Letters to the Editor
-
Name recognition
Clinton's been around for quite a while. With Latino and Asian voters in CA, I think Obama didn't do so well because of the name recognition.
-
Barack Obama is not Jesus
Not just media adoration, but the quasi-deification of Obama by some of his supporters could also end up doing damage. See my argument here:
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/05/barack_obama_is_not_jesus/
-
@Kathy G
Great essay! Unfortunately, Obama IS Jesus--and Buddha, RFK, St. Francis, and Simba the Lion King. I thought you got the memo....
-
Pots and kettles?
It crystallized for me another problem with the Obama campaign: Its supporters' reliance on their, and their candidate's, obvious moral and political superiority to win the election.
Isn't this equally if not more true about Hillary's supporters?
The people I hear excited about Barack are saying he is fresh and new, not that he is morally and politically superior. Those arguments are more likely to heard from the Clinton campaign.
-
"Media Adoration?" Are We Talking About McCain Again?
"Media adoration" is a term that has been heaped with scorn on John McCain by his rivals, and in the Republican camp I think it has does him some minor harm.
Now you throw the term Obama's way and wonder if media bias in his favor may actually backfire against him.
I have no idea and, frankly, think the question a non-starter.
What does interest me is the fact that two men with such different personalities, of such different physical appearance (not the color of their skins), one a hot, sometimes loose lipped firebrand and the other as smooth and studied in his speech as an Oxford Lierature professor, can both be so attractive to the pooh bahs in the media.
Obama, like JFK, is a natural for the "cool" medium of television. Thin, strikingly handsome, his controlled voice exuding the thoughts of a mind totally under control. He's the antithesis of the hollering, wild-eyed Adolf Hitler we see on the old newsreels and wonder how a nutcase that that could have taken over Germany. Obama plays the camera like Tom Brady plays quarterback, especially when nobody's in his face threatening to knock him down.
Johnny Mac, however is a different cat. He's surely no wild-eyed Fuhrer, but he's a feisty little bastard, and seemingly proud of it. His demeanor, his less than movie star stature all portend a lousy television presence, the kind of guest the news media hosts grudgingly bring on for a few quick moments after the stars have had their say, like Johnny Carson used to do.
But no, McCain's is the star with Mathews et al. Why? I think it's because he always holds the possibility of actually making news when he appears. It might be something he hastily blurts out to a seemingly innocuous question; or maybe his red faced, furrowed forehead response to a question he felt unfair---he's a natural news-maker. And news-people, even if they have become essentially talk show hosts in disguise, like news-makers.
Mac will continue to make news; Obama will continue to do his Tom Brady; and the media will continue to adore them both.
-
Fresh and new?
Isn't this a reason you buy a floor cleaner?
-
Kathy G
You OBVIOUSLY don't get it, at all.
Most Americans don't vote based on policy positions. Most Americans don't read, let alone populate thoughtful websites and write for TPM. The poor slobs who voted for Bush like him because they could "have a beer with him" (as if that's his primary job, to have a beer with YOU), or in the words of my illustrious, brilliant city councilwoman, who was Bush's Southwest Ohio Chairperson for Re-election in 2004, he's a "fatherly figure" who will "keep us safe." I'm not making this up, watch "So Goes the Nation" and there she is in all her glory, Leslie Ghiz).
Most Americans don't take time to learn the positions of their candidates. This is what sets Obama apart from Clinton: he's capitalizing on how to hog the media limelight with style over substance. He clearly gets it and can manipulate the media and give rousing speeches. Clinton is BORING. Who wants to hear some old broad drone on about policy and how she's had all that experience? Besides, Black don't crack; White get old real quick.
He's taking a page from the play book of the Republicans.
-
Joan is a Hillary/Barack/John/Mitt/Mike/Ron shill - good grief people
•It was just last week that I was swearing off both my beloved Salon and MSNBC because of the obvious bias of the reporting, particularly at MSNBC.
As I read one of Ms. Walsh's articles very recently, the feedback letters were all complaining that she was an Obama zombie, just waiting for the 5 of Feb, when all of the multitude of Obama voters were going to descend on the polls like Night of the Living Dead and Hillary would be finally banished.
Face it folks, these professional polls leave a lot to be desired and one has to wonder if maybe the pollsters & pundits aren't injecting their own bias (unconsciously or not so unconsciously). Certainly many of the pundits are doing some projecting of their own in interpreting the polls.
All of the Hillary haters crow that she was the FRONT RUNNER for over a year and through the moral and intellectual superiority of Obama backers it is now a dead heat. But you know what? Rudy was also the front runner until, oh my gawd, people were actually voting.
I couldn’t believe that serious cable “analysts” were saying that any candidate should stay in the race or drop out of the race after 2 or 3 states had voted. Does anybody see the absurdity in this. Maybe more like wishful thinking from some of these “respected” commentators.
Give it a break people and especially the media, let the people vote. I for one am tired of the talking heads/pundits trying to turn Obama into a saint and Clinton into the wicked witch, all the while taking subtle and not so subtle pot shots. We deserve better.
-
A Few Points...
Pundits who worry about what influence pundits have on the public are like sportscasters worrying about what influence they have on sport.
There is no there there. I agree with the above posters who say that it is more likely that better name recognition among voters who don't really know much about Barack Obama prevented him from scoring a decisive win on Super Tuesday. Occam's Razor definately applies.