RE: THE AARP. To answer Ezra's query, my understanding was that so many people wanted Obama to attend so many different events that he decided he couldn't run his campaign the way he wanted to, so he instituted a blanket moratorium in August on attending non-DNC approved new events. This managed to get him out of a lot of politically pointless forums. Unfortunately, the moratorium also covered this AARP forum, which really matters. Attending this forum would seem especially important for a campaign that is strongest among younger people in a state where 64 percent of caucus-goers in 2004 were over 50 years old.
Obama has made the attack on special interests a big part of his stump speech, as have John Edwards and Hillary Clinton, but the critical difference between the candidates is that Obama has maintained a greater distance from traditional Democratic interest groups, as well, and his campaign seems less interested than either Clinton's or Edwards' in reaching out to people who are not part of its "transformational" strategy. He doesn't seem to mind dissing people who he doesn't think are useful or part of his master plan, and I have to wonder if, in Democratic primary politics, that's not partly responsible for his declining numbers, because it turns transformational politics into the worst form of transactional political organizing, where the campaign refuses to reach out to groups and people who they think won't matter on the ground. On the one hand, this shows an admirable discipline and focus on winning, but, on the other, is can be a bit off-putting and leave people feeling rebuffed by his campaign.
Edwards is running on a platform of policy change and changes in how our government works, but, unlike Obama, he's actually running a very traditional campaign (with the exception of not taking money from lobbyists). He's courting constituency groups, racking up union endorsements, and being everywhere anyone wants him to be (especially in Iowa). Clinton is a master of constituency-group outreach and politics, and while she may not get as much union support as Edwards will, she's in the lead in some of the other constituency contests, such as local legislator endorsements in Iowa. She's very, very old-school about trying to bring people into her orbit, whether they are part of her master plan or not, and, like Edwards, she recognizes that primary politics rewards the art of relationship building and constituency mobilization.
The Obama machine, on the other hand, is building its own army. It's a bit of a risky strategy, to try to change the rules of political campaigning during a primary, rather than to just set sights on winning under the existing rules. When you see that army, at things like Tom Harkins's Streak Fry, where several thousand Obama-supporters marched in unison into the audience before Obama spoke, it seems impressive and novel and like it could work. Other times, like Walter Shapiro, I have my doubts.
--Garance Franke-Ruta
