Aug 30 2008
The Presidential Race
Just heard the news that McCain has chosen Sarah Palin as veep. It is a good choice, at least good enough to get an Obama supporter like me worried. I like what I heard about Palin so far. She has a life story that is positive and can be related to.
However, this episode is just a distraction of the core contention in this presidential race. To me, this contest is ultimately about race and racism: can America finally get over the mental hurdle of having a minority commander in chief? Or is the political process the real playing field in selecting a President?
To me, both questions are particularly poignant after eight years of unchecked paranoia and fear mongering. America did not get a chance to naturally transition into a minority Presidency: e.g. a black VP after 8 years of peace and prosperity. Instead, Cheney-Bush left the nation in a state of division and confusion: are we really insecure? what’s needed to safeguard America? does government still have a role in national economy? or what is that role?
At this juncture, whether the populace can trust a blackman to be their president really tells how entrenched racism is in America.
First of all, the experience argument is total bullshit. If experience equates to seniority, then Robert Byrd ought to be POTUS 10 years ago. If experience equates to executive credentials, then why not Jack Walsh? Obama ran a half billion dollar (in less than a year, mind you) operation and succeeded in becoming the leading candidate in the race. But he got so little credit for this deed as if he is supposed to be able to do that. Well, if so, how can anyone say that he is too young or too inexperienced?
Secondly, those who bought the experience argument are the usual suspects of racial bigots: white working (hard working, per HRC) Americans. Or sons and daughters of the Southern “heritage”. They are not stupid. They know how to read. They know how to Google (right before Palin was chosen, someone was updating her Wiki entry anonymously). They chose to believe the lack-of-experience crap because even they are embarrassed of what they truly believe.
A recent poll asked people in PA, Ohio how they liked the two parties. The result was almost 2 to 1 in favor of the Democrats. When asked about McCain and Obama, suddenly, the result was tied. If one finds John McCain somewhat un-Republican like, then what is it in Obama that is so un-Democrat? Why those Joe-six-packs love the Democrats in general but not Obama in particular?
Finally, it comes down to this: although Americans have been saying how proud they are of the Tocquevillian democracy, they still give high premium to things outside of democracy, namely, heritage, race and religiosity. Another way to describe this hypocracy is to say that Americans pay lip service to meritocracy but act out aristocracy.
To say things “outside of democracy” is to say they are exogenous to the democratic process–nothing in this process can alter one’s heritage, race or religious affiliation (most of the time). If one looks just at the endogenous factors only, then Obama is the most successful politician in generations: after he stepped out of UChicago campus, he’s lost only a few races. In the heart of darkness that is Chicago politics, he mananged to stay clean while engaged. He was considered an insurgent (not unlike Howard Dean four years ago), but is now the one favored to win: he is doing very thing right within the system and, in terms of achievements, he’s outpaced not only all the pundits bad-mouthing him, but also all his opponents–John Edwards couldn’t even defend his own Senate seat. Clinton has yet to successfully completed anything she initiated on her own (be that Healthcare or the primary). And McCain? He was embroiled in Keating Five when he was at Obama’s stage.
Yet a large portion of the nation still don’t trust him, calling him inexperienced. And more likely than not, it is those people who constantly think of the rest of the world as less democratic, thus less fortunate, than they are.
I am not a religious person, but I do believe in redemption. Hopefully, Obama winning the Presidency will deliver that.
Very well put.
I think Palin was selected to energize the right-wing base that votes on religious beleifs and personality. Palin is an anti-abortion creationist who belongs to the NRA and can shoot a wolf from an airplane. Many religious fundamentalists beleive that Got will guide a leader\’s decisions, so as long as the leader prays every day, then God will be on our side and we can defeat the non-Christians who want to enslave or kill us.
She reveals that the Republican argument that Obama \"doesn\’t have enough experience\" IS bullshit, and she and the rest of the Republicans are creating a persona based on lies. Examples of these lies: She has more experience that Obama (not even close); she is against earmarks and pork (she actually has requested and gotten record-breaking $ amounts in earmarks and pork); she is an \"outsider\" (not to Ted Stevens and the lobbying firms that help get pork for Alaska); she is for \"small government\" (but Alaska gets more federal money per capita than almost any other state, so as long as the lower 48 taxpayers are supporting her she is fine with big government); she supports pregnant teens having their babies instead of having abortions (but she cut funding to a home for teen mothers).
Palin definitely has shaken things up, and the event has forced me to become much more honest about the role of emotions in voting. My support for Obama is fueled largely by emotions because I identify with his vision. His vision and hopes for the US are very similar to mine, although this vision includes details about issues rather than superficial aspects such as whether Obama knows how to shoot a moose. But in many ways, my enthusiasm for Obama may be similar to a religious fundamentalists\’ enthusiasm for Palin – support for a candidate is an act of identifying with what they represent.
Palin is a natural when it comes to playing the “attack dog” role in the campaign. I agree with you on the role of emotion plays in elections. I’m for Obama is because I am a minority/outsider in this country. His success gives hope to others that the American democracy is a true meritocracy and a rational process.