US Presidential Campaign ’08: Truth not Money is the name of the Game
Rizwan Ghani
April 06, 2007
In response to Clinton’s 26 million dollars Obama has come up with 25 million. The money race and windfall contributions have promoted experts to forecast a billion dollar figure for ‘08 campaign. Some are even auguring that all the rules are being re-written for the presidential race and numbers is just the start.
Today there are two yard sticks for the candidates; poll ratings and money. And figures show Obama has covered a long distance despite the fact that Clintons are on it since long. Some Clinton skeptics with tongue in cheek even prophesized that “she has hit the peak” while Obama has just started. It is hard to miss the point that new boy in town is darling of the crowds.
If Obama will have to work hard to maintain his shine, so shall Clinton to avoid being dubbed as “stale” for occupying center stage far too long may it be he days as first lady or as senator. She also needs to watch out over her Iraq stance, white water scandal and botched “health care” flirt that could haunt her as the campaign progresses.
Caution is the theme of the day. Raking in of the money by presidential candidates is a snapshot not end of the course determiner of the campaign.
Both Republicans and Democrat candidates needed money to stay in the race and they put themselves out there to do exactly that. Interestingly, Obama’s 6.9 million and Clinton’s 4.2 million donations show the crucial role that internet is likely to play for fund raising for the campaign.
Obama despite showing public dislike for role of funds has shown that he is no rooky when it comes to using modern methods to collect funds. And is in fact a formidable contender. The observation could be premature but cannot be ignored that Democrats should be weighing the prospects of Obama and Clinton as partners in the White House.
What is equally interesting is that out of Obama’s 100,000 donors half of them made online donations around 100 dollars per person. Experts opine that these donors are there for a long time and it could “exhaust” Clinton's in the long run who lack depth in their online donors’ pool. It would be interesting to see her campaign coming up with ideas to bridge the gap despite undisputed charismatic appeal of Mr. Clinton himself who has can always surprise when it comes to raising funds.
Similarly, Obama camp shouldn’t ignore reports that almost everyone who matters in the current administration has been associated with Clinton in some form or the other. Obama campaigners instead of countering the reality may like to use the strength to Democrat party’s advantage as collective team.
Democrat presidential hopefuls have collectively managed some 20 million dollars more than the Republican candidates. This surge to some means voters are heading for a change and are jockeying for victory of their party from the start. It is time Democrats tap in on this spike and maintain it well beyond coming six to nine months. And if the Democrats play their cards well including Iraq both in the Congress and the Senate it can be easily realized.
In terms of Iraq Democrats should push the Republicans to agree on timeline for milestones including troop withdrawal. And to bring Republicans on board Democrats need to debate original ideas on Iraq. Iowa Gov. Thompson’s Iraq plan makes sense. Thompson talked of dividing Iraq into 18 constituencies based on different parameters including sects to save it from division. Most Sunni majority Gulf States oppose division of Iraq.
In this regard Democrats need to ensure that Iraqi oil draft set to passed in coming months into a law not only allows equal distribution of natural resources amongst all its share holders but is also implemented. Gov. Thompson’s proposal based on Alaskan example of sharing equal share by center, constituencies and remaining one third equally by every man, woman and child could be good start.
The experts suggest Norwegian model as a practical way forward. The model allows 10% profit to the foreign investors and remaining 90% to be left with the government. Norway, since decades is practicing (its) model successfully in which only 4% of out of the total 90% earning is injected annually into the national economy while remaining 86% of money is deposited in national treasury as welfare and pension fund for the public.
Reports claim that the proposed Iraqi oil draft envisages between 10-15% of the total profit earned from Iraqi natural resources while remaining amount will go to the foreign investors. Like most Gulf States Iraq is also a single item (oil based) economy therefore if the draft bill is passed into a law in its current form Iraq is most likely to loses its (oil) revenue and there would little left to share between Baghdad and other minorities including Sunnis. All this has turned into one of the core obstacles to restore peace in Iraq.
Democrats in addition to steps being taken in the Congress and Senate need to focus on core issues in Iraq including passage of oil draft bill into law on lines of Norwegian model to enable concerned to pacify legitimate apprehensions of the minorities to help broker lasting peace in the country.
On the contrary if vested interests manage to get the oil draft approved into a law in its current form it will further fuel the war in Iraq and adversely affect efforts to restore peace in Iraq both in terms of loss of lives and funds. Furthermore, Iraqis like most Latin American states will nationalize its oil assets on first available opportunity.
This situation in addition to fueling Iraq war has also resulted in political spillover in ME including “look east” Gulf policy.
With right moves the prospect of unified Iraq could provide Pelosi a platform that can be instrumental in engaging ME positively at this stage to restore peace in Iraq in immediate term and rebuild Iraq in the long term
Under the circumstances Pelosi needs to push for a stable Iraq that will allow her to win her battle with the White House and help Democrats fulfill their election promise to withdraw troops from Iraq to the American public.
All this could help Democrats at least win the support of Republicans waiting on the fence for want of practical Iraq solution. That in turn can force White House to abandon its failed Iraq policy and work in close cooperation with legislators to bring an early end to Iraq war.
Iraq has been and will be a major factor in this presidential campaign. Any or all those parties or candidates who manage to formulate, adopt and sell a practical way out of Iraq situation as part of its foreign policy will control the White House.
At this stage the ’08 Presidential campaign is wide open for both Republicans and Democrats. Any candidate who like Gov. Schwarzenegger can admit his or her mistakes and is ready to share the truth will control the White House; Something reminiscent of Carter’s walk over to the White House. Carter promised to “tell the truth” to the American public and they put him in the driving seat.
Today America needs truth that doesn’t cost a dime. Ironic it may be that it needs money to be heard in American politics but then in the end what matter most is the message not the fanfare. Let us therefore see if it is Obama’s , Clinton’s or Hagel’s message that America votes for.
Rizwan Ghani.
Today there are two yard sticks for the candidates; poll ratings and money. And figures show Obama has covered a long distance despite the fact that Clintons are on it since long. Some Clinton skeptics with tongue in cheek even prophesized that “she has hit the peak” while Obama has just started. It is hard to miss the point that new boy in town is darling of the crowds.
If Obama will have to work hard to maintain his shine, so shall Clinton to avoid being dubbed as “stale” for occupying center stage far too long may it be he days as first lady or as senator. She also needs to watch out over her Iraq stance, white water scandal and botched “health care” flirt that could haunt her as the campaign progresses.
Caution is the theme of the day. Raking in of the money by presidential candidates is a snapshot not end of the course determiner of the campaign.
Both Republicans and Democrat candidates needed money to stay in the race and they put themselves out there to do exactly that. Interestingly, Obama’s 6.9 million and Clinton’s 4.2 million donations show the crucial role that internet is likely to play for fund raising for the campaign.
Obama despite showing public dislike for role of funds has shown that he is no rooky when it comes to using modern methods to collect funds. And is in fact a formidable contender. The observation could be premature but cannot be ignored that Democrats should be weighing the prospects of Obama and Clinton as partners in the White House.
What is equally interesting is that out of Obama’s 100,000 donors half of them made online donations around 100 dollars per person. Experts opine that these donors are there for a long time and it could “exhaust” Clinton's in the long run who lack depth in their online donors’ pool. It would be interesting to see her campaign coming up with ideas to bridge the gap despite undisputed charismatic appeal of Mr. Clinton himself who has can always surprise when it comes to raising funds.
Similarly, Obama camp shouldn’t ignore reports that almost everyone who matters in the current administration has been associated with Clinton in some form or the other. Obama campaigners instead of countering the reality may like to use the strength to Democrat party’s advantage as collective team.
Democrat presidential hopefuls have collectively managed some 20 million dollars more than the Republican candidates. This surge to some means voters are heading for a change and are jockeying for victory of their party from the start. It is time Democrats tap in on this spike and maintain it well beyond coming six to nine months. And if the Democrats play their cards well including Iraq both in the Congress and the Senate it can be easily realized.
In terms of Iraq Democrats should push the Republicans to agree on timeline for milestones including troop withdrawal. And to bring Republicans on board Democrats need to debate original ideas on Iraq. Iowa Gov. Thompson’s Iraq plan makes sense. Thompson talked of dividing Iraq into 18 constituencies based on different parameters including sects to save it from division. Most Sunni majority Gulf States oppose division of Iraq.
In this regard Democrats need to ensure that Iraqi oil draft set to passed in coming months into a law not only allows equal distribution of natural resources amongst all its share holders but is also implemented. Gov. Thompson’s proposal based on Alaskan example of sharing equal share by center, constituencies and remaining one third equally by every man, woman and child could be good start.
The experts suggest Norwegian model as a practical way forward. The model allows 10% profit to the foreign investors and remaining 90% to be left with the government. Norway, since decades is practicing (its) model successfully in which only 4% of out of the total 90% earning is injected annually into the national economy while remaining 86% of money is deposited in national treasury as welfare and pension fund for the public.
Reports claim that the proposed Iraqi oil draft envisages between 10-15% of the total profit earned from Iraqi natural resources while remaining amount will go to the foreign investors. Like most Gulf States Iraq is also a single item (oil based) economy therefore if the draft bill is passed into a law in its current form Iraq is most likely to loses its (oil) revenue and there would little left to share between Baghdad and other minorities including Sunnis. All this has turned into one of the core obstacles to restore peace in Iraq.
Democrats in addition to steps being taken in the Congress and Senate need to focus on core issues in Iraq including passage of oil draft bill into law on lines of Norwegian model to enable concerned to pacify legitimate apprehensions of the minorities to help broker lasting peace in the country.
On the contrary if vested interests manage to get the oil draft approved into a law in its current form it will further fuel the war in Iraq and adversely affect efforts to restore peace in Iraq both in terms of loss of lives and funds. Furthermore, Iraqis like most Latin American states will nationalize its oil assets on first available opportunity.
This situation in addition to fueling Iraq war has also resulted in political spillover in ME including “look east” Gulf policy.
With right moves the prospect of unified Iraq could provide Pelosi a platform that can be instrumental in engaging ME positively at this stage to restore peace in Iraq in immediate term and rebuild Iraq in the long term
Under the circumstances Pelosi needs to push for a stable Iraq that will allow her to win her battle with the White House and help Democrats fulfill their election promise to withdraw troops from Iraq to the American public.
All this could help Democrats at least win the support of Republicans waiting on the fence for want of practical Iraq solution. That in turn can force White House to abandon its failed Iraq policy and work in close cooperation with legislators to bring an early end to Iraq war.
Iraq has been and will be a major factor in this presidential campaign. Any or all those parties or candidates who manage to formulate, adopt and sell a practical way out of Iraq situation as part of its foreign policy will control the White House.
At this stage the ’08 Presidential campaign is wide open for both Republicans and Democrats. Any candidate who like Gov. Schwarzenegger can admit his or her mistakes and is ready to share the truth will control the White House; Something reminiscent of Carter’s walk over to the White House. Carter promised to “tell the truth” to the American public and they put him in the driving seat.
Today America needs truth that doesn’t cost a dime. Ironic it may be that it needs money to be heard in American politics but then in the end what matter most is the message not the fanfare. Let us therefore see if it is Obama’s , Clinton’s or Hagel’s message that America votes for.
Rizwan Ghani.
Print
Email
