in a December 2007 issue of The Nation magazine showing that AIPAC policies are opposed by a majority of Jewish-Americans."
    http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10809

    Obama's Whitehouse Chief of Staff is Rahm Emanuel, from the Illinois Dem. machine.
    He controlled the purse strings for candidates in the last election and did not fund anti-war candidates.

    Obama is another NWO puppet and watch out!

    His version of "socialism" is closer to Mussolini's than our mild version, witness his being onside with the bailouts.

  • Cynic

    3 years ago

    How dangerous false hope is.

    How dangerous false hope is. Obama's chief foreign policy controller is Brezinski. There is simply zero chance that Obama is who the fantasydwellers think he is, rather he is the latest puppet installed by the usual elites. Meanwhile, the vast transfer of wealth from the people into elite pockets continues with nary a peep from Mr. Obama.

    Here is something far more hopeful:
    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7065205277695921912

    Now we're talking.

  • anarcho

    3 years ago

    What is really important

    It isn't so important what Obama believes or wants - it is what the millions of people who have been activated want that is more important. If Obama fails to deliver this group will radicalize. If he can be pushed - as was Kennedy visa vis the Civil Rights Movement, they will also be radicalize4d.

  • RickW

    3 years ago

    mopled

    Quote:
    His version of "socialism" is closer to Mussolini's than our mild version, witness his being onside with the bailouts.

    http://remember.org/guide/Facts.root.hitler.html
    Adolf Hitler, a charismatic, Austrian-born demagogue, rose to power in Germany during the 1920s and early 1930s at a time of social, political, and economic upheaval. Failing to take power by force in 1923, he eventually won power by democratic means.

  • PacificGatePost

    3 years ago

    THE CAPITAL OF GOODWILL

    There may be additional value in the Obama win for a period of time.

    Goodwill may mean a deeper well to borrow from to fix the economy.

    http://pacificgatepost.blogspot.com/2008/11/americas-obama-capital.html

  • ME2

    3 years ago

    Obama's intentions?

    Unless he / she publicly adheres to an ideology, it is impossible to guess what a leader will do - or will not do - once elected. Trying to make a prediction based upon what was said or done while working themselves up through the pack is useless, since in doing so the art of compromise and aggrandisement is necessary.

    And that carries on through when leaders campaign, for in order to attract as big a voter base as possible, promises have to be dumbed down enough so that while the coded message is still there for supporters, it is not "radical" enough to frighten away new and swing voters.

    Harper tried to do this, but he couldn't escape his ideology tag, made plain by his association with the Reform Party and The Canadian Taxpayers Federation.

    Not so with Obama, since like the Canadian Liberals, the Democrats profess only a generalised Left-of-center approach, which wanders all over the place.

    And that leaves Obama with all kinds of room to do what he thinks best, for he will be wielding unbelievable power. We have already seen what can be done with the power of the Presidency while in the hands of someone like Dubya.

    Those who are looking for sweeping changes are certain to be disappointed, for putting the American ship of state on a new course will take decades, so each incremental step must be a one which clears the way for the next.

    So, IMO, judging Obama will require some time to see if his legislative changes have deep purpose and are followed through, rather than being done just for cosmetic effect.

  • G West

    3 years ago

    Big things????

    Not very likely...although the problems are big enough..

    Interesting piece in today's New York Times about 'reducing' expectations:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/06/us/politics/06expect.html?hp=&pagewanted=print

  • morechatter

    3 years ago

    Yes they will

    Thats the message I'm getting Yes they will and with that message is hope to the masses in a time when things are looking pretty grim and thats what it takes. And there are no easy solutions as it took Republicans eight years to get it into the economic mess largely because of their presidents inability to see the big picture and seeing war as a solution. Bush's focus has always been about big business and profits and often the rules don't apply when it came to him and big corp. Like for instance the environment as Bush has no problem with digging up Alberta and destroying the environment. My understanding of Obama there is likely going to be much consideration given to the tar mud in Alberta and the supply as new president looks for global warming solutions. This will impact Canada no doubt as Feds and Provinces count on money.
    So will they? Put the environment before their thirst for oil and invest in cleaner ways? Or will they continue to dig up Canada while destroying the environment now thats BIG when it comes to the earth.

  • alive

    3 years ago

    Obama or revolution?

    Well, let us put this another way: if Obama fails to improve things in a substantial way; then the only solution left is a full scale revolution!
    I would suggest this is a good time for us all to try really hard and quit bickering, as the alternative is not a pleasant thought!

  • ME2

    3 years ago

    Alive and morechatter

    Wel well, and just who would the revolutionaries be, and with what would they threaten the authorities? Pea-shooters?

  • alive

    3 years ago

    peashooters indeed!

    Well ME2, obviously you did not experience enough hardship in your life to understand that there comes a point where people simply have had enough BS!

    I would prefer if voters would solve this problem, but failing that ( like if Obama turns out to be a fraud ), then indeed everything from peashooters to bricks and stones will make the "leaders" realize that it is time to change their money-grubbing ways!

    Read a bit of history and you will see that revolutions start, when the population suffers enough!

    The financial crisis we experience today is not the doing of the poor people, but they are the ones who suffer real consequences!

    The swines who did it wind up with huge bonuses paid for by the taxpayers!

    That alone is enough to prove that we are being used and abused.

    Eventually we have nothing to loose, and that is the time when people will man the barricades!

    • The discussion for this story is closed. No more comments can be added.