Print This Post Print This Post

where’s the beef?

Noah Millman, who cops to being a registered Republican (I mention it in case any of my readers can’t stand to read anything written by a Republican or a conservative, though, frankly, if that’s how you feel, I’d be surprised to find you among my readers), decided to try to write Obama’s acceptance speech.

First, though, he tried to capture the essence of his subject—his elusiveness.

I still, at this late date, have no idea why Obama is running. I mean, I know why: he wants to be President. He’s “got game” – you don’t need more reason. But Obama has done a rather astonishing thing: he’s built an entire movement – he’s built a fundraising and organizing machine comparable to a national political party, in fact – without really standing for anything in particular. He is not, as George McGovern was, running to take the Democratic Party decisively to the left, nor is he, as Ted Kennedy was, running to restore a certain kind of liberalism within the Democratic Party, nor is he, as Bill Clinton was, running to transform liberalism into some kind of new, Third Way synthesis. Apart from his position on Iraq, he in no way distinguished himself from his rivals as representing a particular faction or even a particular worldview within the Democratic Party or the tradition of American liberalism, and Iraq he has forcefully maintained was a matter of his personal good judgment rather than an indication that he thinks about foreign policy profoundly differently from the Washington consensus. Obama has been attacked from various quarters for running a personality-based campaign, all about his own innate wonderfulness and ability to magically bind up all our political wounds and so forth. And while it’s certainly true that Obama has his lunatic supporters who think he’s the messiah, I think the real reason he’s perceived this way is that, lacking an animating cause, the candidate himself perforce became the cause. And that’s a huge problem because, in the end, a majority of voters is simply not going to vote for Obama on the basis of his innate wonderfulness.

To me, that’s about as clear an expanation—for those who really need one—of McCain’s attacks on Obama’s celebrity status—a status Obama sought in order to deflect attention from his obvious lack of stature as a credible political leader with a track record.

John Podhoretz also captures this nicely as we all wait for Obama to appear in his Temple in Invesco Field [e.a.]:

It certainly is nice to see and hear Stevie Wonder on the stage there at Invesco Field. And I know this is happening 90 minutes or more before Obama takes to all the networks with his acceptance speech. But this ellision of a pop stadium concert with a political convention does really make explicit the very problem that began Obama’s descent earlier this summer — the idea being that he is a showbiz idea of a leader rather than being a real leader.

Bingo! And McCain has exploited that weakness—the absence of steak and its replacement with the sizzle of rock star charisma and jelly-kneed fans—very effectively. Now, every time the Obama campaign plans a heavily stage-managed pseudo-event or spectacle, a lot of bloodhounds are on the case.

Maureen Dowd picked up on this:

Democrats have begun internalizing the criticisms of Hillary and John McCain about Obama’s rock-star prowess, worrying that the Invesco Field extravaganza Thursday, with Bruce Springsteen and Bon Jovi, will just add to the celebrity cachet that Democrats have somehow been shamed into seeing as a negative.

But elsewhere in the New York Times! we hear that Team Obama is ignoring the possible pitfalls [e.a.]:

Some aides worried about the setting overwhelming the message. But those closest to the planning said they had no regrets and were sticking to the sort of big-event politics that no other candidate has been able to match this year.

We are leaning into this, how can you not?” said Jenny Backus, a campaign strategist working on the convention plan. “This is the enthusiasm gap,” referring to what polls show as excitement for Mr. Obama that Senator John McCain’s campaign has not matched.

Well, sure, there’s plenty of excitement for Mr. Obama among his fans. But it’s more than a little weird to watch the spotlights sweeping over Invesco Stadium, to hear the rock music, and to think that this is the Democratic convention rather than American Idol.

Karl Rove is hardly an objective voice, but he explains how this extravaganza feeds directly into McCain’s strategy to deflate the Obama Messiah:

Making your speech in front of 75,000 people at Invesco Field could add to the view that this man is a celebrity, a rock star, somebody who’s fresh in the political scene, been taken by the press clubs. And that’s been a problem for Sen. Obama. Ever since he went to Europe and made the speech that he was running for president of the United States in Europe, in Berlin, he’s been in a slide. And question is whether he will stop that tomorrow night or accelerate it. And it’s a high stakes venue, no if’s, and’s or but’s about it. …

[T]hey had the biggest rally in the history of Pennsylvania just before the Pennsylvania Democratic primary — 35,000 people were in a rally for Sen. Obama in Philadelphia, and he lost the primary in Pennsylvania by almost two to one. So I wouldn’t take his ability to generate crowds. In fact, historically, if you look at this, some of the largest crowds in presidential campaign history were those entertained by George McGovern in the final moments of his horrendous defeat in 1972.

But the show is about to start, so I’m going to kick back and enjoy it!

0 comments ↓

There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment