roachboy

McCain Manager: 'This Election is Not About Issues' - The Fix

so far, then, this idiocy of a presidential race, a televised sporting event, has been shaped in large measure by what rick davis says is the case--and this is apparently the republican strategy---personality over substance, appearance over position, generating the illusion of intimacy over providing meaningful alternatives for the american polity at a point where things have already slid dangerously out of whack. what this means, then, is that this election is a matter of identity, insofar as the republicans are concerned: if does not matter what either candidate says so much as matters the impression of a series of qualities that individuals identify with, projections that they desire to see as their very own Dear Leader.

and there is a way in which this is a smart strategy in that it relies ultimately on the role of television in determining viewpoints, in shaping perceptions---and on a spectator or consumer relation to the future of the country. what's smart about it is that it relies on the *form* of television rather than on its content, on what television *does* rather than on what anyone who circulates within the medium says.

and it assumes that all of us are fucking nitwits.

meanwhile, laura ingram did a little speech today defending sara palin against the "entrenched elites" who "control the media" and who "hate life" and so who "hate sarah palin" because she defends "life..." the analyst who summarized that little series of bon bons argued that the republicans were going to run against the media, against "the elites" who persecute them so.

Talk Radio Host Slams Media, Palin Critics - The Caucus Blog - NYTimes.com

if you take these two things together, what they amount to is an argument for non-falsifiability---believe the image you see but not what anyone says---trust your projections, but ignore those pesky facts that get in the way---those pesky facts are the weapons of a nameless formless "elite" who are out to keep conservatives down.

this is a paranoid narrative.
the nomination process for the republicans hasn't happened yet.
already, the recipe seems to be for delerium on the right.

this is a pretty depressing state of affairs.
i wonder sometimes if how other folk see the general state of politics in america at this point, and what that assessment leads them to think the outcome likely to be.
so what do you think?

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

jorgelito

I think people can make up their own minds Roachie, oops, sorry, I mean Roachboy. I think it's great these people are allowed to speak their minds. Now you know how and what they think (and I mean everyone, not just a select few). In this arena, people choose what they want to project and portray and we get to decide in the end.

Wait until after the RNC. Then we can compare and contrast the DNC with the RNC and I believe it will be very revealing. How the players see themselves and represent themselves will be evident and upon those basis' we will for our own opinions.

__________________
"The race is not always to the swift, nor battle to the strong, but
to the one that endures to the end."

"Demand more from yourself, more than anyone else could ever ask!"

- My recruiter

guy44

As depressing as this may seem, I don't think this is the first time that Americans will vote with something other than the issues on their minds. FDR didn't let the public find out that he was wheelchair-bound because the visual would imply weakness - even though, of course, he won WWII. Although the effect of this is exaggerated, Nixon did look terrible on TV compared to JFK, and people noticed. JFK's wife, Jackie, also became incredibly popular and she was regularly trotted out as a political device. Ronald Reagan got his start in movies, and so did Ahnuld. Bill Clinton's biggest setback (well, after health care, anyways) had to do with a friggin' BJ. After the initial invasion of Iraq, Bush landed on an aircraft carrier in a flight suit and codpiece. And on and on and on.

So when McCain's campaign manager says that "This election is not about issues. This election is about a composite view of what people take away from these candidates," I don't think he's so much admitting a secret campaign strategy as he is accidentally revealing the truth about political campaigns: they are only occasionally about the issues.

P.S. Although I do think, of course, that the McCain campaign (like every campaign) has internalized this idea and is trying to exploit it to its fullest advantage. I also think they are doing this more than most campaigns, and certainly more than Obama's, because they've flip-flopped on all the issues and are advocating a bunch of atrocious policies. But let's not pretend that they are unique.

__________________
"You have reached Ritual Sacrifice. For goats press one, or say 'goats.'"

Baraka_Guru

I think that it's on this side of disgusting, but on the other side of ridiculous.

As a Canadian (who's looking forward to a fall Federal election, by the way), I look at these aspects of American politics and can only come up with the opinion that it is a circus act. For those who know how Canadian politics and elections go, the American counterparts look like something out of a reality TV series in contrast (please forgive the simile).

Canadian political campaigns can get quite juvenile in tone or tactics, but the bottom line is that it always comes down to the issues. The candidates use the issues as gravel-filled snowballs, mind you, but at least they lob issues that concern Canadians rather than prance around claiming to have the biggest and strongest snow fort, and doing little else. It always comes back to this. It always comes down to whether the candidate has done or will do what is in the interests of Canadians and their concerns. It's seldom about the personality of the candidates or their personal lives.

I'm actually quite looking forward to the presidential race. It's going to provide me with months of entertainment value. I feel guilty, though, as I'm also genuinely concerned about the future state of your country's leadership and political environment in general.

McCain's manager is right. It will simply come down to the personalities. This is the shortcoming of a two-party system. (I won't get into the further advantages of the parliamentary system.) It all comes down to, "Who are you going to choose? This guy or that guy?"

Have fun.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

MSD

You have to appeal to the lowest common denominator. In a country of 300,000,000 people, that's pretty fucking low.

I am not reassured by the stupidity of the average voter, nor by a pair of choices even less appealing than Bush/Cheney vs Kerry/Edwards. This time, I don't even like any of the serious third party candidates, and that's based on running down the list of candidates on Wikipedia, a lot of who were apparently added by one of the few hundred people out there who even know about them. There's even a guy who wasn't born in the US and was still nominated by some obscure party.

For me, the election sucks on issues. I don't want to have to choose between whether I want a candidate who is for gun owners and nuclear power or one who is pro-choice and will respect separation of church and state. I'm back to my stance that I may leave the presidential election choice blank on my ballot for lack of a real choice.

Poppinjay

Given that gun rights have made some headway, while abortion restrictions have abounded, I think I know which way the wind blows on those particular issues.

It's not all about style and personality. The American electorate has well shown that when it's hurting, it will vote for change. When Bill Clinton announced he was running for president, I thought it was a joke. A year later, working three part time jobs with no health coverage, I took him a little bit more seriously. As did the voting public.

Gore won in y2k, but lost the seat to a bug in the system. Bush won because Kerry was repugnant to even dyed in the wool dems. He was ineffectual and pompous.

Rove and his ilk can crow about being "architects", but votes are decided when a person goes into his garage, looks at his 15 year old beater, wonders if he can maybe go fishing this weekend, and then realizes he can't afford the gas. You can pull the wool over people's eyes, but they figure out how to get out from under.

__________________
I think the Apocalypse is happening all around us. We go on eating desserts and watching TV. I know I do. I wish we were more capable of sustained passion and sustained resistance. We should be screaming and what we do is gossip. -Lydia Millet