Showing posts with label presidential campaign 2008. Show all posts
Showing posts with label presidential campaign 2008. Show all posts

Monday, February 18, 2008

Obama’s dreamers…

The proof that Sen. Barack Obama has the momentum is the countless articles written, not only about him and his presidential campaign, but also about the cult he has inspired. Amongst the articles piling up on my desk, I came across two new articles about Obamaphilia. Recent polls point out that Obama has managed to blur the divide within the society. Although he is still struggling with the Hispanic vote, Obama wins over white, black, women, men, poor and rich electorates. Yet, two articles from the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times highlight the last divide that Obama has not bridged so far; the generational one.
Rather than talking about young people versus old people, the articles prefer the dichotomy between the realists and the dreamers. The realists think that, despite his qualities, Obama will not win the Democratic nomination because “there is still a great deal of racial prejudice in the U.S., and thus a substantial percentage of whites who will not vote for a black candidate for president under any circumstance” (Winds of change, N.Y. Times, February 5th). As for dreamers, they express great interest in the election but seem unconcerned with such factors as Obama’s race or perceived electability. As the New York Times’ journalist says, “they are just fed up with the status quo, and they want change. And they’ve found a rock star who embodies their desire.”The Los Angeles Times’ article wants to be even more persuasive. The journalist pretends to hesitate: “did I want to be some dreamer hippie loser, or a person who understands that change emerges from hard work and conflict?” (The cult of Obama, L.A. Times, February 8th). Finally, the journalist asserts: “what the Cult of Obama doesn’t realize is that he’s a politician. Not a brave one taking risky positions like Ron Paul or Dennis Kucinich, but a mainstream one.” A couple of days after these articles were written, we can say that Obama has now the momentum. The remaining divide seems to be that between optimists and pessimists.

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Candidates' daughters

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.