It’s 1:00 AM and I just returned from the final Obama rally before the New Hampshire primary tomorrow. The feeling of momentum and possibility here in the state is unbelievable. Concord, NH isn’t exactly known as the capitol of the progressive movement (just ask the students who spent there summer working there on climate change), but tonight it entered history. Only moments ago, I was surrounded by people of all ages, all races, and all political backgrounds cheering and shouting for Obama, and more importantly, shouting for change. Cheering and crying as Obama talked about the union organizers who fought for the right to organize, women who marched for the right to vote, and students - and here’s where the crowd begins to go wild - who marched in Selma, Birmingham and Montgomery and fought for civil rights.
What does this all mean? Is it all rhetoric? Of course it is. But what it means is that Obama is rallying this state and in turn the country around the idea of a movement. The high-school kids in Concord, NH who rallied for Obama: they’ve never yelled for the civil rights movement before, they’ve never been told they’re part of a movement before - and now, there they are, cheering to be part of something bigger than themselves.
And while specific policy points are important and positions matter - so does this feeling of change. Obama is making people feel like they can do something. People feel that radical change is possible and realizing that they want to be a part of it. As an activist, getting people over the barrier of believing that they can’t accomplish anything is always the biggest challenge, I feel. The feeling that nothing can be done - the feeling that this challenge of climate is simply too big, that’s what I see blocking progress. Obama is helping us get past that.
Especially among youth. The youth turnout in Iowa was historic and phenomenally important. Not only is the Obama campaign engaging thousands of young people in politics for the first time, they are making our job as youth activists much easier. A strong youth vote scares establishment politicians, making them more open to our demands. It helps us fund-raise, showing foundations and donors the power and value of youth organizing. It serves notice to the country that a new generation is rising up.
No, Obama’s policies aren’t perfect - not even close. We need to keep pushing him on it - that’s why students here in NH handed out info about coal and mountaintop removal at the rally tonight, why we’ve been doing global warming campaigning here for the last 6 months. But listen, this fight isn’t going to be won with policies. Look at the US Congress - are this people ever, really going to pass the laws we need them to? I mean seriously, you know who works in Washington, many of you have lobbied them for years - you think they’re going to radically transform our country in the time we need them to? As Obama says, the scale of our challenges have exceeded the capacity of our broken politics.
The only chance we have is to completely redefine politics in this country - to spark a massive movement for a clean energy economy strong enough to lift millions out of poverty, to stop global warming. To follow the tradition of the civil rights movement that refused to only fight their battle in Washington, but fought in the streets. It’s about changing the conditions on the ground, not in Washington, which is what matters now.
And while Edwards might fight harder in Washington, and Kucinich might have better policies, and Hillary might be able to pull more strings, no one will help us get the American people to believe in radical change more, no one will change the conditions on the ground outside of D.C. more than Obama.
We have an immense fight ahead of us. None of the presidential candidates will be able to deliver the kind of change that we need right now. But when students of every race and background join hands together, put on green hard hats, and sit down in front of coal plants all across this country, we need a president who believes in social movements - a president who was a community organizer, working for $12,000 a year on the streets of Chicago, and a black man who knows what it is to struggle in this country - we need Obama in the White House.
He won’t stop global warming on his own. But I think he won’t be able to turn a blind eye on our movement if it is brining people together, if it is galvanizing young people, and if its more than just bitter critique and criticism, but inspirational and aspirational - if it is like Power Shift was, like Green for All is becoming - we’re on the right track. It’s easy to back away from policies, it’s harder to back away from your identity. And that’s what we’ll challenge when we build a movement for clean energy in this country. It won’t be easy - it wouldn’t be no matter who becomes president - but with Obama, I think we have a fighting chance.
Votes are already starting to come in here in New Hampshire. Obama is going to win here, he’s going to win in South Carolina, and he’s going to go on and win the nomination and the presidency - no guarantees in politics, but that’s my bet. And it’ll be an incredible thing for this country and our movement. Let’s position ourselves to take advantage of it. Let’s get out there and talk with people - not berate them about how they’re blind to the real issues, but welcome them into our movement, take the inspiration they are feeling and magnify it with our vision for a new America. Change is on the move - let’s take advantage of it.
Share your opinion - I want to hear your disagreements, your priorities, your candidate. I haven’t always supported Obama, I’m a newcomer. But I’m convinced, and I’ll do my damndest to convince you.
Subscribe by Email!
Subscribe by RSS!
Share on Facebook
I just read your comments. I am glad you are voting this year. It is an exciting time in America. I noticed that you admit that Obama is just telling you (talking about) rhetoric aka no substance, no specifics, but you still plan on voting for him no matter what?
**What does this all mean? Is it all rhetoric? Of course it is.** you affirm
You also say **And while specific policy points are important and positions matter - so does this feeling of change. Obama is making people feel like they can do something.**
All feelings aside, I question why it is that someone like yourself plans to vote for a candidate that only offers “rhetoric” to make people “feel good” or as you say, **feel like they can do something** and yet, that same candidate doesn’t specifically outline what theirspecific policy positions are.
I think Obama’s campaign has played it brilliantly thus far. They have managed to avoid getting pinned down on specific policy positions in Iowa and New Hampshire, and have been allowed to just talk in generalities…more rhetoric.
I wonder why it is that Obama continues to refuse to take questions from the audience and reporters at his campaign stops? I know he hasn’t done a regular reporter Q&A session in several days.
As you say, the crowds for Obama are excited about doing something. I just wonder what that “something” is that Obama has planned. Until I know more specifics, until I see Obama face the tough questions about his record and provide substantive answers, and specific policy positions on the issues, I will not be supporting him for POTUS.
What is your opinion about the fact that Obama’s New Hampshire and S. Carolina campaign staffs are headed by lobbyists? Obama said in the deabte this weekend that his biggest achievement in the US Senate was passing lobbyist reform so lobbyists could not wine and dine public officials with lunches, meals, etc., but then Charlie Gibson quickly pointed out to Obama that such unethical behavior can happen, as long as all the parties are standing up. According to Obama, that was HIS finest achievement as a US Senator. Does that concern you at all?
Here is my point: The American people deserve to know where ALL the candidates for POTUS stand on the challenges that face America. They should have to answer tough questions and provide specific answers on their policy positions. Obama should NOT be excluded from that process. Do you agree?
My $.02
PS: Did Obama take ANY questions from the audience tonight? If so, what was asked, and what were his answers? Thanks!
I had a revelation tonight and it ultimately confirmed my support for Obama…let me share. In all honesty It’s hard for me to get over my distaste for the Clintons and impeachment, I do respect them for their work for America and Bill has really impressed me over the past few years with his work on global issues and with NOLA. Bill was the first president I voted for back in 92. I turned 18 in October and voted for him in November. I’d never take that vote back. When I found out that Hillary was running I was on the fence. On one hand, I will always respect the Clintons. On the other hand I was jaded and pushed out of mainstream politics during the Lewinski trials. I just got so fed up with the hatred and bickering and I gave up, Voted Nader in ‘00 and then turned my back. Guess what! We ended up with GWB…alot of us learned our lesson in 2000.
With all that said, I definatly could support Hillary in 08, and if she wins the nomination I will be voting for her. You’d have to cut off my legs to keep me away from the polls. I feel this is the most important vote I will have ever cast. But My father said something to me tonight that stopped me dead in my tracks. My Father has advanced parkinsons disease. I quit my job to take care of him myself instead of putting him in a home. He was born in 1930 He faught in Korea, His two older brothers faught in WWII, his father faught in WWI and he lost his youngest brother in Viet Nam. He comes from a strong military background. He also has expressed he was for Jim Crow Laws during his younger life, has told me of open hatred of Mexicans and feels all homosexuals should be marched of the SF Pier. Yet he told me something tonight as we were watching the news that shocked me to my bones…it gave me chills. Since this process has started, evertime Hillary comes on the news, my Dad launches into his standard “I Hate Clinton” Retoric…I’m used to it, the first president he voted for was Ike. My Dad lives, Breathes, Shits hatred for the Clintons. When I first registered as a young 18 years old and told my Dad I was a liberal Democrat he was pissed, but then after a few monthes of arguement, he could see it was truely what I believed and that we just had different world views. He actually told me he was proud of me for standing for what I believed in.
Tonight, as we were watching Obama on ABC, my Dad told me he actually liked Obama. I almost didn’t know what to say. A 77 year old, grizzled war vet with a very, very firm hatred for liberals…he still rags me from time to time for idolizing John Lennon, actually said he liked Obama. I told him “You know he’s pretty liberal” and he replied “I Know, but I can tell he’s standing for what he believes in” Then I asked “Would you ever vote for him?” He responded “Of course not, but I still like him” It all tied in so quickly that I knew my gut had been right from the start. Obama’s message is from his heart, there isn’t an ounce of artificialness in his words. Republicians and independents can sense that, just as we liberals do. When I hear Bush speak, I instantly tune him out because I know he’s full of crap. Well Republicans feel the same way for Clinton, any Clinton. Electability is the final end game to this process and Obama has it in Spades. Obama has the best chance to be heard by republicans and independents, and he just might win enough of them to take the White House.
The young people are finally motivated to the polls and that is what this country has need for a long time. But I am an Edwards supporter and I’ll tell you why.
I’m sitting here in the sacrifice zone - West Virginia - where every day the coal barons, aided by the state and federal government are succeeding in blowing us off of the planet. Obama is one of the biggest supporters of this, I can’t hardly type the words, “clean coal” power plant in Illinois. Three things: there’s no such thing as clean coal; the price keeps going up, our kids are going to pay for it and they can’t afford it; and if WV isn’t gone already (which I’m not so sure it isn’t) it will certainly be blown to bits to fill the pockets of Obama’s contributors.
I was a political consultant in IL for 8 years. I still read the papers and keep up with the inside scoop. As much as I like this young man’s message I don’t like the people and the money he is tied to. The news of his unethical dealing have not reached the national press - and they probably won’t. What IS making the press are all of John Edwards’ proposals coming out of Barrack Obama’s mouth.
There’s where I draw the line. If you’ll steal another’s words, plagiarize their writings, then you are capable of just about anything - including blowing my house off of the map.
God bless every young person who supports Obama or any other candidate. I’ve voted in every election since I was 19 - we had to fight to get that vote during Viet Nam. So get out there and be Americans! As for me, I’m sticking with John Edwards to the finish, because he will not cave in to the big corporations, he will work with the unions not against them, he’ll get us out this war now, give my family some health care, and most important to me - he is the only candidate who has the guts to say that “MOUNTAINTOP REMOVAL IS WRONG AND MUST STOP!”
What does this all mean? Is it all rhetoric? Of course it is.
That’s great. At least you’re aware of the fcat that you’re voting for an empty suit, which is more than can be said for most Obama supporters.
Refreshing that the young people are active in this election. I’m a John Edwards supporter - here’s why:
Edwards is the only candidate still in the race that has stated that “Mountaintop Removal is wrong and needs to stop.” He has been endorsed by Ralph Nader, the Greens AND the United Mine Workers. He is against tax-payer give-aways to the energy sector and the coal industry and does not support our hard-earned tax dollars going to investing in coal-to-liquid.
Obama, on the other hand, is one of the strongest supporters of coal-to-liquid. There’s only one way to get enough coal to fuel that dynamo - MOUNTAINTOP REMOVAL! No other form of mining will generate enough coal to keep up with the government plan of “cheap” energy, big profits and fooling the American people into believing that they are serious about tackling global warming.
I’m in the sacrifice zone - West Virginia - where day by day the coal industry, state and federal government are in the process of blowing us off the planet. And they are succeeding. Fox Business News just released a story: Obama, Huckabee, Clinton, Rockefeller and Romney Support Coal-to-Liquid Fuel. In other words - they have bought into the coal industry propaganda and are ready and willing to snuff a whole section of Appalachia - our people, our culture, our mountains - to fill their coffers and put more money into corporations and Wall Street. Grab-and-Run economics is why West Virginia, Kentucky, Alabama and others are where they are today.
Obama is in the pockets of the corporations and the federal lobbyists. His proposals are verbatim the words that we have heard from John Edwards for four years. His ideas are not his own - he stole them from John Edwards. If he is able, with a clean conscience, to plagiarize Edwards he is capable of anything. Including BLOWING WEST VIRGINIA OFF OF THE MAP!
I applaud this young man for his passion. And I applaud anyone who has the gumption to get out there and be involved. But I well remember the sign on the old-time merchant’s store: “Go No Further to Get Cheated.”
“Reflecting the interests of southern Illinois coal producers, he sponsored legislation to provide tax breaks and other incentives for refineries that turn coal into liquid fuel.. (also) Exelon’s (energy) executives and employees were big backers of Obama’s 2004 Senate bid and gave his presidential campaign nearly $160,000 in the first quarter of this year..” - Chicago Tribune.
I don’t think Obama can keep taking money from atomic and coal company executives, the latter who are blowing off the tops of mountains, and remain objective.
I am sticking with Edwards, the only candidate left who has spoken out against CTL and has not taken the industry money.
as others have said about obama’s record with coal, obama is a tool. let’s be honest. if you want to work to end destruction of the planet, you have to go after the profiteers — the corporations. they won’t stop doing what they’re doing. they just won’t. and if there’s any hope that a corporate-funded fella like obama will do anything to stop corporations, that’s simply false hope. actually, i think elections in general provide false hope.
that said, of the candidates kucinich is my favorite, but i’ll vote for edwards because he’s a feisty gent who obviously has a taste for the flesh of big business.
Jamie, thanks for a great post. I’m also going to be voting for Obama and have cheered every victory he’s had so far. It is important to feel good about being engaged, just as its important get more people, especially young people engaged. Don’t forget, Kennedy was slow and reticent in actually addressing the civil rights problem, but he helped create the atmosphere for that movement to grow. I’d much rather work for paradigm shift in a country engaged in politics and hopeful about its future than one where its leaders are locked in a continued debate over partisan politics. Its not black and white, there are trade-offs to this view, I’m not deluded. But I am choosing and casting my vote.
for those of you wondering about obama’s campaign positions please go to barackobama.com and read his positions. his speeches dont need to lay out specifics.
as for CTL, MTR, etc… Obama is an illinois state senator. yes he said he “transcends normal politics” but lets face it, hes covering his own ass. once he wins the presidency, which he WILL, his position on CTL, MTR can be changed. and its up to the citizens of the US to do it.
he is different. he cares what people say. he understands grassroots movements. if we want to stop coal plants then we need to motivate people the way he does. some of his supporters stood in the winter weather of NH for 2.5 hrs just to ensure they saw him speak this morning. we need to be that motivational, why not start with a leader of our country that can do the same for us…
“Edwards might fight harder in Washington, and Kucinich might have better policies, and Hillary might be able to pull more strings”
…I think that is a pretty good assessment of the candidates.
Obama voted for the most anti-environmental bill ever to pass
congress: the pro-nuclear, pro-coal, pro-ethanol Energy Policy Act of
2005. He hasn’t changed his tune much, since he also voted for the
energy bill this legislative session (over the summer; he failed to vote on its
final passage). This bill included lots of dirty stuff, and Obama didn’t exactly speak out about the pro-nuke, pro-coal, pro-ethanol stuff in there.
In January 2007, Obama co-sponsored the Coal-to-Liquid Fuel Promotion
Act of 2007 (S.155). After being attacked over it, Obama took only a
small step back from his promotion of coal-to-liquids — claiming
that he’ll only support it if it can produce fewer greenhouse gas
emissions than conventional oil refineries (which is impossible,
meaning that they’ll just do some screwy calculations to rationalize
and mislead, while still promoting it). He still sponsors S.155 and
the bill still has no language that would incorporate Obama’s
backpeddling campaign promises about global warming criteria.
Exelon — the nation’s largest nuclear utility, based in Illinois
(the #1 nuclear power state) — by way of their corporate officials,
is among Obama’s top 6 campaign contributors. Obama remains pro-nuclear.
Obama’s support for ethanol, coal and nuclear has been pretty
consistent and disgusting. No honest environmentalist can truthfully
say that he’s “be a great president” on environmental issues.
On other issues, he’s not much better… having voted in favor of
numerous war funding bills, having refused to take the nuclear
weapons option off the table with regard to U.S. using them on Iran
or other countries, having joined recently with Clinton in support of
the corporate-neoliberal North American Free Trade Agreement to Peru,
having voted build 700 miles of double-layered fencing on the
U.S.-Mexico border by the end of 2008, etc.
So, let’s get real here. If you want to play
“lesser” evil with corporate puppets in democrat’s clothing, that’s
your prerogative. However, please let’s not pretend that Obama, Clinton or even Edwards are somehow our friends on energy and environmental issues. Their track records show otherwise and their corporate campaign contributions dictate otherwise even moreso.
All about Obama:
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=90&ItemID=14670
This was a great post — I too have been so moved by Obama. Your words resonated with me and I hope you don’t mind, but I quoted you on my blog where I was writing about Youth voting and civic engagement. We need this man to lead our country and if the youth would mobilize, they can decide who will be our next president.
“As you say, the crowds for Obama are excited about doing something. I just wonder what that “something” is that Obama has planned.”
Mr. Proud American, I think the point Jamie is trying to make doesn’t have to do with what Obama has planned, it has to do with what we have planned: a broad-based movement calling for an end to the climate crisis and fighting for a sustainable, just, and prosperous future for all.
Jamie has made the best case I’ve heard yet for why we - the members of the youth climate movement - should support Obama: because he’s creating the environment for our movement to grow, and we all have a pretty strong interest in that.
I’ve been a strong Edwards supporter. He seems to me to be both the most progressive, populist candidate on just about all fronts and yet also seems to find a way to talk to independents, moderates and conservatives without immediately turning them off. Despite being strongly progressive, he matches up very well against all the Rs in a general and is highly “electable.” Most importantly to me, he has shown the most leadership on climate and energy issues, coming out with a strong climate/energy plan very early on and he should be credited with driving Obama and Clinton to take stronger stands. More than that, he seems to “get it” better than anyone else: climate is clearly a top priority for him, and he’s convinced me early on that he understands both the scale of the problem and the commitment required of the response.
Clinton seems to get it now, or at least she has done her homework and has smart people around her. She’s also taken whole stock the green jobs platform from 1 Sky/Power Shift/Step it Up, which is excellent, and she’s got the economic opportunity messaging down pat. But to me, it seems like climate is just another of six or so policy issues for Clinton, not one of her top one or two priorities, and she seems the least likely to unite broad-based support for strong climate policy and a clean energy future.
Obama has a good solid climate/energy plan now too (about six months after Edwards’ plan and a week or so after Clinton’s if I remember correctly), and he sprinkles it into his stump speeches. But he has yet to convince me that he is really committed to the issue, or that he isn’t just saying it because he has to, because Edwards and groups like LCV - and us - have made it clear he has to talk about climate.
All that being said, Jamie’s case to support Obama is a good one - not for his policies, or for his personal commitment to climate, but because of his apparent ability to spark a “movement mentality” in this country, and to empower every day citizens - and young people - with a feeling that they can collectively change the world. That would be a huge boon in our efforts to create a movement for a sustainable, just, and prosperous future, and may trump a candidates’ policy positions, as long as we’re convinced Obama will be receptive to our movement - to the movement he will help spark, even if unintentionally - once elected.
We can’t rely on a president - any candidate - to change the world for us. It’s our future at stake, and it’s foolish to put that future in the hands of any candidate or President, no matter how good they are. We’re going to have to create the change we want to see, and we can! If Obama helps convince millions more young people that they can indeed create the change they want to see - forget what Obama wants to see - then he could be our most effective ally on the campaign trail, and in the White House.
We should continue our already highly successful efforts to drive the candidates to take stronger and stronger positions during the elections. And at the same time, we should start preparing to push climate into the top of the priority list for whichever candidate moves into the White House in January 2009. Our work will not be over in November 2008, but through diligent efforts over the next 10 months, we’ll be in the right position in 2009 to capitalize and make the critical push for strong federal action (finally!).
Eye on the prize folks…
Jaime, great post! I appreciated your candor and enthusiasm. I too am an Edwards fan because he has the strongest policy ideas for climate change and isn’t indebted to big business. However, your point is taken that Obama may be the best candidate because he catalyzes our sense of possibility. This pushes me to ask one question: Do we need a president with the best policy ideas, or one with good policy ideas who inspires us to be empowered? And damn, I’m thinking it’s the latter.