Hey there...
Now that my one-week vacation is over, I can return to the world of politics. Let me tell you, since I escaped the Beltway for a week, most Americans do not spend every waking hour worrying or wondering about who will succeed whom in what office. At least now. Maybe later, but not now.
Politics outside of Washington is like a radio playing in the background. People may watch a bit of a newscast here or there but then move onto other things--like what is for dinner, what the kids are doing, the weather, and griping. Politics is not a dominant fixture in their lives.
They know who is running for office, they know the issues, but there's plenty of time before they need to get serious, so why do it now?
While I was away, I saw that Senator Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama appeared on the same stage at the same time; Senator Clinton's husband spoke to Barack Obama in a long anticipated "chat," the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Americans have the right to own guns in their own homes for self-defense, and the candidates continued sniping back and forth over this and that.
Senator Obama had to give a speech saying that he was an American patriot (countering claims that he wasn't) and Senator John McCain was being attacked on his military record (seems like a dumb move to me).
We are going to see a lot of this back and forth trying to win the news cycle for the next several months so get used to it. That and lots of polls released almost daily by dozens of organizations, some of whom should not be in the polling business. Don't worry, I'll sort them out for you.
Basically, Senator Obama can be safely described as "ahead" although not by very much. Given President Bush's low approval ratings and the large advantage Democrats enjoy in generic polling, it could be said that Senator McCain should be grateful it's this close. It can also be said that given all the Republican Party's woes, it's a good sign for Senator McCain that he is only slightly behind (in most polls, not in all).
There was an interesting article posted about a focus group in the Washington Post recently. Focus groups are gatherings of 5-10 people chosen demographically and are asked questions and followups. Unlike a poll, a good focus group leader can drill down into peoples' emotions and feelings about a candidate or party and glean things that could make a diference in a campaign.
This one particular group showed that a consensus leaned towards Senator Obama but that there were still many unknowns about him because he has so recently become a national figure. There's interest but no finality and if Senator Obama can't close the sale, Senator McCain will be there to fill the void. So, the election is still pretty fluid, as far as I am concerned, although I would say Senator Obama is still the guy to beat.
Lately, Senator Obama's statements on such issues as gay marriage (he does not favor gay marriage but does favor gay "unions" and wants the issue left to the states but does not favor a referendum in the state of California to prohibit gay marriage) are beginning to leave a muddled taste in some polling. What does this guy really think? Is he the true post-political figure who can bring Americans together, or is he trying to slide an ambitious political agenda through a series of mushy bromides?
Senator McCain was viewed by this focus group as too close to President Bush and the Democratic argument that electing Senator McCain would fulfill a third term for President Bush is falling on receptive ears. People in this group felt a change was necessary but were not quite agreed on what that "change" was or should be.
Voters will have to decide but they will have time to do it, and at their own pace. Even if it's not the pace of Beltway insiders who think of politics all the time. Tonight, I actually found myself thinking: what's for dinner? :-)
Showing posts with label Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Obama. Show all posts
July 1, 2008
May 2, 2008
Heading into Tuesday
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.
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:
Posts (Atom)
