The dust has settled over the Obama nomination. What has remained? What is the lasting narrative we have seen over the last week?
Well, I feared that Obama losing SD would be a disastrous portend of things to come. And it still may be, but despite him limping backwards, practically mortally wounded, over the finish line, largely due to the help of superdelegates, the narrative was about how momentous and historic the occasion was. And it is. But it would have been for Hillary as well.
Obama was helped in this by two things. One, McCain’s terrible decision to have a major speech hours before Obama’s shining moment. Green backdrop, deadpan delivery, boring content, and 50 people in the audience – not good. Compare that to Obama’s gracious and soaring speech in typical Obama style on the night of his coronation. Even Fox News had to give the guy props and bash McCain.
Second, Hillary did not concede that night. Bad move, and that was all the networks could talk about. Of course now all the talk is whether we will get Obama/Clinton. I seriously doubt it; in fact, I will run around the block naked if he chooses her.
Those two things, and the very special significance of Obama’s win hide the fact that the Democratic voters were showing signs of buyer’s remorse. Only Pat Buchanan pointed it out, but no one took him up on the thread.
Needless to say, a great speech (and two bad ones), can definitely plaster over an unstable wall. I have fear that plaster may crumble, and unless Obama can fix what is causing the problem underneath, he may be in for trouble.
On the other hand, if McCain keeps looking old and frail and out of ideas, we keep losing 50,000 jobs a month, and oil hits $150/barrel, it may not matter.
I think his main problem now is his elitist image. Second, the notion he is unpatriotic. However, some would claim he needs to flesh out his policies more; that he appears nothing more than a great speech maker.
That is an interesting point though. The public is not stupid. They know plans get morphed and twisted once politicians, no matter how well-meaning, get to Washington. No intricate plan looks anything like what was promised once the final product is released. So by not going into detail, Obama shows he understands people vote on generalities. That is, if they like where you are headed, the details do not matter that much. Details get changed, but the general direction is what steers the course, and if they like the direction, they will vote for that candidate.
Why does Bush still have a near 30% approval rating? Because he is doing a great job? No, because despite his utter corruption and incompetence, these 30 percenters like what he stands for and what he ideally wants to do, and in some cases has done (i.e. give tax subsidies for the rich).
Obama gets this. People vote on your general philosophy. As long as Obama can keep people focused on his direction and overall philosophy, he controls the narrative and has a great chance this November. Get bogged down in details the opposition can tear apart, and you lose control of the message. Whatever shine you may have had gets lost in the tarnish of nit-picking and the scavenging of your policy’s carcass.
So Obama needs to keep the conversation elevated on ideals and overall direction, while appearing less elite (no riding in tanks though, please).
Thank goodness - now instead of screaming “oh no” if I hear that Obama has chosen Clinton as a running mate, I’ll actually have a reason to laugh instead.
Left by JwJ on June 8th, 2008