Andrew Sullivan: Obama emerges as a liberal Reagan who can reunite America

[ruggerson]

http://timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/andrew_sullivan/article3137473.ece

The historical analogies for the phenomenon that is Barack Obama have already stretched credibility. For a while pundits likened him to the effete loser Adlai Stevenson, the Democratic party’s 1950s version of Labour’s Hugh Gaitskell, the greatest prime minister we never had.

But Obama doesn’t seem like such an airhead after his gritty, crushing defeat of Hillary Clinton in Iowa. I long thought he’d win ? but I never thought it would be by eight points, or that he’d push Clinton into third place.

So now the favourite analogy is JFK: the young, hopeful rhetorician urging a New Frontier after two terms of conservatism. But that doesn’t work either: JFK won by out-hawking Nixon in 1960, and Obama is a clear antiIraq war candidate.

Bobby Kennedy is more apposite: a mix of inner steel and an evolving moral candidacy. Just as a vote for RFK in 1968 was seen by many as a form of collective self-absolution for Vietnam, so Obama resonates among many Americans who do not recognise what their country has become these past few years.

The analogy that worries Republicans the most is a more recent one. Could Obama be a potential liberal version of Ronald Reagan? Could he do for the Democrats what Reagan did for the Republicans a quarter century ago?

(more)

[aquart]

1. Reagan united America? WHEN?

[FormerDittoHead]

7. I think he's thinking electoral votes

1980: Reagan 489 to Carter's 49
...and after four years:
1984: Reagan 525 to Mondale's 13

I know what you're thinking, but THESE numbers are only something we could HOPE for in November...

[MADem]

11. Obama certainly doesn't need endorsements from Andrew "Why won't the Pope love me?" Sullivan

The guy is an idiot, a whiner, and he is ALWAYS WRONG.

He's the fool who said that Bush didn't MEAN it in his antigay attitude. He's the one who thought Bush knew what he was doing in the Middle East.

The guy is a stupid tool. He gets attention because he's an oddity--a gay conservative. And, he makes for good television with that 'charming accent.'

[Rageneau]

16. More evidence that the right-wing punditocracy favors Obama.

It is suspicious enough to see NO (as in, zero) criticism of Obama by the MSM or the right-wing talking heads. It goes beyond suspicion - into the realm of ominous fact -- when the right-wingers come right out in FAVOR of Obama, as so many -- like Sullivan -- are these days.

Any candidate the right-wing is happy with -- is pushing for -- is smoothing the way in front of -- is not the threat to the right-wing that candidates whom the media constantly criticizes are.

The MSM can find nothing at all good to say about Edwards or Clinton (or DK, for that matter) but they seem to be going ga-ga over Obama. Why?

Why is it the right-wingers seem to WANT to run against them?

Because they want Democrats to win?

Or what?

[Renew Deal]

19. Didn't he win 49 states in 1984?

:shrug:

[K Gardner]

2. LOL.... and Katz had to redo his OP Title :-)

[The_Casual_Observer]

3. This is really messed up. I don't even know where to begin.

Is Andrew write this after inhaling a popper?


Obama is an anarchist!

[Sarah Ibarruri]

4. LIBERAL Reagan? Have people become nuts? That's like saying Obama is a Hitler that can unite us

I don't understand using the term, Reagan, in any form of positive light. This man started a trend of destruction of the middle class and was an outright pig.

[Renew Deal]

15. Are you nuts?

"That's like saying Obama is a Hitler that can unite us"

Think about what you're saying.

[Zynx]

20. Reagan may have been difficult to stomach for many, but he certainly

was no Hitler.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

5. Without Getting Into The Obama-Reagan Comparisons

The nation was as polarized under Reagan as it was under Clinton... The only difference was the numbers on both sides...

[papau]

6. LOL - a DK, or Edwards, or even Hillary would be a more left candidate - but the RFK

comparison may well fit.

[Cameron27]

8. If I was managing Obama's campaign,

I'd knock down the Reagan comparisons ASAP. It might help him with republicans and indy's but I can't see it helping with the Democratic base. Well, with any Democrats actually.

[liberalmuse]

9. I don't really like that analogy...

But it could be true that Obama has the ability to unite Americans, but not in the same way Reagan did. Reagan united white, middle/upper class protestant America. Obama could very possibly expand on that to include people across the board, no matter what religion, race or income.

[mcscajun]

10. He's got this right...

"What has long been remarkable to me is how this liberal politician fails to alienate conservatives. In fact, many like him a great deal. His calm and reasoned demeanour, his crisp style, his refusal to engage in racial identity politics: these appeal to disaffected Republicans."

My only Republican friend, with whom I stopped talking politics some time ago, occasionally forces a discussion despite that. Such a discussion occurred Friday night regarding the primaries/caucuses. For the record, he was an early proponent of Bush, predicted he'd be the next President long before he got the nomination, and voted for him twice. He's not terribly happy with Bush these days. We had a further discussion last night after the debates; he'd watched both the Republican and the Democratic candidates.

His position right now is that he will vote for Obama in the primary rather than vote in the Republican primary at all and, if Obama is our nominee, vote for Obama over any of the Republican field; although he likes Huckabee, even he seems fired up for Obama. (How he manages to equate these two men is beyond me; although, as astute as he likes to see himself, he no more truly understands the danger of a Huckabee presidency than he did that of a Bush presidency. He doesn't believe the man's religious beliefs are something he'll bring with him into the WH and his governing style, and likes what he did in Arkansas as Governor.)

My friend lives in Illinois (only since late last year) which is, predictably, expected to go overwhelmingly for Obama in both the primary and the general. He wants Obama to get the Democratic nomination, and as to the general election, so long as Obama is running, he believes that "Huckabee won't need his vote", and he'll be happy if either of them win. :wtf:

He is still a Republican at heart; if Huckabee is running against someone other than Obama, he'll vote Huckabee. If it comes down to a match-up between Clinton and Giuliani, he'd even vote for Giuliani. :banghead: I no more believe that Giuliani has any realistic chance of gaining the nomination than I do that the Sun rises in the West. There is that to hang onto.

[ProSense]

12. Typical conservative BS: he'll unite everybody but me

Sullivan endorsed Ron Paul. I wonder if he believes Paul will unite the GOP? He's simply using unity to hype Reagan.

[MalloyLiberal]

13. HE'S NOT LIBERAL!

[Cha]

14. Some people just don't get it.

Soundbytes, platitudes, and demogoguery. Obama is nothing like reagun but thanks, sully.

[BenDavid]

17. Andrew (on top) Sullivan supported bush and that should tell ya

something.

Andrew, just to be sure you know - we don't want you on our side.Stay over there with the nasty-ass cavemen and the Fascist gay-bashers
You're not welcome on the side of good and decent people.

Basically, Andrew Sullivan is Ann Coulter without the short skirts.

[robbedvoter]

18. Sullivan supported Kerry (&Edwards) in 2004. Useful if flawed endorsement

Of course the language is BS - this is what Sullivan is fluent in. But it's good that the lines are crossed already - especially now, for New Hampshire.