Nov

7

Good things (and bad) about Obama’s win

Filed Under Ideas, News, Random Thoughts 

There are a couple of things about Senator Obama’s win that make me happy — or at least optimistic.

1. Race was an issue in the campaign. As much as people try to say otherwise, it mattered. I am genuinely glad for black people that this is so. It affirms what they’ve been trying to say for over a hundred years–that their skin color doesn’t make them less important. But now that we’ve elected a black man into the White House, the “American is racist” argument will lose a lot of its clout. Of course, those who really believe it will find some way to keep it alive, but I don’t think it will be nearly as persuasive.

Further, Obama will ultimately prove the equality of the “races” when he makes a mistake and has to pay the consequences. Just as the media’s treatment of Hillary Clinton during the primaries proved that women have an equal right to criticism, a strong opposition to Obama’s policies will show that black people really do get treated the same way as white people.

2. Campaign finance whining might go away. Obama raised an enormous amount of money. If McCain had raised that much and won, the media would have accused him of buying the presidency (and in a sense, he would have). But they won’t criticize Obama for his financial success. In the future, Republicans should feel free to raise as much as they can (legally), since any media criticism of their success would be obviously disingenuous. I realize that the media’s ability to spin things to fit their narrative will still be powerful, but I think the “buying the election” epithet will lose some of its power.

3. Republicans should know how not to run a campaign. McCain’s campaign was pretty sorry. He survived on people’s hesitancy about Obama and a few spectacular successes — the “surge,” Gov. Palin (a mixed blessing, more below). His response to other issues, e.g. the economic “crisis,” was pretty bad. It took a plumber from Toledo and a slip from Obama to focus the message on the obvious. McCain and Co. were just flopping around, and it hurt them. In fact, McCain and Palin never really explained any of their positions very well.
Voters reminded the GOP that ideas do matter, and if you can’t express them cogently, you won’t win.

4. A young rising star in the GOP got national facetime. Gov. Palin has been a touchstone for the debate within the GOP about the party’s direction. She represents one vision of Republicanism (I think the more conservative side). It was nice that she could be introduced to the country to remind young conservatives that they can actually go places in politics, and that people really do care about conservative values. To be sure, certain aspects of her candidacy were badly handled, and she may not have been ready to be president (I’m not sure that Obama is either). But she could represent a future GOP that a lot of its younger members would like. She may not be a good candidate for president, even in the future, but her success should remind the movers and shakers that they can’t ignore the right.

5. Conservatives aren’t whining. When Democrats lost in 2000 and 2004, there was lots of griping about all the unfair things that happened. Most conservatives are pretty prosaic about this campaign. Many see it as a deserved punishment for a party that has behaved badly. Further, they think it proved that moderate Republicanism doesn’t work very well against “moderate” Democrat-ism. The introspection may be very healthy.

Some not-so-good things and observations:


1. Senator Obama ran on a campaign of “hope and change.” He never really bothered to be more specific about the kind of change or what we should hope for. His success in vagueness prompts a couple of points, any or all of which may be true.
a. Americans don’t care about the meaning of words. They think emotionally; which makes no sense, but I think it captures the sentiment. In reading the various analyses of the campaign, both during and after, I was struck by the freqency of aesthetic language and imagery. Obama’s campaign was (perhaps intentionally) cast as a artistic event. And people today generally think that art is something that you interact with emotionally–and without thought. They don’t care about the meaning of art; indeed, they may think that it has no meaning. Obama capitalized on this sentimentality to propel his campaign.
b. Americans were so sick of Washington that they were willing to “vote for change” regardless of the nature of the change. When people don’t trust the current government (and it was perceived as Republican), “change” is automatically a powerful idea. I think voters were so disillusioned with Republicans that they were willing to give nearly anything else a chance. Obama essentially said “I’ll do things differently.” And voters said “Go for it.” They may have thought they had nothing to lose. It couldn’t get that much worse. (It can, but it’s hard to convince people that it could be that much worse.)

2. The mainstream media might as well be an extension of the Democrat party. There are a few journalists who actually did a little journalism, but for the most part, reporters were incredibly lopsided. In this campaign, no one could accuse journalists of educating anyone, or even of being “fair and balanced.” The public’s ignorance of relevant issues (like economics, foreign policy, etc.) permitted Obama to run his vague campaign, but the media never tried to inform the American voter about the relevant points in the discussion. They vacillated between gross simplification and technical jargon/academia-ese. This certainly played in Obama’s favor, since he appeared to cater to many people’s rudimentary understanding. His unclear positions allowed voters to project their ideas onto his without damage, so his ideas looked like their own. This is not a good thing, and the media could have helped prevent it.

All said, an Obama presidency may be good for the country in a couple of ways. If he governs like Clinton, we’ll do all right. If he governs like Hoover, the economy probably won’t do well. But as Robert Bork has observed, one thing that would help restore religious sentiment to our culture would be deep depression. It’s just that economic depression isn’t likely to win many voters. Obama’s power is highly derivative. We would do well to remember that if he tries to make waves, that doesn’t mean he controls the oceans.

Comments

One Response to “Good things (and bad) about Obama’s win”

  1. Donald Garland on November 12th, 2008 8:26 pm

    your political views / comments are very interesting , almost like you read my mind . possibly you should pursue a career in politics.
    If you and your wife are ever near newport news, williamsburg or gloucester va stop in to see us

Leave a Reply