I’m just not certain, having watched the fresh-faced senator shy away from fighting with the feral Hillary over her Hollywood turf, that he understands that a campaign is inherently a conflict.
The Democrats lost the last two excruciatingly close elections because Al Gore and John Kerry did not fight fiercely and cleverly enough.
This is why I like Obama and dis-like Maureen Dowd. It's all just a game to her. A battle. A competition. The issues are secondary. But I don't want to hear about the game, the battle, or the competition. I want to hear about the issues. We haven't had anyone in recent years who could bring them out. I'm hoping Obama can (even if I disagree with him).
Oh, and Gore and Kerry did not lose because of a failure to fight fiercely and cleverly. They lost because they could not connect with the people and could not articulate an appealing vision. They lost to George W. Bush -- that's embarassing.
(Actually, Gore lost because of Nader. But it shouldn't even have come to that. Gore should have trounced him).
