As we head into Tuesday's primary elections in Indiana and North Carolina, a couple of things are becoming clearer-the controversy over Senator Barack Obama's former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright-has hurt the front runner who is seeking to wrap up the Democratic Party's presidential nomination. It's shown up in polls, surveys, and anecdotal data.
The press coverage around Senator Obama has changed markedly. No longer is he the savior who causes tingles and chills in political reporters. At times, he has been testy and while his most ardent followers accept his mea culpas about the remarks of the Rev. Wright ("outrageous") others on the fence don't seem so sure.
While Senator Obama has been steadily converting the so-called "superdelegates" who may be called on to cast ballots if, as likely, neither Senator Obama nor Senator Hillary Clinton of New York amass enough delegates to win on the first ballot at the political convention in August, he suddenly seems much less of a clear winner than he did even a couple of weeks ago.
For instance, today (May 2), the Gallup Polling organization reported that its presidential daily tracking data showed the likely Republican Party nominee, Senator John McCain of Arizona, beating Senator Obama in a fall election by six points (48-42) while Senator McCain leads Senator Clinton for the fall by one point, 46-45.
The obvious conclusion is that the longer Senators Obama and Clinton go at each other, the beneficiary is Senator McCain. Most analysts still say that when the Democrats finally settle on a nominee, the party will unite behind the candidate. But you could drive a truck through the terms, "finally settle" and exactly what that will mean. More and more, you hear voters for one candidate swear they will desert the party if their choice loses. I first dismissed a lot of this, but the more I hear it, the more I tend to believe it's possible.
There is a lot being written and said that the controversy over Rev. Wright is truly a "distraction" from the "real" issues that Americans care about-health policy, the war in Iraq, the economy, the food crisis, etc. It is the press and media which fixate on these so-called meaningless disputes that make for good stories but little else.
Here, I must dissent. Having covered American politics for more than 25 years, and having spoken to thousands of voters in that time (and I'm one myself!), I can say that controversies like Reverend Wright do matter. Here's why:
The American president is not just a national version of a county manager-that is, the person in charge of the Oval Office is more than someone who merely selects and implements a policy to solve problems. No, sir. The president has that role, of course, but the symbolic nature of the Chief Executive is even more important. Our president is head of the government, head of state, and also serves as an embodiment of ourselves. He or she will be the epitome of what it is to be "American". This person is going to be in our living rooms nightly for the next four years. The president will inspire us, call on us for sacrifice, scold us at times, and urge us on to make the country a better place. We have to "like", if not actually love the person who lives at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. We want to feel comfortable with the person who occupies the White House.
This calls for a unique set of skills which falls under the rubric of character. What kind of person is this candidate? How truthful? What has this person gone through in life? Am I inspired? Can I believe what is said? What does the body language give off? How are ordinary citizens treated? Can the press be handled? Is this person "presidential"?
Those who think these things don't matter don't understand the office of the presidency.
Do you think Americans actually pore through the policy positions of the candidates on health care and compare them? Most Americans realize that the promises and papers ground out during the campaign mean little. These proposals have a way of disappearing like the morning dew on a blistering hot day once an administration takes office. They are usually vague and sound alike, even coming from different candidates. But the character of the candidate doesn't change, and therein lies the true measure by which a voter can judge for whom he is going to cast a ballot. And incidents like the Wright controversy and Senator Obama's responses to them, or Senator Clinton's imagined landing under sniper fire in Tuzla, or Senator McCain's relationship to President George Bush, may mean more to a voter than another ten-point plan for curing whatever.
So while advocates for one candidate or another may grind teeth at what appear to be inane issues at time when so much needs to be discussed and debated, it truly does matter. That's what people talk about around the water cooler or on the way to work…and that's what can decide nominations and elections.
We will see how this impacts the voting on Tuesday. No matter what, the presidential contest in the Democratic Party will likely go on. There will be a major impact on the race should one candidate lose the two races on Tuesday. Of course, Senator Obama can afford to lose the two and keep going. It would be a devastating loss, but at the end of the day, he would still be ahead in delegates and probably in the popular vote. But it would be a warning sign and could serve as a touchstone for Senator Clinton to rack up further victories in the remaining primaries, putting the supers on the spot.
If Senator Clinton loses both, you can bet there will be more cries for her to leave the race, although it appears she is committed to carrying on. A split decision, and not much changes.
If the results fall in between, I'll be around to interpret them for you. Stay tuned.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment