Expectations: Too high, Too Low?

My Garin, if I could give you one constructive criticism: Be more assertive! Do not let David Axelrod manhandle and push you around! I saw the interview this past Sunday on Meet The Press and he clearly dominated the interview. I think, and I am only seeing you on TV, that you are not by nature a pit bull like Axelrod. You are a dignified and mild mannered person and it appeared that he gave you a beat down. However, there is one caveat: He might have overdone it. I thought, and I may not be objective, that he was entirely too aggressive while you tried to have a dignified discussion. Of course, Tim Russert was just stoking the flames!

I also saw you earlier today (Tuesday)(election day) on Andrea Mitchell's show and she was trying to downplay Obama's role in the so-called negative campaign ads. Is she serious? He has more money, he's running more ads, and Hillary Clinton is responsible for the negative campaign ads? By the way, your performance was 10X better than Sunday and I'm glad you pushed back at her when she suggested the ad that briefly showed Bin Laden was too negative. Are we supposed to ignore the big elephant in the room? What do these people think Republicans are going to run on? It isn't the Economy. It will be National Security. That is a mistake Democrats always make: That the Economy and domestic issues will win elections, to the exclusion of National Security. I think it is valid and very appropriate to remind people that Terrorism exists and we have not caught Bin Laden. The Republicans will surely remind us of that to neutralize the DEMS advantage with the Economy and social issues.

Do not get into discussions about margins of victory with the media. The fluctuations in the polls are a result of them (journalists) talking up Obama and always asking negative questions of/about Hillary. Even Larry King was asking some very tough questions last night compared to the puff ball questions he asked Obama after the Reverend Wright revelations. I thought Hillary performed exceptionally well on his show and on Keith Olberman's show. She did not moan and whine about the questions but showed a toughness and a real grasp of the issues. She was not stumbling over her words and hemming and hawing. She knew what she was talking about, not searching and making up answers as she's speaking.

What is a win? A win is when you beat the other person. The margin should not matter but we know that a big margin is better than a small margin in terms of narrowing the gap in the popular vote. However, Why is the bar set so high for Hillary when Obama only has to "close the gap?" Why, after raising more money, massively outspending, tons of negative ads and fliers, can't Obama beat Hillary? Seems to me the media needs to be focusing more on this question.

THE SPIN BY THE CAMPAIGN TONIGHT AND TOMORROW, regardless of the margin of victory should be:1) He has raised more money2) Outspent Hillary by 2,3,4,5 to 1 and he cannot beat her. He is like a salesman who knocks on some one's door, talks enthusiastically about what he's selling, but then, does not articulate the benefits of his product and therefore does not closes the deal.3) Why is the bar so high for Hillary but all Obama has to do is come close? Can he merely come close in a General Election, or does he have to not only make the Presentation, but more importantly, CLOSE THE DEAL! He has yet to prove that he can.4) He has spent to win Pennsylvania, therefore, he should be held to a high standard and be EXPECTED TO WIN! Can you imagine the Headlines if Hillary had spent as much as Obama has and not be able to close the deal? Imagine the Headlines!5) This is the same thing that happened to Gore in 2000. The media set the bar for Bush so low, that no matter how badly he performed, he was a winner. 6) Continue to talk about the "secret" deals going on regarding Florida and Michigan.7) Obama had a fair shot at the vote in Florida, and he lost. Both he and Hillary was on the ballot in Florida and he ran ads. In Michigan both Obama and Edwards took their name off the ballot voluntarily. They both had ground operations in Michigan. Both ran as "uncommitted" and told people to vote that way. They made a political calculation and lost. Why should Hillary be punished because she left her name on the ballot?7) Talk about History. Ask the journalists about the states he's won. Ask them to show you, statistically, the last time Democrats won in the states in which he racked up delegates? When was the last time Democrats won in red states? And, even if he had a chance earlier on at the height of his "movement" that has changed in light of Reverend Wright and "bitter gate." He is even less likely to win in those states now.

So, the main focus should be on performances in the States Democrats NEED to win and have traditionally won when they win the White House. This is, I BELIEVE AN IMPORTANT POINT. OBAMA IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE THE MAP. HE SHOULD DEMONSTRATE HE CAN WIN BLUE STATES IN A PRIMARY.