Email this post
If you're a politician from Illinois, you want to be compared to Abraham Lincoln. That's why Barack Obama announced his candidacy at the Old State House in Springfield, Ill. a site closely associated with the Lincoln legend. You don't want to be compared to Adlai Stevenson. But on Tuesday, Ed Rendell, in a conversation with The Washington Post, likened Obama to Stevenson.
Who is Adlai Stevenson and why wouldn't you want to be compared to him? The former governor of Illinois ran for president twice, in 1952 and 1956. And lost twice. Decisively.
He was loved by many in the Democrat Party at the time because he sounded like an intellectual, giving erudite speeches about the political system and the nation's problems. He was, in fact, a shrewd politician, and he came from a family of politicians. But he seemed, at times, more like a candidate for philosopher-king than president. His downfall, other than the misfortune of running against a seemingly apolitical and wildly popular war hero named Dwight Eisenhower, was that he had trouble connecting with working-class people.
Sound familiar? This is the caricature of Barack Obama put forward by his critics. The elitist. The professor. The philosopher, The one who can't connect with downscale white voters. The man who prefers complex answers to one-liners. And in November, this may turn out to be the political epitaph of Barack Obama, if he comes up short at the ballot box. It must be said, though, that no one ever thought of Stevenson as a rock star.
When you watch the video of Rendell making the comparison, it's obvious that he wasn't doing so maliciously; within the ranks of the Democratic Party, being likened to Stevenson hardly qualifies as a slur. It was more that Rendell was expressing his fear that Obama isn't connecting on the gut issues, and Rendell wants to see that change. If it doesn't, he could wind up like Stevenson. And come in second....
Who is Adlai Stevenson and why wouldn't you want to be compared to him? The former governor of Illinois ran for president twice, in 1952 and 1956. And lost twice. Decisively.
He was loved by many in the Democrat Party at the time because he sounded like an intellectual, giving erudite speeches about the political system and the nation's problems. He was, in fact, a shrewd politician, and he came from a family of politicians. But he seemed, at times, more like a candidate for philosopher-king than president. His downfall, other than the misfortune of running against a seemingly apolitical and wildly popular war hero named Dwight Eisenhower, was that he had trouble connecting with working-class people.
Sound familiar? This is the caricature of Barack Obama put forward by his critics. The elitist. The professor. The philosopher, The one who can't connect with downscale white voters. The man who prefers complex answers to one-liners. And in November, this may turn out to be the political epitaph of Barack Obama, if he comes up short at the ballot box. It must be said, though, that no one ever thought of Stevenson as a rock star.
When you watch the video of Rendell making the comparison, it's obvious that he wasn't doing so maliciously; within the ranks of the Democratic Party, being likened to Stevenson hardly qualifies as a slur. It was more that Rendell was expressing his fear that Obama isn't connecting on the gut issues, and Rendell wants to see that change. If it doesn't, he could wind up like Stevenson. And come in second....
As a candidate George Bush was that type of guy you might see yourself grabbing a beer with, and we all know how that came out. McCain reminds me of Bush in other ways by talking tough at the expense of foriegn relations. I would prefer "a professor, a philosopher" as president.
You mean a patsy.
Comment removed.
Outside of Philly, Rendell is not well liked at all. I personally think he is a good Gov., but with family in friends in areas of N.E. PA and Central PA, they can't wait to vote for McCain. Had Hillary won the Dem. nomination they would have voted for her, but since Obama won, that made up their mind for them, especially with the backing of Rendell. They DONT like Obama's socialist agenda or his apparent lack of leadership experience.
While I understand there is a need to get to the point, the majority of people, in my experience (and others) are the lack of intellectual capacity. This isn't elitist, this is educated. It is fine to get to the point. It is fine to reframe from complicating issues, but the GW approach is the "smoke them out of their holes." I am left wanting after a statement like that. I expect this from my gas-station attendant or high quality food provider at the diner, but not from the president. The president should have the intellectual capacity that leaves you in awe and wondering how you could become more like them.
Shabba, that logic doesn't make sense, considering Rendell backed Hillary in the primaries. Of course he's going to back his party's candidate in the general election, did your friends think otherwise?
Steverawthar: Logic makes perfect sence. Most are working class Dems. and they wanted Hillary as she had the experience and "conservativism" they looked for in their dem leaders. They never believed in Obama and his "change" platform and his (or his wifes) socialist views. Now with Rendell's support, they like Obama even less. Now all those voters are swinging over to McCain...as he is better then the unproven socialist Obama. Just wait until the election, McCain is going to walk away with this election...no matter what the liberal media wants you to believe. The Democratic party has been hijacked by liberal socialists.
I beg to differ that no one thought of Adlai as a rock star. That's exactly the effect he had on young people in college, the more left of center upper class. He was best described as a "rock star" and the appeal of his looks and charm was remarked upon by his opponents to discredit him as a man without real substance, proven ability, or who had stood the test of time. Adlai lost because he had a funny name, ran against a war hero during a time when Americans were afraid of being attacked, because he was thought to be too young and idealistic at a time that called for pragmatism. Adlai also failed to coalesce support into the monolith that drove Ike into office.
I think Shabba is saying that people are picking up on the highly qualified support by Hillary backers like Rendell and other Dem centrists. Hillary herself is not really closing the deal on her support, with not so subtle sabotage of her own message at the convention. Don't believe me? "My friends it is time to ORANGE PANTSUIT take back the country we ORANGE PANTSUIT whether you voted for me or you voted for ORANGE PANTSUIT the time is now to unite as a single ORANGE PANTSUIT with a single ORANGE PANTSUIT." And what happened to the linen suit she toured the stage in? Too perfect, apparently.
Liberal media....lol.....all the outlets are owned by conservatives. And even the conservatives will admit that 4 years of MCain will be exactly like the previous 8 years. The Republican Party is in trouble because Bush wrecked it.
Ronbo: Your so naive. The media is completely liberal and has been for decades. That's what sells knucklehead. What planet are you from? Bush (is an idiot) but he did'nt wreck the Rep part. The US economy is capitalist in nature therefore the President has (and should have) very little control over it.
Shabba.....you use the term "Socialist" as if you were referencing the Communist Party....and you couldnt be further from the truth. There is absoluley nothing wrong with Socialized health care or Socialized education. Everyone citizen of these great United Stated should have good health care and a good education beyond high school. And if anyone does not agree with this in my opinion is UNAMERICAN
Shabba.....the "Liberal Media" is an old myth that has been proven to be just that....a myth. Can you say Rupert Murdach?
Rendell = EPIC FAIL.
That is all.
Ronbo. There is EVERYTHING WRONG with socialized health care (Education is already socialized, but look at its performance over the past few decades. Testing rates have dropped astronomically in this country). Universities or post HS should be strictly private as not all people want to or should attend college. Why should hardworking tax paying people pay for people that DONT WORK and are simply milking the system. I would agree with a univ. healthcare plan that is like unemployment (6 months coverage max for major medical only) but NOT indefinitly. Just look at Canada, France, Norway, etc..where is takes 6-12 months for a basic check up. Socialized HC isnt all its cracked up to be. P.S. Regarding "Liberal Media"...can you say Time Magazine, NY Times, Hollywood...all a bunch of tree hugging liberals.
28 comments | View All Comments | View All By Latest
About Inquirer political writers
The Inauguration: Jan. 20 blog brings you coverage of President-elect Barack Obama's transition into office.
It's written by political journalists from the Philadelphia Inquirer. Send us your comments -- and news tips -- at this address.
Thomas Fitzgerald joined The Philadelphia Inquirer in 2000, and has covered Harrisburg as well as city, state and national politics for the newspaper. He was a “boy on the bus” in the 2004 presidential campaign and during primary contests in 2000 and 1996.
Nathan Gorenstein has covered politics and government in the city, state and nation for the Inquirer. He's worked in the city hall bureau, had a stint on the business desk, and once covered the suburbs. After serving as assistant regional editor, he was named editor of the "Politics" web site.
LATEST ELECTION NEWS
Promotions
- News | Sports | Business | What's Happening | Restaurants & Food | Entertainment | Living | Marketplace | Jobs
Site Services:
Classifieds:
- Jobs | Cars | Real Estate | Rentals | Marketplace | Celebrations
Partners:
