As the primary campaign is getting tougher and tougher, candidates are ready to use any argument that could help them convince as many voters as possible. The week before Super Tuesday was the period for candidates to show their personal and family harmonies. To do so, presidential candidates were divided in two groups; while Senator Obama and Governor Romney preferred the traditional family picture with wife and children, Senators Clinton and McCain involved their daughters in a more active and contemporary way.
Indeed, Meghan McCain is very active on the blogosphere. She owns a blog and keeps on posting posts, comments and especially podcasts from the backstage. On substance, nothing really exciting, but her blog is cleverly done as it brings a new look on the campaign and the electronic soundtrack gives the impression of a young and modern campaign, contrasting with her father generation.
It’s not yet a phenomenon, but still, last weekend, international media have started focusing on Meghan McCain’s involvement in her dad’s campaign. Meghan McCain’s involvement contrasts with Chelsea Clinton’s one. Chelsea Clinton appears in almost every single meeting her mother is given. That is pretty much always what she has done since we know her and her parents.Since Chelsea has grown up, she now uses her celebrity to address directly to people on her mother’s behalf. That is what she does by calling celebrities and Democratic Party “superdelegates” on her mother’s behalf. However, in being more visible, Chelsea also takes the risk to concentrate attacks on her person. This is what happened last week when MSNBC anchor David Shuster said that “the Clinton campaign had pimped out Chelsea.” The day after, an open-ed of the LA Times told the story about an email that Chelsea forwarded to her numerous contacts. The email was about feminist Robin Morgan and the addendum to her 1970 essay Good bye to all of that. In her addendum, Morgan makes Hillary Clinton into a conduit for female struggles of every imaginable variety. The LA Times regretted that Chelsea has considered that piece as a valuable argument to bring in the debate.
Indeed, Meghan McCain is very active on the blogosphere. She owns a blog and keeps on posting posts, comments and especially podcasts from the backstage. On substance, nothing really exciting, but her blog is cleverly done as it brings a new look on the campaign and the electronic soundtrack gives the impression of a young and modern campaign, contrasting with her father generation.
It’s not yet a phenomenon, but still, last weekend, international media have started focusing on Meghan McCain’s involvement in her dad’s campaign. Meghan McCain’s involvement contrasts with Chelsea Clinton’s one. Chelsea Clinton appears in almost every single meeting her mother is given. That is pretty much always what she has done since we know her and her parents.Since Chelsea has grown up, she now uses her celebrity to address directly to people on her mother’s behalf. That is what she does by calling celebrities and Democratic Party “superdelegates” on her mother’s behalf. However, in being more visible, Chelsea also takes the risk to concentrate attacks on her person. This is what happened last week when MSNBC anchor David Shuster said that “the Clinton campaign had pimped out Chelsea.” The day after, an open-ed of the LA Times told the story about an email that Chelsea forwarded to her numerous contacts. The email was about feminist Robin Morgan and the addendum to her 1970 essay Good bye to all of that. In her addendum, Morgan makes Hillary Clinton into a conduit for female struggles of every imaginable variety. The LA Times regretted that Chelsea has considered that piece as a valuable argument to bring in the debate.
No comments:
Post a Comment