Sen. Hillary Clinton has been defeated in eleven consecutive primaries and yet still persists in making arguments regarding Sen. Obama which have not—and will not—resonate. Simultaneously, Sen. John McCain, the likely Republican nominee, is assaulting his Democratic rival according to a failed strategy.

The most often repeated assault on Sen. Obama is that he does not have sufficient experience to lead—despite his eight-year service in the Illinois Legislature and his election to Congress in 2004. Sen. Clinton maintains she will be ready on “Day One” and both she and Sen. McCain portray Sen. Obama as an ingénue in foreign affairs. They miss the obvious: Sen. Obama’s competence during the campaign is an outstanding testament to his skills; it is visible and irrefutable evidence of his ability to lead.

Sen. Obama has already surpassed the Clintons in a key area. In very short time, he has built a coalition of energetic young voters in tandem with Democrats, Independents and some Republicans. In other words, Sen. Obama is demonstrating he is on a par with the truly outstanding presidents: he can create a new political alignment. In the twentieth century, only Franklin D. Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan achieved this. Thus, voters understand that Sen. Obama transcends his race, the liberal Democratic base and even the Democratic Party. This high level of proficiency wins nominations, presidential elections —and is the kind of talent which usually secures a two-term presidency.

Furthermore, Sen. Obama has been able to do in one breathless stroke what no one other Democrat has done: he has smashed the grip of the Democratic elite on the Democratic grass roots. His fundraising efforts, based on a direct appeal to the people, have circumvented the traditional Party fundraising with all its concomitant deals and counter-deals. He has also destroyed the stranglehold that out-dated African American leaders such as Rev. Al Sharpton and Rev. Jesse Jackson have on the Democratic Party: He has delivered the African American vote on his own merits, without resorting to a vitriolic race-laden vocabulary. Sen. Obama has thus far waged a successful coup against the entrenched, ossified and stagnant power of the Democratic elite on its own party.

Sen. Obama has also outshone Republicans in one of their most cherished ambitions. Since 1992, many members of the Republican Party —and especially a coterie of stalwart conservatives within it—have been determined to defeat the Clintons. Yet, for all their attempts, Republicans have consistently failed: they did not succeed in 1992, 1996, during the impeachment hearings, nor against Sen. Clinton in both elections in New York. Only Sen. Obama is on the verge of dealing Sen. Clinton’s campaign a death-blow. If he succeeds, he becomes an instant hero for conservatives too—no matter how liberal his politics are.

If forging a new political alignment and circumventing the Democratic elite are not proof of successful leadership, then what is?

The other argument which has been tried against Sen. Obama and which will continue to fail is that he is a great speechmaker but cannot deliver tangible results. Sen. Clinton has often derided her competitor as good with words but unable to procure “solutions.” Sen. McCain recently referred to Obama as offering “an eloquent but empty call for change.” However, the electorate recognizes that Sen. Obama is not simply making good speeches; he is presenting a vision. Like legendary leaders in America and abroad—Thomas Jefferson, Winston Churchill, Martin Luther King, Mahatma Gandhi—Sen. Obama is projecting a transcendental ideal for his nation. It is this, not merely words, which accelerates the pulse of his supporters.

When both Sen. Clinton and Sen. McCain attack Sen. Obama for his eloquence this backfires; the electorate is insulted. Many politicians can speak well and make promises: but very few have vision—and voters know the difference. Hence, a didactic scolding of the electorate does not work. Moreover, it makes both Sen. Clinton and Sen. McCain look envious rather than capable: it accentuates their lack of eloquence and their lack of vision. It is akin to a short, stocky person telling a supermodel: “You are only tall, slim and beautiful.”

Sen. Obama is indeed vulnerable in one key area: he can potentially be pegged as too liberal for the American mainstream. This, rather than flimsy assaults on “inexperience” and “empty rhetoric” is a better strategy for his adversaries; it will also give the nation a more substantive debate.

If Sen. Obama’s rivals wish to have an impact on his momentum, they must avoid attacking him on the two areas—leadership and eloquence—in which he far outshines his closest competitors from both parties.

-Grace Vuoto is Executive Director of the Edmund Burke Institute for American Renewal. The opinions expressed are her own.