TN Dems Advise Barack Obama

You know how the old saying goes, opinions are like...everyone's got one. Well, this concept was on full display in the Tennessean, as they consulted various Tennessee Democrats for their advice to Obama on how he might win.

The best example would be Governor Bredesen, a Harvard grad like Obama, who as we all know won all 95 counties in his re-election bid in 2006. But what the paper fails to mention is that Bredesen lost his initial Gubernatorial bid by about 10 percent against Don Sundquist. He then went on to become one of the best Mayor's Nashville has ever had. He followed this up by a victory in 2002 against a man who quite possibly could be found legally retarded, Vanderpool Hilleary, after the incumbent Republican left office with approvals in the George W. Bush range.

Even though Bredesen was a successful mayor (with a significant financial advantage) running against an idiot congressman who was a member of the unpopular incumbent's party...he still only won by 3 percent. In other words, had 25K out of 1.5 million votes switched sides, we'd all be talking about how Bredesen blew the biggest chance for a party switchover in Tennessee history.

Bredesen didn't win 95 counties by eating fried chicken at a meat-and-three, he did it by balancing the budget without raising taxes, and avoiding any sort of social issues that might tarnish him in the Conservative south. But, onto the Gov's words of wisdom:

"When I came to Tennessee and first ran for office I was from the North, and I was a big-city mayor. No big-city mayor had ever been elected governor of Tennessee before," Bredesen said Monday during an interview with the Real Clear Politics Web site. "There's a little chasm you gotta cross. They're kind of looking across a little chasm at you as somebody from maybe a different world. But people are very open; if you're willing to show them who you are a little bit you can close that chasm up and then talk to them about issues and other things."

It's one thing to go into a race with very high neutral approval ratings and work to make people like you...its a whole other thing when you start out with unfavorable ratings in the high 50s, and expect to turn those numbers around one voter at a time.

Next up, Harold Ford Jr., who after stumping all across the state as a Conservative southern Democrat, lost to a wealthy Republican (in a Democratic year nation-wide) by 3 percent.

"Obama should mingle," he added. "He should go to the states where he lost big: Walk across Kentucky and West Virginia. He should take half a day and work as a fireman, a waiter, a mechanic."

I can think of no better allocation of campaign time and resources than to "walk" across two states that voted for Bush in 2000/2004, and who show no signs of inching towards an African-American Senator with a foreign name and a relatively liberal record. However, I do think Ford's latter idea was fairly decent...he's already walked a day in the shoes of a home healthcare worker, perhaps he could do something like that again. Though, its probably best to avoid any uniform pictures which could look a bit goofy on his tall, lanky build.

Next up we have a professor who apparently learns his facts by watching 15 second sound-bites of cable news:

"Obama doesn't need Tennessee," said David A. Bositis, an expert on racial politics at the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies in Washington. "Obama's base was highly educated, upper-income voters … Obama's not going to try to recast his campaign and claim that he's going to be the candidate of rural America. He's from Chicago."

OK, well, the problem is that Obama is going after Rural America. He's just picking and choosing which of these rural states that he has a chance at winning. Unless of course there has been some huge influx of urban liberal doctors in Montana and Indiana that I wasn't aware of.

Obama is going after Virginia hard, as well as North Carolina and Georgia as an outside chance. Realistically, there is not a single shred of objective evidence to indicate that Barack Obama has a snowball's chance in hell of winning a state that Tennessee native, Al Gore, lost in 2000, unless of course there is a massive nationwide landslide in his direction come November.

Campaigning in states does not win or lose them except at the margins. In a close election, a lot of stops can make the difference, but he can't erase a 15 point deficit by showing up to do a large rally, or going into some Tennessee diner and ordering some grits. So, while he'll be coming to Nashville in October for his debate against McCain, and at that time he might make a few stops...all indications are that his resources would be better allocated in states where he doesn't have sky-high unfavorable ratings.

After he wins (and if the election comes down to Tennessee, he wouldn't win), he should then spend the first couple of years in his administration traveling to some of these southeastern states which weren't too keen on him in the election.

See Also:

Sharon Cobb