No, This Is Not an Anti-Obama Shirt.
Before I get too many emails accusing me of hating Obama because of this shirt, hear me out. I love listening to him. He is probably going to do a great job if elected. I agree that moving towards the center is the best strategy to get elected.
My problem is that all the left-wing, idealist young people who have supported the hell out of him are going to walk out of the process and give up. Not because he’s doing anything specifically to compromise them, but because they don’t realize that everybody who is elected at that level can only get by using compromise.
It’s also very important not to get cocky and assume that Obama is going to win. Just because he’s up in the polls now is no reason not to think forward and worry about a McCain win. In the summer of 1988, Dukakis had a huge advantage over H.W. Bush I. Look how that turned out, two Bushes later.
I’d love to hear what people think about this design now that I’ve said my piece. Just keep it civil and understand that my cynicism has nothing to do with wanting a Republican victory. I donated to Mike Gravel, for Pete’s sake!
July 8th, 2008 at 4:34 pm
Okay, so I can sort of see this as a strategic move – reduce expectations now so that later there will be less backlash. However, I think the timing is *way* off. The time to bring down expectations was when he got the nomination, or months before then (think February). By piling on now, it just drags the energy behind his campaign even further down.
I understand that you’re not hoping for McCain to win – that much was quite clear from the copy on the shirt’s page, in fact, so anyone who *does* think that must either a) not be paying attention, or b) think you’re lying. That said, I think that this shirt is harmful.
As I said in my email, I don’t think that we should all shut up and bow to Father Obama regardless of what he says or does. There is a difference, though, between slogan t-shirts and, say, writing a position piece. Slogan shirts can be easily used to help McCain win in November; position pieces, much less so. If I were entirely sure Obama was going to win, I’d be in favor of strong criticism via whatever media – ’cause heck, so long as it’s not going to be McCain, I’d love to see Obama pushed to take more progressive positions – but that’s not the situation.
July 8th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
Understood! I can accept the disagreement, at least we’re rooting for the same guy.
Though I am still sore we lost Gravel and Kucinich.
July 8th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
Yeah, it would be nice to have an *actual* progressive. On the other hand, I think Obama gives us a better chance than either Gravel or Kucinich would have at actually winning.
Hopefully Kucinich will keep doing good work in the House for many years to come.
July 9th, 2008 at 3:37 am
Without an explanation, this t-shirt comes off as anti-Obama. And I’m not saying this because I can’t take any criticism of my exalted leader. I actually agree with your sentiments about the man, sans the Gravel part. (Dude is a little nuts for my taste.) It’s just that if I saw this shirt on the street, I’d think the wearer was trying to say “Hey, dirty hippie. Do you like hope? Well, you better shut your bong-hole because you’re going to be real disappointed come November.”
On the other hand, you could shop this t-shirt around conservative blogs, make a shit-ton of money, and then donate it all to Obama. That’d be cool.
July 9th, 2008 at 9:38 am
“On the other hand, you could shop this t-shirt around conservative blogs, make a shit-ton of money, and then donate it all to Obama. That’d be cool.”
Now *that* is thinking like a capitalist!
At the end of the season, you send a thank-you message to all the customers with the total they helped donate to his campaign.
July 9th, 2008 at 11:25 am
I don’t have any issue with the shirt design. I do have a problem with the Bob Herbert piece, though. I confess I haven’t been paying super-close attention to all of Obama’s positions, but the statements on the death penalty and religious organizations that Herbert cites are the first time I’ve heard Obama say anything about those issues. Maybe I’ve missed something and he’s indeed changing position.
On the other hand, it reads to me more like Herbert is suddenly hearing Obama say stuff he doesn’t agree with, and takes it as a shift – forgetting Obama’s own statement about honesty “even when we disagree.” I don’t agree with Obama on everything, but I never expected to. He’s refining some positions somewhat, but I don’t think he’s “zigging with [...] reckless abandon” – rather, he’s being honest, and it turns out he’s not as lefty as some people had assumed. But as long as he’s being honest about his opinions and positions, I’m happy, and he’s still a big step above a lot of others.
Like I say, I haven’t been studying the whole thing closely, so maybe I’m missing something, but I’m probably about as well informed as most interested-but-not-obsessed Americans, so right or wrong, I suspect my view isn’t that uncommon. But who knows.
July 9th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
Yes, everybody who is elected at that level only gets there by compromise. But this isn’t compromise, although it certainly is politics as usual. It’s bait-and-switch. It’s presenting yourself as some kind of new and exciting product that will revolutionalize the industry and change the very world, and then you find the same old shitty sanctions against Iran and legal wiretaps on your grandma because she likes hummus a lot. I don’t mind the compromisin’, it’s all the deceivin’ it takes to get there.
July 9th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
Depends on what he compromises to get there, IMHO I hope its not any of the things we know and love about him.
July 9th, 2008 at 8:57 pm
I have to confess, I’ve found Obama’s rightward tilt over the last few weeks to be disturbing. When I saw him speak six months ago, there was no hint of compromise about him, and he was fighting and winning a two-fronted war. Now he’s softening his liberal-firebrand image like crazy, and all the enthusiasm and grassroots wind appears to be going out of his sails.
I hope with all my heart that he’s setting us up for a massive resurgence of “Yes We Can” spirit with his big stadium acceptance speech. But the buckling on FISA (and it’s WAY more than teleco immunity, although that is a big deal) has me concerned.
July 9th, 2008 at 8:57 pm
I love how being against blanket pardons for felonious behavior makes you a left-wing. Supporting the rule of law is only centrist of you’re locking up brown people?
July 9th, 2008 at 9:15 pm
[quote]
On the other hand, you could shop this t-shirt around conservative blogs, make a shit-ton of money, and then donate it all to Obama. That’d be cool.
[/quote]
That’s… seriously the best idea I’ve heard in a long time.
[quote]
At the end of the season, you send a thank-you message to all the customers with the total they helped donate to his campaign.
[/quote]
That’s the coup de gras.
I think it’s a fun shirt, but I have to concur it comes off first taste as a slam. Like many DS strips, once you’ve read it a couple times, the full concept settles in, but that ain’t bumpersticker politics.
July 9th, 2008 at 10:01 pm
[quote]
“On the other hand, you could shop this t-shirt around conservative blogs, make a shit-ton of money, and then donate it all to Obama. That’d be cool.”
At the end of the season, you send a thank-you message to all the customers with the total they helped donate to his campaign.
[/quote]
The conservative blog readers would be buying and wearing this shirt because it amplifies a message they think helps their candidate win – doing something like this would be reinforcing the “incorrect” interpretation of this as an “Anti-Obama Shirt.”
You have no control over peoples’ interpretation of this design in the wild, and a well designed/catchy t-shirt (along with support for the “grassroots are abandoning Obama” talking point) could definitely have a negative effect on the chances of your desired outcome, regardless of your actual intent.
Whether you believe that the money you raise will create a greater positive impact than the negative one is up to you, but the pessimist in me is going to side with the latter. The conservative blog gambit just seems like the epitome of the “get[ting] cocky” that you advise against. Dissent is important, but so is considering the actual vs. intended effect of the message you’re trying to get across.
July 9th, 2008 at 11:44 pm
[...] undefined or vaguely defined occupation. One remarks about Obama’s recent move to the right with a new campaign logo. Obama denies any change in policy. posted by Blazecock Pileon (131 comments total) 4 users marked [...]
July 10th, 2008 at 10:24 am
I’ve been thinking about this for a few days now. I think that the feeling of betrayal being expressed by many on the left buys heavily into the belief that the antidote to hard-core conservative partisanship is hard-core liberal partisanship. That hasn’t been the theme of Obama’s campaign at all. Obama’s main appeal all along has been that he is a compromiser who can bring people of different backgrounds and beliefs together to solve our problems in new ways. A President Obama, even if he has a likely Democratic majority to work with in Congress, will need to get liberals/progressives to compromise within a pretty broad Democratic coalition before there’s any hope of compromising with the Republicans. His “post-partisanship” (god I hate that term, sorry) is is biggest asset. Many different people are able to project their hopes and desires onto Obama – this is what makes him such a great candidate. I’m of the opinion that we need an effective leader who will bring about compromise and break through the naked partisanship of the last eight years.
That reminds me – one of the things that distresses me about this election is the amount of faith placed on the next president to do everything everyone wants. The president does not have absolute power in this country, and it stands to reason (let’s all pray for this) that the next president will reign in some of the power grabbed by the current one. There’s a real need for leadership to steer this country back in a non-disastrous direction, but next the president will need to work with a motley crew of entrenched interests, career politicians, and special interest groups of various stripes to make anything happen. We can’t afford to have another naked partisan as president, even if that person is a liberal partisan who will strive to correct the damage done by the current administration.
Anyways, you are on to something by pointing out that Obama hasn’t won squat yet, and that excited young people can’t just buy cool t-shirts, they still need to show up to vote. Points well taken.
July 10th, 2008 at 11:55 am
“My problem is that all the left-wing, idealist young people … don’t realize that everybody who is elected at that level can only get by using compromise.”
I’m left-wing on many social issues, an idealist, and 23. I resent your ignorant and condescending generalization.
“It’s bait-and-switch. It’s … sanctions against Iran and legal wiretaps on your grandma….”
Have you read the new FISA bill? I recommend knowing before speaking.
“I love how being against blanket pardons for felonious behavior makes you a left-wing.”
There is nothing of worth in that sentence. First: The FISA amendment bill provides immunity to lawsuits, not to prosecution, so it has nothing to do with felonious behavior, only liability-inducing behavior. Nothing in the FISA amendment bill, as far as I know, prevents an Obama administration Justice Department to look into illegal activity. Do you have information the rest of the public doesn’t? If so, please provide it. Second: The laws as they exist now are murky at best. Even without the FISA amendment, it’s not clear that they telcos would be liable. It’s pretty presumptuous for you to just say it’s “felonious” without any support. What chapter and section of the United States Code did they violate? What case law do you rely on to show without doubt that such a statute is constitutional in the face of contravening Presidential action? Unless you’re a swing vote on the Supreme Court of the United States, you’re not qualified to say whether this was criminal activity. Third: Being against it isn’t what makes you a left-wing extremist, being so against it that you don’t even recognize the value of the compromise is what makes you a left-wing extremist. In case you missed it, the FISA amendment preempts any and all future “war powers” arguments to get around FISA. It unambiguously closes off a major loophole that the Bush Administration has been using as a legal argument with some success. That’s HUGE. Fourth: Why is it so important for you to bankrupt the telephone companies? Isn’t it more important to reform the government’s relationship with civil liberties? Compensation for past wrongs would be great, but honestly, you can’t have it both ways. Either compromise legislation is passed (and the lawsuits don’t go through), or it isn’t (and civil liberties progress isn’t made). You choose.
Yours,
A Harvard Law student
July 10th, 2008 at 1:33 pm
Jay, you don’t have to be a dick about it. Be nice.
July 10th, 2008 at 7:44 pm
Speaking as a Brit, I can understand the sentiment expressed in the t-shirt. Back in the 1990s when the Conservative government imploded, Tony Blair and “New Labour” came along and appeared to offer a better way for politics and the people to move forward.
Move forward to 2008 and what do we have? A surveillance society of which Stalin would be proud, which daily kills off more of our civil liberties. A government intent on criminalising everything its leaders dislike without doing anything positive about the major issues in the country. A government which taxes the b*ll*cks off anyone it can. A leader who lied about Iraq’s WMDs and took this country into war on the basis of questionabke evidence. Now we have an unelected leader who couldn’t inspire urine to drop into his toilet and who blames anything and everything else he can think of for the problems of the country.
All those people who thought there was new hope were wrong. Britain is no longer a green and pleasant land.
That is disappointment: A new leader came along with the song “things can only get better”. BUt his legacy is not one of improvement. It is one of lies, control freakery, taxes imposed, more offences created yet people not feeling safer in their homes or on the streets.
For whatever reason there is disappointment and resentment at what this “New look” political party has done in government.
That’s what this t-shirt is about to me. Rave and wear whatever t-shirts you want. That doesn’t win elections. People need to vote and engage with the political process continually to get anything like progress, whichever side of the political spectrum you are on.
I’m just an outsider. Believe me, in Britain we know about disappointment in our politicians.
July 14th, 2008 at 7:25 pm
I voted for Dukakis in 1988 (my first presidential election) and I totally get the shirt from that angle. But I suspect the truly crushing disappointment will come after the election.
This year, I voted for McCain in the primary and encouraged my Democrat(ic) friends to vote for Obama. I do think they are the best we could hope for from their respective parties, and each have good qualities. At the same time, I may not vote for either of them–l don’t expect either to be perfect, but I agree with Dan above that the recent FISA vote should raise a red flag that both McCain and Obama (like Clinton before him) will be open for business as usual when it comes to personal privacy and freedom.
Anyone who can’t sense the potential for disappointment this year should go rent a copy of the 1972 Robert Redford film The Candidate…
September 17th, 2008 at 7:35 am
[...] Looks like I’m feeling a bit political this morning. The government’s evasive response to the European Commission over Phorm and BT’s secret testing has really annoyed me. A while back I came across this blog entry at Diesel Sweeties. [...]
February 28th, 2009 at 4:14 pm
[...] my Obama skeptic shirt to the BioDiesel show last night spawned one disappointing conversation. I kept trying to explain [...]