Obama: An Arrogant or a battlefield strategist?

Hello there! If you are new here, you might want to subscribe to the RSS feed for updates on this topic.

It was recently reported that while at the National Republican, a Republican club on Capitol Hill, Karl Rove made an “off the record” statement that he think Barack Obama is arrogant. Mr. Rove further noted that he saw examples of Obama’s arrogance. Chocolatecity.cc blog will address couple of Mr. Rove’s reasonings for referring to Mr. Obama as an arrogant. First let us take a look at the definition of the word “arrogant”. Arrogant according to Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, is an exaggerating or disposed to exaggerate one’s own worth or importance often by an overbearing manner.

Below are Mr. Rove’s reasons for calling Mr. Obama an arrogant.:

Mr. Rove added “We saw it when he, you know, earlier on, he made a big thing about he wanted to strengthen the public financing system. He said absolutely he would take taxpayer dollars in the general election if the Republican agreed to take taxpayer dollars and abide by the $85 million limit spending limit.” “And then, you know, that was when he didn’t think he could raise money. Now that he knows that he can raise money, he’s decided the rules shouldn’t apply, and he reversed course on Thursday.”

Mr. Rove’s second point: “ And look, it’s not just the only one we saw last week. We saw it on town halls. Early on, he said yes, I’ll meet John McCain any place, anywhere. John McCain says, look, let’s travel and jointly, and together and do 10 town halls between now and the time of the national conventions, one a week. And we’ll go every , let’s agree on places and let’s go together. We can travel together.”According to Rove, It was an interesting idea. And suddenly, “Mr. Anywhere, Any time” became a — he offered up two. He said let’s do one on the Fourth of July, on the night of the Fourth of July when every ambulatory American is going to be eating a hot dog or watching fireworks. And the other one in August. And when McCain said look, let’s have a serious discussion about having more than that, his answer was take it or leave it. That’s the quote.

In my opinion, Obama opting out of the public financing is a very smart and farsighted battlefield strategy. Obama’s refusal to used tax-payers money and opting out of the public financing for his presidential campaign, thus reversing his earlier stance in bold certainty he can raise millions more on his own as the first major-party candidate to bypass a system that was hurried into place in 1976 after the Watergate scandal. Had Mr. Obama not taken this route, he would have disappointed millions of his supporters.

Mr. Rove is upset that Obama is not falling into the Republican standard swift boating strategy that he Rove devised and craftfully masterminded over the years. Unlike John Carey and Al Gore, the Obama team have master the plan to counteract the Republican cheap attack machinery.

Prior to agreeing with Sen. McCain and Sen. Russ Feingold to “preserve a publicly financed general election,” Obama did not have any sense of the magnitude of money that he could raised through small contribution. Knowing what he knows today, why would he limit himself to $85 million. Experts are projecting that Obama could raise as much as $500 million which could put him at a tremendous advantage over the Republican presumptuous nominee, John McCain. The goal of this election is for Obama to defeat Mr. McCain. Why then would he assist McCain in derailing his chances of winning the election? If McCain was in similar situation as Obama, he would have done exactly the same thing.

Obama’s strategy to defeating McCain is the utilization of the 50-state strategy. The objective of the 50-state strategy is for the Democratic party to be committed to winning the elections at every level in every region of the country by placing an organized Democrats structure in every precinct in America. In other words, to take the no-stone-unturned approach. Rather than just focus on swing states, Obama will have an “in your face” approach by forcing the Republican to spend much more money on ad campaigns in Republican dominated and control states, such as Utah, Mississippi and Texas. There is a very strong correlation between an effective ad campaign and undecided voters. A crumb of $85 million is just not enough to accomplish this 50-state strategy.

On the issue of Obama meeting John McCain any place, anywhere for a debate, who will that benefit? If I was down 15% in the polls as McCain is, I will definitely make similar request as the McCain camp.

Don’t give me that sorry “he made a promise to the American people” crap. Studies have shown that most American do not care about public financing and do not want their hard earned tax dollar used for politicians to campaign. As a matter of fact the decision by Obama to opt out will provide a long term gain for Mr. Obama and subsequently take him to the White House.

Mr. Rove comments are more of a frustration, especially since he is being beaten at his own Swift boat game. Obama’s is refusing to allow the Republican to pull a fast one on him like they did to Al Gore and John Kerry. Not this time Mr. Rove, this is not arrogant it’s battlefield strategy combined with a dosage of marketing strategy.

Link to ChocolateCity.cc

Arguably the BEST African American blog