I also like this quote:
The initial magic of his candidacy has gotten a very unusual and strong response," said Lee Miringoff , director of the nonpartisan Marist Institute for Public Opinion in Poughkeepsie, N.Y. But "it still remains to be seen" whether Obama can weather the examination and pressure of a presidential campaign.I know it was a throwaway line from a political consultant, but this reflects the image-over-substance phenomenon that I believe Obama represents. The metaphor that should reflect how we select a president is a job interview or a dog show--where the candidates pass increasingly demanding standards of qualification, not an "act."
"He's had a very good opening act, but now he will have to generate an equally strong act two," Miringoff said.
6 comments:
Elections are always based on image. Was Bill Clinton more qualified than President Bush I? Was GWB more qualified to be President than Al Gore?
Barack Obama may not have a laundry list of legislative accomplishments, or executive positions; but neither did JFK or Abraham Lincoln.
He might be over-hyped, but so is Guiliani, John Edwards, John McCain, Hillary Clinton, Mitt Romney, and Bill Richardson. All have accomplished something, but what makes them so special as to be "more qualified" to be President than anyone else?
Ultimately, voters will go with the person who makes them believe in them...I think Obama has that quality more than the other Democrats. Once he gets into office, there will be people surrounding him that can do the mechanics involved with running the Country (You think GWB writes the budget?), his job will be to promote a vision and stick to it.
-it sure didn't deep six Lieberman in BlueBlueBlue Connecticut. That's because CT, in addition to being BlueBlueBlue... is also JewJewJew ... and big $ $ $. And we all know why the GOP base is big $ $ $.
"Anonymous,"
Not sure of your point . . . (the non-anti-semitic part, at least). Are you saying that Lieberman won because he was Jewish, and therefore the candidate of the rich, and therefore the candidate of the GOP?
Yes and Yes. I've been to CT, have you? Most of the state looks like Bellmeade.
Yes, I've been there--know a little about it.
I think the reason Lieberman won is significantly less shadowy . . . the majority of Connecticut voters believed that Lieberman better represented their views on the issues--and the main distinction between the two candidates was the GWOT.
ANON,
I assure you, Lieberman did not win because he is Jewish.
Post a Comment