LOGO: Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines. A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.  
November 23, 2009
Log in / Register

 Choose a size
Text Size

Most Read

Intelligentsia Against Intelligence

The Guantanamo Lawyers: Shipwrecked

Obama's Third Way in Afghanistan

'Left, Right & Center': The Geithner-Summers Backlash; Is Palin Dangerous?

Claire Wasserman on Europe's Islamic Immigrants

Most Comments
Most Emailed

Reports
Despite Subsidies, Class Sizes Rise in California Schools

Ear to the Ground

A/V Booth

Arts & Culture
Freedom’s Fight: Part II

Digs
Financial Meltdown 101
Vetting Sarah Palin

Truthdig Bazaar
Pinochet and Me

Pinochet and Me

By Marc Cooper
$10.40

more items

 
Reports

Squinting at the Election

Email this item Email    Print this item Print   
Posted on May 29, 2007

By Eugene Robinson

WASHINGTON—The presidential candidates of both parties have been campaigning for months now, introducing themselves to the nation. So why do so many of them seem to get progressively fuzzier and less distinct, like photographs left out in the sun? Is it the process that’s causing this steady attenuation, or does the problem lie with the candidates themselves?

    There are two major exceptions to the general rule I’ve just posited. Hillary Clinton and John McCain are as vivid as the subjects of the artist Chuck Close’s hyperrealist portraits, in which you can see every wrinkle, every blotch, every pore. The problem is that when people know exactly who you are, or think they do, they tend to form hard and fast opinions. There are so many Democrats who “just don’t like Hillary Clinton” and so many Republicans who “just don’t like John McCain” that the two candidates once considered presumptive favorites to win the major-party nominations could both fall short.

    By contrast, the images of their opponents range from gauzy to blurry to practically incorporeal.

    Barack Obama’s phenomenal rise as a candidate came as he was brilliantly sketching the outlines of who he is and what he believes. His identity and philosophy are based on inclusiveness, which is a soothing message for a nation bleeding from wedge-issue politics as practiced by George W. Bush, Karl Rove and the like. But not all either/or propositions are false choices—some are real choices, with real consequences. While we know much about who Obama is and how he thinks, the question of precisely what he would do in a given situation is like the bottom line on an eye chart—you can almost make it out, but not quite.

    Obama’s sudden prominence lowered a scrim in front of John Edwards’ candidacy—he was going to be the anti-Hillary, but that role is now taken. Joe Biden certainly speaks his mind clearly enough, but it has been hard to persuade people to see him and Chris Dodd as anything other than creatures of the Senate—unlike Clinton and Obama, two senators who are blessed with escape-velocity star power.

Advertisement

    We thought we knew Rudy Giuliani, who started out as an icon: “America’s mayor,” the hero of 9/11. But then he began shape-shifting. New Yorkers were familiar with a mayor who was vocally pro-choice on abortion and strongly in favor of gay rights. Republican primary voters are being introduced to a Giuliani who is reluctantly pro-choice, with a heavy heart, and who doesn’t really want to talk about gay rights much at all.

    He should take a lesson from Mitt Romney, who at least looks and sounds convincing as a committed conservative—even though he managed to get elected governor of Massachusetts, pretty nearly the least conservative state in the nation. Romney doesn’t try to pretend he hasn’t changed his positions, he just comes up with a reason for the about-face and sticks to his story.

    And as for the rest of the Republicans, I could pick Sam Brownback, Mike Huckabee, Duncan Hunter, Jim Gilmore, Tommy Thompson, Tom Tancredo and Ron Paul out of a lineup, but I’d bet most voters couldn’t.

    Maybe it’s the sheer number of candidates that makes them so hard to get a fix on—a “debate” with eight or 10 participants is really no more than a glorified panel discussion. Maybe it’s the extraordinary length of the campaign, which is now about to downshift into summer mode. Some of the candidates who trail in the polls may start running out of money and be forced to drop out between now and September. For the front-runners, all of whom have money to burn, the next few months are mostly about positioning themselves for the stretch run.

    Clinton and McCain have settled political identities, for better or worse. It’s not that they have always been consistent—Clinton has taken just about all possible positions on the Iraq war—but people think they know who these veterans are. By the fall, another familiar Washington hand, Fred Thompson, who happens to be a professional communicator, may well be a major player in the Republican field. Newt Gingrich, a known (if mercurial) quantity, may be in there, too.

    And by summer’s end, Al Gore will have finished his book tour. You did notice that he has a new book out, right?   

    Eugene Robinson’s e-mail address is eugenerobinson(at symbol)washpost.com.   

    © 2007, Washington Post Writers Group


Elsewhere: .

Comments

Are you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig.

By angelatc, June 7, 2007 at 12:21 pm #

Ill defined and scratchy does not define Ron Paul.  He has a long and consistent voting record. There’s nothing ambigious about the guy. 

While the concept of individual freedom seems to frighten a lot of people away from him, he has said that his goals in office would be to bring our troops home, and strip away powers from the executive branch.

But the difference is, with Ron Paul it isn’t just rhetoric. Look at his history over the years - the man is as solid as a rock.

Report this

By shz, June 1, 2007 at 3:47 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

As important to a candidate’s campaign as paid ads is the attention they get on “newscasts” and celebrity shows.  We’re bombarded with Obama and Clinton, mainly on the basis that one is black and the other a female, which to this voter means nothing.  Aren’t the other candidates newsworthy?  Before all the candidates have even declared themselves, we’re told Clinton is the frontrunner!

I think it’s time for a fair division of airtime.  A mention of one should call for equal time for the others.  We should expect Oprah to give as much time to all candidates as she did to Obama.

I’ve gone out of my way to learn about each one of them, but most folks rely on news programming to learn about the candidates.  They’ll never learn what Kucinich, for example, stands for.

It’s already unfair that candidates who sell themselves to the highest bidders have the edge in advertising To compound this disparity with inequality of time spent on news is just plain, old not right.

.........................

Report this

By Trigger finger, May 31, 2007 at 7:42 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

This, the class of 2008 is a preview of what will lead us into eight more years of free fall and eight more years of Corporate control of America that will continue to pad their pockets at the expense of the working man.  We’ll be hard pressed to get an IQ bump from what we have now.  Who, among all these faces is qualified to lead America with integrity and honesty and do it for the people.  Not one. Not even one. Not one is trustworthy. They are all in this for themselves.  How far away are we from a president who will on his first day in office, award himself a hundred million dollar bonus, a hundred million a year retirement benefit that he can start drawing immediately, then look into the TV cameras and give us all the finger and tell us to give 60% of your income to him or your job goes to Mexico. This is the culture of Corporate America and they are your government. Most of them rip off their companies for enough money to be elected without any outside money.  Its closer than we think!

Either we act, or we should put our heads between our knees and start to pray.

Report this

By Leefeller, May 30, 2007 at 1:32 am #

DennisD “Those that do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it”.

You know that Bush was a history major, occasionally when he decided to actually show up and attend class.  I picture Bush sitting in history class, after a big night out with Chaney and Rove at Porky’s.  Bleary eyed and hung over. One and only thing Bush remotely remembered hearing the Professor say while in college:

“Those that do not learn from history are supposed to repeat it”.

Report this

By DennisD, May 30, 2007 at 12:14 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

Vote third party or expect more of the same from both parties. The truly wasted votes will be the ones hoping for a change of direction from either the Dems or Repubs when a change is the last thing their owners want. “Those that do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it”.

Report this

By Sang Ze, May 29, 2007 at 9:54 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

First of all, the idea that a campaign begins immediately after an election is stupid. All political campaigns should be limited to two months. Secondly, thus far except for a couple of people like Kucinich and Gravel, none of the candidates has anything to offer, and even these two guys are somewhat lacking in imagination.  The system needs change. We need a new party, maybe two or three. Most of all, we need leadership. We ain’t got it right now - in office, or in the race - and many of us are beginning to think we have lost the ability to raise such.

Report this

By felicity, May 29, 2007 at 7:12 pm #

When the personnel manager of a large corporation has a job opening, he does not interview potential candidates 500 times before he sends him on to a department head who, in turn, will also not interview him 500 times - nor will a $500 million (the cost of running in the general election) bribe necessarily make it happen.

Honestly, other than the mega, mega bucks falling into the coffers of MSM by way of three and a half years of ‘campaigning’ is this trip really necessary? 

By the time Nov, ‘08 rolls around, this whole play will be a hands-down candidate for the theater of the absurd.  And we’ll probably end up with the perfect person to head its cast.

Report this

By Bill Blackolive, May 29, 2007 at 3:07 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

The problem is reality is haunting the normal US politicians and citizens.  They know something is wrong but have not seen what it is haunting them quite.  They cannot look at hundreds of US military bases on Earth, to even begin to think. Official explanation for the 911 attacks are no help. For ye bitten by fleas and uncertain is this in ye scalp or crotch, visit patriotsqwuestion911.com/media, and slowly read, and slowly think.

Report this

By Leefeller, May 29, 2007 at 1:02 pm #

Sort of remember George Bush spewing inclusiveness during his first election. In fact George Bush said a lot of things to get votes, which never become true nor were they even on the radar after he was elected.  Seems he rolled up his sleeves and started raping the world. If we had known then that candidate Bush was a chronic liar, would we have voted for him? 

I recall reading an article that Bush was voted the most likely candidate folks would want to have a beer with.  Must admit Kerry,  seemed like he had a telephone pole stuffed up his ass,  even so I voted for him telephone pole and all. 

Today if I had a choice and was looking to have a beer with one of the candidates,  Mike Gravel, would be my first choice, the guy says what he believes and seems the most like a person I would find waiting in line at the local gas station.  He reminds me of the uncle who at Thanksgiving drags the skeletons out of the closet,  tells it like it is and pisses off all the relatives.  Must be training from his old taxi cab driver days. 

Dennis Kucinicih would be my next choice.  I am open to his ideas for needed change in our nations political future, he seems to offer political points I believe in so I would have a beer with him and would hope that Elizabeth would be there.  Not sure if Dennis likes beer though?

Obama and the guy.(cannot remember his name) The guy that Ann Colter loves to hate, you remember she called him a fagot at the Republican circle jerk.  Both Obama and the other guy seem about the same to me.  Both provide pablum sound-bites,  what would happen if they were elected?  Since I feel they are in the good hands of big money deep pockets I must admit I have not been following either of them.  Having a beer with Obama or the other guy would be a strain and I would probably be hoping that I was someplace else, I know they would. 

Hillary is my last choice not because I am sexist pig, but because she reminds me of the   “Wicked With of the West”  and I know some folks wish a house would fall on her.  Unless I had deep pockets, I know Hillary would never have a beer with me anyway.

As far as all the Republicans go, having a beer with anyone of them would be as Polosi says, “A Great Experiment”.

With so many candidates, I forgot the Governor of New Mexico?  Will I have a beer with him?  I would give it a try and see what he has to say.

Report this

By anonymous, May 29, 2007 at 12:00 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

Hate to get my hopes up but, I thought Al looked thinner the other night.

He’s the only one we know can win because he already did. 

I love that line.

Report this

By Nellie, May 29, 2007 at 9:27 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

Having paid close attention to the candidates so far, both Democratic and Republican, I find none of them ill-defined, overlapping, or sketchy.

I do find it interesting that the two candidates who appear to have made the most sweeping change in policy positions are the ones selected by this article as the most distinct. Perhaps they are distinct in their ambiguity.

Report this

Add Your Comment

Posts by unregistered readers are moderated. Posts by members
are published immediately. Why wait? Register today!







Number of characters remaining: 4000

Notify you when others comment on this article?


Are you a human?
Retype the word you see here.


Please read and abide by our comment policy.
By submitting this comment, you agree to this site's terms and conditions.

 
 

 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2009 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved.