We must be strong where our opponents think we are weak...

Hello Mindepenedents!
You can tell this is an urgent post because I didn't take the time to capitalize the "N" again. that can be our little code. This article from the Washington Post is making some waves in Obama circles. I recommend you read it. If you're interested in the plebian opinion of a non-political like myself, go ahead and read my response below. I liken it to your boss telling you X and you going home and railing about it to your girlfriend or parent or spouse or dog. It doesn't make a lot of difference, but it sure feels better after your done.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/04/AR2007020401343_2.html

On the challenges Obama will face running for president against the likes of infrastructure heavy Hillary. Very very money focused. And I’d like to lament and focus on this.

First the lamentation: it is sad I think, that a candidate’s viability in the land of the free and the home of the brave is judged almost exclusively on their ability to raise millions of dollars. Not one of the talking heads or political writers has mentioned this, but, perhaps this is why people are so skeptical and cynical when conversation turns to politics. After all, these aren’t real people, they’re millionaires who hang out with billionaires. They go from town to town touching on how they want to change things but you have to pay $2,500 to listen, though, technically you’re paying for a $5 steak. These stodgy writers and politirazzi prop up this bent system by reminding people that its only money that wins elections. Not message or votes, dollar bills and donors.

Now the focus: I think this is where political commentators and other candidates are not “getting” us. We do this for free. We do this because we care. We have more access to more people even than television or radio, newspapers or plain old millions of dollars ever will. Because of that, we have an advantage. We must think like Sun Tzu. The enemy (and that’s a strong word so lets just say the opponent), the opponent believes he (or she) is strong, but (s)he relies on outmoded technology and old thinking. (S)He ignores or trivializes the importance of new technologies – trying to bend them into their paradigm of old thinking. (S)He forgets the most important part of winning a battle is manpower and fighting spirit. We can take our abilities and our drive and desire and we can defeat anything that we come up against because we are no one. Nemo; nameless faceless millions. We are not paid, we are not professionals, we have a fundamental connection to the populace that no paid or professional campaigner can ever have. This inspires trust, and trust and energy will create an avalanche of manpower, overwhelming our opponents. A few highly trained strategists cannot stem the tide of millions of untrained, politically incorrect voracious supporters. Without infrastructure, we have the freedom, the freedoms we have always had but rarely used, to say what we want about our candidate without fear of the red tape that binds old-style campaigns. Without going on the attack; our opponents’ attacks only harm themselves, because their true nature is revealed and the voters are not as dumb as our opponents would like. And without rancor; for it is this cynicism and despair that we lash out against, that all people, given the chance, will lash out against should a champion arise.

Our perceived “weakness” in financial support can be viewed from the same perspective. We must take what our opponents see as a shortfalling and turn it into our advantage. We do not have the infrastructure that Hillary has been building for 20 years. It’s a disadvantage, but the advantage is that everyone knows this. No one contributes $10 to a campaign funded by billionaires. But we will have millions of contributors. 100 contributors of $1,000,000 is exactly the same amount as 1,000,000 contributors at $100 – except its 100,000 times as many votes, 100,000 times as many friends and 100,000 times as many tongues wagging at dinner parties and sports bars and piano recitals. It is our lack of infrastructure and mega financiers that can win the day. Trust, hope, understanding, if these are the things that Obama can show during his campaign, I believe a tidal wave of support will all but drown out the competition. Money may buy ad time, but it doesn’t buy my vote.

That said, Obama’s popularity, as it rises, will certainly attract the Hollywood hangers-on, the billionaire bosom-buddies and the many-millionaire metastasis of a typical campaign. Obama must maintain the integrity of his grassroots techno-literate supporters. They have volunteered themselves his de facto advertising and PR team. With the help of the internet forums, Myspace, Facebook, and all the message boards and chatrooms out there, Obama’s main hope is not going to be his ability to wrangle funds, but his ability to spread hope to the disenfranchised regular folk out there who are sick of hearing about how many tens or hundreds of millions were thrown away on this person or that person’s particular campaign.

That would be my take anyway, just one nameless, faceless opinion.

Hope on, friends, Hope on.