My latest in the American News:
In a recent column in the Washington Post, Richard Cohen is concerned that he can think of multiple actions of John McCain that he truly admires while he can think of nothing Barack Obama has done to elicit similar admiration. Cohen is disturbed because he is politically inclined to favor Obama.
Cohen admires McCain's actions as a POW in Vietnam, undergoing torture but refusing early release for the Communists' propaganda purposes.
Cohen also admires McCain's advocacy of campaign finance reform, his opposition to the Medicare prescription drug plan as a budget buster, and McCain's call for a “surge” of troops in Iraq when the war was at its least popular; McCain was virtually alone in making this plea.
As Cohen points out, these policy positions were guaranteed to anger important parts of the voting population, yet McCain stuck to his guns rather than pander to polling.
None of this is to say that Obama is not admirable. Obama has reason to be proud. He is the first African-American to gain the presidential nomination of a major party and he has, in this author's opinion, a better than even chance of winning the election. But Cohen's concern is apt: Other than the good feeling an Obama victory would give to many Americans, what qualifies him to be president?
This question of admiration tells us of a key difference between McCain and Obama. To the extent McCain is admired, he is admired for what he has done. To the extent Obama is admired, he is admired for who he is.
Obama seems to know this, which is why he has made his personality a focal point of his campaign. Recently he told a group of Democrats, “I have become a symbol of the possibility of America returning to our best traditions.” This statement, along with much of the language and imagery surrounding the Obama campaign, indicates a conscious effort by Obama to make his very existence the reason for voting for him.
As pundit Jay Cost asserts, Obama's campaign theme is “this great man will unify a divided America around himself.” But, Cost argues, Obama might be making too grand a claim for himself, making it difficult for him to connect with the average voter. Obama runs the risk of acquiring the flaw fatal to many Democratic presidential candidates, namely taking the persona of an elite out of touch with the common man.
Obama has virtually no Senate record, having chosen to run for president before he could build one. His legislative record as an Illinois state senator is best characterized by a high number of “present” votes, earning Obama a reputation as a legislator who ducked the tough votes.
This does not mean that Obama would not be a successful president, even the transformational president some think he can be. It just means that, more than any candidate in recent history, we don't know what an Obama presidency will entail. Obama hasn't failed any of political life's tests, but he also hasn't really taken any of those tests.
McCain, on the other hand, has been tested, literally tortured for his commitment to his beliefs and his country. He is using his experience to his advantage, portraying himself as the wise statesman and Obama as the flippant celebrity who looks good but is devoid of substance. While Obama attempts to paint himself as the embodiment of tomorrow's promise, McCain portrays himself as the battle-tested warrior who is able to make the tough changes necessary in Washington.
Many voters cast their vote based on candidate characteristics. These are factors such as a candidate's perceived honesty, trustworthiness, leadership, commitment to “people like me.” This fall's campaigning will show which candidate's self-description is more attractive to the public. It will also show if the public prefers what Obama is or what McCain has done.
Recent Comments