PS - Discussion question: Whaddya think of McCain’s Veep? That choice was rather unexpected. Pragmatic or pandering?
No more pandering that what any number of other candidates--including Obama--have done. Obama took someone who was the opposite of him in many ways, to appear to balance his flaws and things he's lacking, and McCain has done the same. (Those who shout that she's so young and lacking in experience should probably think for a moment about the fact that yes, that's true, but she's running for vice president; if it's such a problem that she's young and inexperienced, doesn't that kind of support the argument of those who say the same about Obama, who's running for president?
Plus, I really believe that even if Hillary hadn't come so close, and Obama got the nomination without Hillary ever being a main contender, there's a good chance McCain would have chosen a woman. It's a smart way of generating excitement for himself. Vote one way, you get a black man. Vote the other, you get a woman. Either way, history is made.
Was it a calculated choice? Of course. But when are things otherwise in politics? And I believe that it still means something. There may have been a number of reasons she was chosen, but that doesn't change the fact that he was willing to go with it.
This sounds quite interesting -- I find American politics fascinating, not least because the candidates actually inspire the populace. People actually care about politics. In the UK, often, because the party leaders are so stupid, or boring, or both, we tend to pay them very little attention, save to satirise them. Quite often, people will vote knowing very little about what the person they are voting for stands for. In the end, it might just come down to looks!
I'm sure the same thing happens in the US, sometimes, but this particular Obama/Clinton nomination race, has really captured our imagination as well.
(Sorry to waffle! Thanks for adding me as a friend, by the way, and as you can probably tell, I'm back from my Internet hiatus!)
I don't know if was an accident that you replied to my comment instead of the entry, but I'll reply to your reply anyway :)
Quite often, people will vote knowing very little about what the person they are voting for stands for. In the end, it might just come down to looks!
I'm sure the same thing happens in the US, sometimes, but this particular Obama/Clinton nomination race, has really captured our imagination as well.
The same thing happens here, without a doubt. Looks and youth were a HUGE part of the Bill Clinton/Bob Dole race. Clinton was young and smooth and played the saxophone on a cool late-night talk show. Bob Dole was old and stiff. What either of them actually said or did was secondary. And now, with Obama, a huge part of it is his looks. And I'm not just talking about race. I'm talking about his youth and good looks. He's so dapper! There's no question that many people respond to that.
People actually care about politics. In the UK, often, because the party leaders are so stupid, or boring, or both, we tend to pay them very little attention, save to satirise them.
This is very interesting. I had gotten the idea that there were plenty of people in the U.K. who voted for issues or cared about politics. All the ranting about Thatcher, all the initial love of Blair that disappeared and turned to bitter hatred, etc.
No more pandering that what any number of other candidates--including Obama--have done. Obama took someone who was the opposite of him in many ways, to appear to balance his flaws and things he's lacking, and McCain has done the same. (Those who shout that she's so young and lacking in experience should probably think for a moment about the fact that yes, that's true, but she's running for vice president; if it's such a problem that she's young and inexperienced, doesn't that kind of support the argument of those who say the same about Obama, who's running for president?
Plus, I really believe that even if Hillary hadn't come so close, and Obama got the nomination without Hillary ever being a main contender, there's a good chance McCain would have chosen a woman. It's a smart way of generating excitement for himself. Vote one way, you get a black man. Vote the other, you get a woman. Either way, history is made.
Was it a calculated choice? Of course. But when are things otherwise in politics? And I believe that it still means something. There may have been a number of reasons she was chosen, but that doesn't change the fact that he was willing to go with it.
Reply
I'm sure the same thing happens in the US, sometimes, but this particular Obama/Clinton nomination race, has really captured our imagination as well.
(Sorry to waffle! Thanks for adding me as a friend, by the way, and as you can probably tell, I'm back from my Internet hiatus!)
Reply
Reply
Quite often, people will vote knowing very little about what the person they are voting for stands for. In the end, it might just come down to looks!
I'm sure the same thing happens in the US, sometimes, but this particular Obama/Clinton nomination race, has really captured our imagination as well.
The same thing happens here, without a doubt. Looks and youth were a HUGE part of the Bill Clinton/Bob Dole race. Clinton was young and smooth and played the saxophone on a cool late-night talk show. Bob Dole was old and stiff. What either of them actually said or did was secondary. And now, with Obama, a huge part of it is his looks. And I'm not just talking about race. I'm talking about his youth and good looks. He's so dapper! There's no question that many people respond to that.
People actually care about politics. In the UK, often, because the party leaders are so stupid, or boring, or both, we tend to pay them very little attention, save to satirise them.
This is very interesting. I had gotten the idea that there were plenty of people in the U.K. who voted for issues or cared about politics. All the ranting about Thatcher, all the initial love of Blair that disappeared and turned to bitter hatred, etc.
Reply
Leave a comment