A recent article by Robert Parry in Consortium News argues that, contrary to most expectations, John McCain “may well win” the election in November. By way of explanation Parry places a great deal of responsibility on an alleged news media bias against Obama and in favor of McCain. I beg to disagree.
I’ve been saying for at least 6 months that we need to get used to saying “President McCain” because I’ve thought and continue to think that, unfortunately, this is going to happen—but not really for the reason of media bias that Mr. Parry emphasizes. Rather, I’ve seen the demise of any opportunity for a Democratic victory going back into the Democratic primaries, when the party abandoned its supposed progressive “base” by doing its quadrennial swan dive toward the political center, as Kucinich, Gravel and even the semi-progressive Edwards were eliminated (albeit with a lot of media-bias assistance) from contention and the primary became an essentially issue-less contest of popularity and social identity between the “woman” and the “black.” With his nomination and subsequent panderings toward a daunting line-up of conservative elements, Obama and the Party have set themselves up for the very focus on “personal” questions of patriotism, competence, etc. that are always the last refuge of campaigns where there is no real substantive difference between the opponents. In this contest McCain “may well” and probably will win. The GOP demonstrated for all to see, by its efficient “swift boating” of John Kerry in the 2004 election, that the Democrats are no match for them in the game of personal invective.
Is this contest salvageable for Obama? Yes, if he took the necessary route for success, which is the essence of simplicity but is a route which he and the party are apparently not willing or able to follow. He wins by becoming the true champion of the interests of “the people” over those of “the corporation,” the proponent of peace and international harmony advocates over those of war and empire. These are the issues of the majority of the American people, and it should not take that much courage to stand up to the power of AIPAC and Goldman Sachs and say: “This is where I stand, with the people, and no amount of derision heaped on me as a ‘radical’ or as ‘un-patriotic’ and no degree of threat of losing this election is going to deter me, as ‘I’d rather be right than President.’” By being willing to lose the election by standing on principle, he can win. Given his and the party’s long-time and immediate dependence on these powers, I doubt this will happen, especially if people in the peace/progressive movement join his ranks as the “best deal available” among the only “viable” candidates.
Given the likelihood that Obama won’t, or can’t, make this trip back to the political left from which the party of the people supposedly derived, the people have no choice but to abandon the party that has abandoned them and support a third party candidate like Nader or McKinney. I can even see the possibility that Obama will reach such a degraded state of support from the people that he will be the “unelectable” candidate and that we, who support McKinney, would be able to say in truth that voting for Obama rather than for her as President is tantamount to a “vote for McCain.” How about them particular apples?