I don’t think that most people really care who was right or wrong in a
debate; it’s more a question of how the candidates handle themselves and what
they reveal about who they are in a stressful situation. I don’t think it’s a bad thing that the candidates get it on. I think it’s important for Obama to show some fight. It’s one thing to have a message of unity; it’s another to be a doormat. If he’s going up against the Republicans he’s going to have to defend himself.
But Obama is in the tougher position here. If his strength lies in being the transracial candidate, it’s in the Clinton’s interest to make him the "black candidate". If his strength lies in being the healer, the conciliator who who wants to heal the nation’s partisan wounds, it’s in the Clinton’s interest to force him to come out swinging. Obama’s attractiveness as a candidate lies in his cool, and so the Clintons will do everything they can to make him look hot. He needs to find a cool fighting style, more epee than broadsword, more Jet Li than Mike Tyson. More good-humored wit than hot, reactive brawn. From where I sit, so far so good, but we’ll see how it plays out. A lot depends on how the media spin it and how a public consensus develops on who handles himself or herself better here.
The idea that Edwards won last night is silly if winning means not being part of the fight. He’d switch places with either of his opponents in a minute. There’s a difference between transcending the fight and being in the fight to begin with, and at this point Edwards just isn’t in it. If he does get back in it–and he could–he will be scrapping exactly the way Obama and Clinton are now.
UPDATE: See also here:
Most pundits felt that Gore and Kerry won their debates on the merits, but it was indisputable that they failed to connect with the electorate on a gut level. And that cost them. We need a candidate who runs a campaign that’s capable of giving as good as it gets, or of hitting back harder. But we also need a candidate who’s capable of appealing to voters, of inspiring their trust and confidence, and of connecting with independents and moderate Republicans. . . . Remember, debates aren’t for pundits, they’re for undecided voters. And time and again, those voters are repelled by strong attacks, however accurate, and drawn to the candidate who seems to rise above them.
Easier said than done–and you need help from a sympathetic media. If the media theme during the Gore/Bush debate focussed on what a clueless, in-over-his-head Lost Boy Bush appeared to be, maybe the country would have realized that he was a clueless, in-over-his-head Lost Boy.
UPDATE 2: An article by ABC is rightly getting some scrutiny by the blogosphere. It calls Obama’s response to a reporter testy, using phrases like "shot back". It all fits into the narrative that Obama is hot and frustrated. Judge for yourself if that’s an accurate description:
Leave a Reply