- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
As a composition and literature professor (and one-time speech instructor), I have to say that Obama was better at explaining and exploring the issues (and he was right), but McCain won. Obama was subtle, knowledgeable, thoughtful, and warm and humorous when appropriate. But he was too abstract and too analytical. McCain was funny, brief and to the point, simple instead of complex, and full of stories to illustrate his points--exactly what the average person, who lacks any background information about the issues, wants.
People want someone who is direct, certain, sure, and comes across as a good guy to know; someone who is smart enough but not so smart that the other person feels stupid. Reagan mastered that persona (despite being really ignorant or maybe because of it), Carter didn't. Bush I and Dukakis didn't master that persona, Clinton did (despite being really smart and knowledgeable). Bush II seemed to find that persona, Gore and Kerry didn't. Hillary was getting there with some help from Bubba.
We don't need to guess who won the general elections. I'm worried.
