Hope
I wonder about the number of former Obama supporters who have switched to Hillary's camp versus the number of former Hillary boosters who've done the opposite. I think it's an easy bet that the latter group far outnumbers the former. I wonder also about the extent to which former Obama supporters who now back Hillary were swayed by her argument that, basically, Obama is little more than an empty shirt that generates pretty words. I wonder how many of those voters believed in Obama and then, upon hearing Hillary's sour grapes (let's be honest and call them what they are) emerged from under the spell of his charisma as if from a dream to realize, "Oh, yes, she's right. He says bullshit and represents nothing at all." Save us, oh Hillary, from this latter-day Pied Piper.
Those of you who know me well enough know me to something of a cynic, a skeptic, a misanthrope. So you should know without much doubt that I'm approaching this election with as much reason and as little of a rose-colored-glasses view as I can. And still it is from a reasoned standpoint that I hate hearing the following arguments:
(a) Obama supporters should not be swayed by his charisma and his message of hope because there is no substance to it.
(b) Obama has no experience and Hillary has lots of experience, so clearly she is qualified for the job and he is not.
First of all I don't want to spend too much time arguing the idea that Hillary is loaded with experience compared to Obama. But. As US Senators, her experience outweighs his by one term. One. He has one term and she has two. Not exactly a long and storied senatorial career on his part, but neither on hers. However add to his resume seven years as a state senator and things start to look a bit more even. No, Illinois is not Washington, but the point is not that he's tremendously experienced; it's that she's barely more experienced than he is except for two "terms" as First Lady. While I'm not trying to diminish the importance of First Ladies--they truly do have an important position and accomplish meaningful things--First Lady is not an executive position. First Lady is not a spot on the Cabinet, no matter how much Hillary wants to spin it to make it look like one. Certainly she was a powerful First Lady and served as an adviser on some level to her husband, but in no court could you submit that as evidence of executive experience. So why does Hillary get to keep screaming all this about her overwhelming experience without people throwing things at her and crying bullshit? If you're looking for a Democratic candidate with loads of experience, you're out of luck; there ain't one left on the field.
That's (b). But I really keep thinking about (a).
While I admit that there is a danger or a risk that a gifted speaker like Obama could turn out to be a completely ineffectual president, I don't believe his oratory abilities should be ignored in service of other considerations. I don't believe his charisma should be dismissed as illusion and trickery. And, again, I say all this as an unabashed cynic. Can we not all admit that the manner in which Obama seduces almost anyone who hears him speak is valuable? That it is valuable, the way he transforms a podium, a stage, an arena into an extension of himself? That it is valuable, his ability to excite and motivate people to action the way they've never before been excited or motivated about ideas, about community, about the ability of politics to accomplish great things? Is this not the stuff of a great leader?
I don't mean to say that charisma is all we need in a president. I don't mean even to give credence to the idiotic notion that Hillary cannot be president because a lot of people don't like her, because she's polarizing. I mean only that, if Clinton and Obama are on a fairly even level from a policy standpoint or from an experiential standpoint, then isn't it OK to say that Obama's dazzle should give him the edge? Because it does help inform his ability to lead, and it does allow him to unite people.
Recently I watched the movie Primary Colors again for the first time in a long time. There is a scene at the beginning of the film in which a young, idealistic political operative has just joined the campaign to elect Governor Jack Stanton (who of course is a barely-veiled stand-in for Bill Clinton in a story based on his run for President). Mrs. Stanton asks the young man why in order to join the campaign to elect this unknown governor did he leave his former position working for a US Senator? He answers, in part:You had Kennedy; I didn’t. I’ve never heard a president use words like “destiny” and “sacrifice” without thinking “bullshit.” And, OK, maybe it was bullshit with Kennedy too, but... but people believed it. And I guess that’s what I want. I want to believe it. I want to be a part of something that’s history.
This is what is happening now. This is what people feel about Barack Obama. And that's worth noticing. It's not OK to dismiss that about him. It's that ability of his to unite people that leads many to compare him not even to Bill Clinton but to Jack or Bobby Kennedy. When no one else in the 40-plus years since Kennedy's death has made people feel this good about government, it's worth noticing. When no one else since Kennedy has made the public believe this much, it's worth noticing. And if we let this opportunity go by--this chance to elect someone with this much promise, who gives this many people this much real hope--we won't get another chance like it in our lifetimes.
Those of you who know me well enough know me to something of a cynic, a skeptic, a misanthrope. So you should know without much doubt that I'm approaching this election with as much reason and as little of a rose-colored-glasses view as I can. And still it is from a reasoned standpoint that I hate hearing the following arguments:
(a) Obama supporters should not be swayed by his charisma and his message of hope because there is no substance to it.
(b) Obama has no experience and Hillary has lots of experience, so clearly she is qualified for the job and he is not.
First of all I don't want to spend too much time arguing the idea that Hillary is loaded with experience compared to Obama. But. As US Senators, her experience outweighs his by one term. One. He has one term and she has two. Not exactly a long and storied senatorial career on his part, but neither on hers. However add to his resume seven years as a state senator and things start to look a bit more even. No, Illinois is not Washington, but the point is not that he's tremendously experienced; it's that she's barely more experienced than he is except for two "terms" as First Lady. While I'm not trying to diminish the importance of First Ladies--they truly do have an important position and accomplish meaningful things--First Lady is not an executive position. First Lady is not a spot on the Cabinet, no matter how much Hillary wants to spin it to make it look like one. Certainly she was a powerful First Lady and served as an adviser on some level to her husband, but in no court could you submit that as evidence of executive experience. So why does Hillary get to keep screaming all this about her overwhelming experience without people throwing things at her and crying bullshit? If you're looking for a Democratic candidate with loads of experience, you're out of luck; there ain't one left on the field.
That's (b). But I really keep thinking about (a).
While I admit that there is a danger or a risk that a gifted speaker like Obama could turn out to be a completely ineffectual president, I don't believe his oratory abilities should be ignored in service of other considerations. I don't believe his charisma should be dismissed as illusion and trickery. And, again, I say all this as an unabashed cynic. Can we not all admit that the manner in which Obama seduces almost anyone who hears him speak is valuable? That it is valuable, the way he transforms a podium, a stage, an arena into an extension of himself? That it is valuable, his ability to excite and motivate people to action the way they've never before been excited or motivated about ideas, about community, about the ability of politics to accomplish great things? Is this not the stuff of a great leader?
I don't mean to say that charisma is all we need in a president. I don't mean even to give credence to the idiotic notion that Hillary cannot be president because a lot of people don't like her, because she's polarizing. I mean only that, if Clinton and Obama are on a fairly even level from a policy standpoint or from an experiential standpoint, then isn't it OK to say that Obama's dazzle should give him the edge? Because it does help inform his ability to lead, and it does allow him to unite people.
Recently I watched the movie Primary Colors again for the first time in a long time. There is a scene at the beginning of the film in which a young, idealistic political operative has just joined the campaign to elect Governor Jack Stanton (who of course is a barely-veiled stand-in for Bill Clinton in a story based on his run for President). Mrs. Stanton asks the young man why in order to join the campaign to elect this unknown governor did he leave his former position working for a US Senator? He answers, in part:You had Kennedy; I didn’t. I’ve never heard a president use words like “destiny” and “sacrifice” without thinking “bullshit.” And, OK, maybe it was bullshit with Kennedy too, but... but people believed it. And I guess that’s what I want. I want to believe it. I want to be a part of something that’s history.
This is what is happening now. This is what people feel about Barack Obama. And that's worth noticing. It's not OK to dismiss that about him. It's that ability of his to unite people that leads many to compare him not even to Bill Clinton but to Jack or Bobby Kennedy. When no one else in the 40-plus years since Kennedy's death has made people feel this good about government, it's worth noticing. When no one else since Kennedy has made the public believe this much, it's worth noticing. And if we let this opportunity go by--this chance to elect someone with this much promise, who gives this many people this much real hope--we won't get another chance like it in our lifetimes.