When the candidates face off this fall in the political version of reality TV's survivor shows, what are we likely to see?
The scripts are obvious--Change vs. Bush Three--as is the imagery, idealistic young guy vs. gritty old-timer. But many viewers will be making their choices on a subtext: Who makes them feel better--and safer?
On that score, both candidates have serious work to do. As David Brooks points out today, "Obama has to come up with a personal narrative voters can relate to. McCain needs to come up with a one-sentence description for why he represents a clean break and a compelling future."
TV debates, starting with the first, have always been more about music than words. While Kennedy was deploring a non-existent "missile gap" with the Russians and arguing with Nixon over defending Formosa from the Chinese, voters were seeing a confident Presidential-looking JFK and a shifty, uneasy Nixon (who famously rejected makeup and looked unshaven in the first outing).
McCain and Obama handlers are too sophisticated to allow visual gaffes, but the candidates' style and demeanor will be crucial.
Does Obama come across as a plausible game-changing new kind of political leader or a cocky, overeducated young African-American with con-man patter?
Will McCain look like a rock-solid patriotic President open to a new future or a grumpy old man holding on to outdated ideas?
They are both too deft to fall into stereotypes, but the debates will hinge on their performances as much as their platforms. Undecided voters will be sitting back and challenging them to show their true selves. What some psychologists call "emotional intelligence," the ability to connect viscerally with others, will be more crucial than brains or bombast.
Cynics may see that as putting on an act but, in the 21st century, it's always show time.
Showing posts with label '08 Presidential election. Show all posts
Showing posts with label '08 Presidential election. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 03, 2008
Monday, May 05, 2008
Kristol Ball on Obama and McCain
Today's MSM campaign news:
William Kristol: "In a New York Times/CBS News poll in late February, Obama was defeating John McCain 50 to 38. Two months later, the Times/CBS poll had McCain and Obama tied. The poll that came out yesterday showed Obama reopening a lead over McCain--but clearly over this period a vulnerability for Obama was exposed."
CBS: "Obama has seen a big reversal since his denunciation of Wright’s remarks on Tuesday. He now leads presumptive Republican nominee John McCain in the hypothetical fall contest by eleven points, 51 percent to 40 percent."
The alarming news is that Obama's lead over McCain has shrunk from 12 to 11 percent.
After this disquisition on Obama's vulnerability, Kristol has a brilliant suggestion for the Republicans: Nominate 36-year-old Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal as McCain's running mate.
Why didn't anyone think of that before? A potential successor half as old with six months of experience in a state house would surely comfort voters worried about McCain's age.
Kristol may be a little shaky on facts, but he's much funnier than Maureen Dowd or Gail Collins.
William Kristol: "In a New York Times/CBS News poll in late February, Obama was defeating John McCain 50 to 38. Two months later, the Times/CBS poll had McCain and Obama tied. The poll that came out yesterday showed Obama reopening a lead over McCain--but clearly over this period a vulnerability for Obama was exposed."
CBS: "Obama has seen a big reversal since his denunciation of Wright’s remarks on Tuesday. He now leads presumptive Republican nominee John McCain in the hypothetical fall contest by eleven points, 51 percent to 40 percent."
The alarming news is that Obama's lead over McCain has shrunk from 12 to 11 percent.
After this disquisition on Obama's vulnerability, Kristol has a brilliant suggestion for the Republicans: Nominate 36-year-old Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal as McCain's running mate.
Why didn't anyone think of that before? A potential successor half as old with six months of experience in a state house would surely comfort voters worried about McCain's age.
Kristol may be a little shaky on facts, but he's much funnier than Maureen Dowd or Gail Collins.
Saturday, September 29, 2007
Newt Is Not Running
The reason is simple: The job isn't big enough.
Newt Gingrich’s decision not to pursue the presidency was announced today by a spokesman who explained the former Speaker will deal with “the challenges America faces and finding solutions to those challenges” as chairman of his tax-exempt organization instead.
It’s not that the White House isn’t a pleasant place to live with good perks, but Gingrich would have to give up his tax-free empire, his think tank, his Fox News contract as a commentator, the $40,000 speaking gigs and so much more he now enjoys without all the headaches of actually doing something.
In addition, if Newt had decided to go for it, there would have been pesky reporters asking about his shutting down the government in 1995, impeaching Bill Clinton for office sex while carrying on his own affair and, later, having to pay a $300,000 fine by the House ethics committee.
All that plus the travel, the hand-shaking, the debating with the likes of Ron Paul and Tom Tancredo would have been degrading to a visionary.
Actually, "the presidency is a minor post on the scale of change I'm describing," Gingrich explained to the Washington Post in July.
Instead he will follow the example of Benjamin Franklin. “He didn't think he was less than Washington or Jefferson,” Gingrich the historian explains. “He was deliberately eclectic and deliberately complex, and happy to be so.
“He was pretty interesting. If you had told him, 'If you could have been simple, you could have been president,' he would have said, 'That's pretty stupid.'"
No one will ever accuse Newt Gingrich of being simple.
Newt Gingrich’s decision not to pursue the presidency was announced today by a spokesman who explained the former Speaker will deal with “the challenges America faces and finding solutions to those challenges” as chairman of his tax-exempt organization instead.
It’s not that the White House isn’t a pleasant place to live with good perks, but Gingrich would have to give up his tax-free empire, his think tank, his Fox News contract as a commentator, the $40,000 speaking gigs and so much more he now enjoys without all the headaches of actually doing something.
In addition, if Newt had decided to go for it, there would have been pesky reporters asking about his shutting down the government in 1995, impeaching Bill Clinton for office sex while carrying on his own affair and, later, having to pay a $300,000 fine by the House ethics committee.
All that plus the travel, the hand-shaking, the debating with the likes of Ron Paul and Tom Tancredo would have been degrading to a visionary.
Actually, "the presidency is a minor post on the scale of change I'm describing," Gingrich explained to the Washington Post in July.
Instead he will follow the example of Benjamin Franklin. “He didn't think he was less than Washington or Jefferson,” Gingrich the historian explains. “He was deliberately eclectic and deliberately complex, and happy to be so.
“He was pretty interesting. If you had told him, 'If you could have been simple, you could have been president,' he would have said, 'That's pretty stupid.'"
No one will ever accuse Newt Gingrich of being simple.
Monday, September 24, 2007
Giuliani's Glass House
As he hears Fred Thompson’s footsteps in the Republican race, America’s Mayor has gone from polishing his 9/11 halo to photo-shopping it out of all recognition, the Washington Post reports today.
At the same time, Rudy Giuliani has reverted to his prosecutorial roots by impugning the judgment and motives of every Democrat in sight from MoveOn.org back to Bill Clinton.
On terrorism, he charges, Democrats have "the same bad judgment they had in the 1990s. They don't see the threat. They don't accept the threat."
But, the Post reports, the attacks are “undercut by Giuliani's record as mayor and by his public statements about terrorism since the 1990s, which document an evolution in thinking that began with a mind-set similar to the one he criticizes today.”
Before 9/11 and even in the aftermath, Giuliani treated terrorism more as crime, akin to his Mafia experience, rather than an ongoing political crisis, reflected in his decision to locate a command center for the Office of Emergency Management across from the twin towers, which had been attacked in 1993.
John McCain has politely questioned whether Giuliani’s performance after 9/11 "translates, necessarily, into foreign policy or national security expertise. I know of nothing in his background that indicates that he has any experience in it."
The Mayor’s level of interest in international affairs was reflected by his failure to attend meetings of the Iraq Study Group in 2006 that would have interfered with his schedule of collecting $1.4 million in speaking fees, which led to his ultimate resignation from the commission.
Now Giuliani is not only touting his toughness on terrorism and the world it has created but the softness of everybody else. John McCain may be wrong about Iraq and its context, but he knows what he’s talking about, talks straight and doesn’t demean those who disagree with him.
Giuliani is his polar opposite.
At the same time, Rudy Giuliani has reverted to his prosecutorial roots by impugning the judgment and motives of every Democrat in sight from MoveOn.org back to Bill Clinton.
On terrorism, he charges, Democrats have "the same bad judgment they had in the 1990s. They don't see the threat. They don't accept the threat."
But, the Post reports, the attacks are “undercut by Giuliani's record as mayor and by his public statements about terrorism since the 1990s, which document an evolution in thinking that began with a mind-set similar to the one he criticizes today.”
Before 9/11 and even in the aftermath, Giuliani treated terrorism more as crime, akin to his Mafia experience, rather than an ongoing political crisis, reflected in his decision to locate a command center for the Office of Emergency Management across from the twin towers, which had been attacked in 1993.
John McCain has politely questioned whether Giuliani’s performance after 9/11 "translates, necessarily, into foreign policy or national security expertise. I know of nothing in his background that indicates that he has any experience in it."
The Mayor’s level of interest in international affairs was reflected by his failure to attend meetings of the Iraq Study Group in 2006 that would have interfered with his schedule of collecting $1.4 million in speaking fees, which led to his ultimate resignation from the commission.
Now Giuliani is not only touting his toughness on terrorism and the world it has created but the softness of everybody else. John McCain may be wrong about Iraq and its context, but he knows what he’s talking about, talks straight and doesn’t demean those who disagree with him.
Giuliani is his polar opposite.
Sunday, September 02, 2007
Bloomberg-Hagel '08
An Independent presidential ticket is shaping up with Mike Bloomberg, New York’s Mayor, and Sen. Chuck Hagel as his running mate. Increasingly, there are clues about the intentions of both.
Bloomberg was in Washington this week to make a speech about the new Census poverty figures, but he found time to advise reporters on how to cover the 2008 presidential campaigns, while listing issues--Iraq, Social Security and immigration--that candidates should address. Then he posed with supporters holding signs reading: “Bloomberg ’08: DraftMichael.com.”
A while back, Bloomberg had dinner with Sen. Chuck Hagel, the Vietnam veteran who has been opposing the war in Iraq for some time now and has been toying with an Independent run for President himself.
Now we have word that Hagel is unlikely to run for re-election to the Senate, opening the way for former Sen. and Gov. Bob Kerrey to go for the Nebraska seat. Kerrey, a Democrat and good friend who has said he will run only if Hagel doesn’t, is now preparing to go for it.
A Bloomberg-Hagel ticket would have the Mayor’s billions and his executive experience to pair up with the Senator’s idealism and legislative know-how in the Washington maze.
They wouldn’t get much of the NASCAR vote, but this newest odd couple certainly would make the race interesting for the two New Yorkers who are likely to get the Republican and Democratic nominations
Bloomberg was in Washington this week to make a speech about the new Census poverty figures, but he found time to advise reporters on how to cover the 2008 presidential campaigns, while listing issues--Iraq, Social Security and immigration--that candidates should address. Then he posed with supporters holding signs reading: “Bloomberg ’08: DraftMichael.com.”
A while back, Bloomberg had dinner with Sen. Chuck Hagel, the Vietnam veteran who has been opposing the war in Iraq for some time now and has been toying with an Independent run for President himself.
Now we have word that Hagel is unlikely to run for re-election to the Senate, opening the way for former Sen. and Gov. Bob Kerrey to go for the Nebraska seat. Kerrey, a Democrat and good friend who has said he will run only if Hagel doesn’t, is now preparing to go for it.
A Bloomberg-Hagel ticket would have the Mayor’s billions and his executive experience to pair up with the Senator’s idealism and legislative know-how in the Washington maze.
They wouldn’t get much of the NASCAR vote, but this newest odd couple certainly would make the race interesting for the two New Yorkers who are likely to get the Republican and Democratic nominations
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)