LOGO: Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines. A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.  
 
January 8, 2009
Log in / Register

 Choose a size
Text Size

Most Read

Blagojevich vs. the Senate

Navel-Gazing in the Grand Old Party

Yukking It Up at the Blago Show

Israeli Voices for Peace

Gauging Obama’s Silence on Gaza

Most Comments
Most Emailed

Reports

Ear to the Ground

A/V Booth

Arts & Culture
Tragedy Repeats Itself

Digs
Financial Meltdown 101
Vetting Sarah Palin

Truthdig Bazaar
Empire: Impressions of China (Imago Mundi series)

Empire: Impressions of China (Imago Mundi series)

By Orville Schell, James Whitlow Delano (Photographer)
$35.00

more items

 
Reports

Belittling the Campaign

Email this item Email    Print this item Print   
Posted on Apr 28, 2008

By E.J. Dionne

    WASHINGTON—This is supposed to be a big election, but it has given every sign in recent weeks of becoming a small one. As a result, the public and the media are showing signs of exhaustion with what had once been an exhilarating contest.

    In big elections, voters know how much is at stake. They focus on central problems, not manufactured issues or the personal foibles of candidates. In big elections, such as those of 1968, 1980 and 1992, voters realize they are deciding whether to move the country in a new direction. 

    In small elections, by contrast, voters sense that the outcome is unlikely to make much difference, though they (and the media) can be wrong about this.

    The 2000 campaign was an excellent example of what happens when an election seems inconsequential. Shrewdly, George W. Bush knew that the country was, on the whole, satisfied with the results of Bill Clinton’s presidency. Bush presented himself as being far more moderate than he actually was and even occasionally posed as the centrist inheritor of the positive aspects of Clinton’s legacy.

    This moved attention toward Al Gore’s sighs in the first presidential debate and his alleged tendency to exaggerate. Although Bush doesn’t drink, he was cast as the guy with whom you would want to have a beer, and that was made to seem so important at the time.

    Before the battle for Pennsylvania, the 2008 presidential contest looked as big as elections get. The country’s deep disillusionment with Bush, akin to the disillusionment with Jimmy Carter in 1980, portends a wish by voters to move in a different direction, albeit one quite unlike the path chosen 28 years ago. The issues discussed in debates and on the stump were the important ones: an Iraq war in which victory is elusive, an economy falling into disarray, a health care system failing employees and employers alike.

    No one benefited more than Barack Obama from this sense of historic moment. Change, not experience, was the order of the day. Sweep, not a mastery of detail, was the virtue most valued in campaign oratory. A clean break with the past, not merely a return to better days, was the promise most prized.

    Then something happened. Specifically, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. And he keeps happening, holding tightly to a spotlight that was turned his way by a certain politician whom the preacher dismisses for being a politician. First came his Friday appearance on PBS with Bill Moyers, then his NAACP address in Detroit on Sunday, and his National Press Club speech in Washington on Monday.

    Obama, once seen as a prophet, is now merely a human being capable of performing indifferently in debate and of making statements about bitter voters that made some voters bitter.

    All this has helped Hillary Clinton in the short run, and she has used her opening well. Her old flaws look like virtues: She is battle-tested, not merely a figure from the past; she is the candidate who has been vetted, not someone who has been run through the media mill; she is the fighter, not the politician who will do anything to win. And she is, suddenly, a right-wing hero, not the victim of a vast right-wing conspiracy.

    Yes, the conservative commentariat has turned her way, or at least against Obama. Of course, these are temporary conversions of convenience. But there is a lesson in the eagerness to spur on the Democratic fight in its current form, and it’s about more than just enjoying watching Clinton and Obama eviscerate each other. 

    The smaller this election looks, the easier it will be for the Republicans to run campaigns such as those they orchestrated in 2000 and 1988 in which the particular flaws of candidates take on an exaggerated importance. The significance of the choice that the voters are making for the country’s future recedes. Were Hillary Clinton to win the nomination, she, no less than Obama, would need this to be a big election. This is something Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton all understood about the contests in which they prevailed.

    Contrary to those who are cynical about democracy, voters themselves are rarely manipulated into thinking that big elections are actually small ones. But the candidates and the media, with some help from Jeremiah Wright, are doing all they can to run this election through an Incredible Shrinking Machine. Obama and Clinton should not make it harder for Americans to have the election they want.
   
    E.J. Dionne’s e-mail address is postchat(at)aol.com.
   
    © 2008, Washington Post Writers Group

Jump to Comments

Advertisement


Elsewhere: .

Comments

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

By tdbach, April 30, 2008 at 2:21 pm #

How clever

Report this

By TDoff, April 30, 2008 at 2:00 pm #

Well, tdbach, finally, finally, you are right about one thing: That you are wrong.

Report this

By tdbach, April 30, 2008 at 1:51 pm #

Thank you for sharing your Rorschach test. You’ve gazed long and hard at the scene before us and now we know what you see. That you see a butterfly where I see a human profile, mirrored, is not terribly instructive for anyone else, unless they’re really into butterflies.

“[Hillary’s] desire is to ‘win’ at any cost.” Really? And you know this how? Because ‘everyone’ says it? I mean, look! She’s trying to win, she’s questioning Obama’s credentials!

And Obama? He’s ‘less so.’ He is the embodiment of possibility and promise, of a purer form of leader. Really? He doesn’t play the old right-wing meme that the Clintons are unscrupulous liars and the dirtiest of politicians – anything to win – to win? Is he doing it to philosophize about the state of national dialog?

In another comment string to a different article, I suggested you were a right-wing troll. I guess I was wrong. Now it appears you were dissing Maria Cocco’s article about unequal pay, not because you think unequal pay is a good thing, but because she has written articles in the past that have been favorable to Clinton and critical of Obama.  I guess I’ve been fooled by your eager appropriation of right-wing propaganda when it suits your purpose. I should have taken a longer view. You’re not one of the Right Wing, you’re just someone who’s as profoundly naive as they are.

Report this

By Paracelsus, April 30, 2008 at 6:55 am #

Not all profit is measured in dollars.

Report this

By Purple Girl, April 30, 2008 at 6:26 am #

Wright is a non issue, only those benfiting from the ‘controversay’ are playing it up as a ‘telltale sign’ .this is th e same BS having been played out for decades- ‘Gays will cause mass destruction to the Family unit’, ‘Liberals hate Blue collar workers’ ‘Terrorist could live next door’ Yada yada yada.
WE WANT REAL ANSWERS AND ACTIONS ABOUT- the economy , the Wars, The corp and Gov’t Crimes which have undermined our countries very foundation. We want those Responsible for this Treason, War Crimes and Crimes agaisnt Humanity over the last 4 decades, Tried, Convicted and PUNISHED. We want the Truth to be brought to light.Not th e30 second blurb ‘Countdown ‘afford US -with endless meaningless Crap for the other 55 mins. Rehashing Media personalities self congradualting pats on the Back (I only say ‘Countdown’ because the other are PURE CRAP)it whould focus on the REAL issues that face this country- “Countdown” To Mass Trials. We want a NEW REALITY Show- Decades worth of Evidence is available in the Archives.Abrams should be using that ‘Law Degree’ to try these case in the Public Square- A antional Public Defender, since our DOJ is culpable, along with the so called SCOTUS.
the Audacity to use such a vile egomaniac as Buchanan as a representive of anything other then the Twisted Old F*ck and Andrea Mitchell as anything other then a loyal Wife to a national Criminals is OUTRAGEOUS- just as deceptfully as Georgie- the Clinton wonder boy being proclaimed a “mderator’ on ABC’s Candidate Debate. How stupid do they think we Are? I am insulted daily by the media Crap!Adn I pay for this Sh*t wherther I like it or Not- just so I can get History, CSPAN or Discovery Channels.Corp whores work our Communication avenues like two bit hookers

Report this

By Apostle Gideon, April 29, 2008 at 10:30 am #

Is this election a whole lot of abuse of the word, substance, in rhetoric, or what?

Check out my blogs:

http://benevolentlybeloved.com

Report this

By felicity, April 29, 2008 at 7:37 am #

TDoff, what a great comment! 

Given the outcome of the ‘04 presidential election, I really don’t have much faith in the judgement of the ‘we.’ Much of the Western world threw up its hands in disbelief at that outcome branding the American electorate, idiots. That’s about right. Idiots elect idiots.

Report this

By DennisD, April 29, 2008 at 6:36 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

By Paracelsus, April 28 at 10:42 pm #
By jackpine savage, April 29 at 3:37 am #

Both excellent posts and right on target.

With unqualified candidates that have no accomplishments to speak of what else can the press do but highlight their bowling scores and endless bickering as a reason to pay attention to them.

With Bu$h I thought we hit bottom. I can only hope
I’m not wrong.

Report this

By TDoff, April 29, 2008 at 6:15 am #

When one’s goal is not to accomplish great things, but to ‘win’; not to create things of value, but to ‘win’; not to live a worthwhile life, but to ‘win’; and ‘winning’ is defined as convincing a very diverse mob to vote a certain way, then:
1. One sets up focus groups, and does polls, and studies psychological sales techniques, to determine what will ‘work’ to make specific sub-groups of the ‘mob’ act in a certain way, and
2. One does whatever is necessary, says whatever is deemed expedient, acts however is determined to be ‘best’, to create the result desired, the ‘win’.

In short, one becomes a fake, creates an illusion that seeks to embody all the desires of the mob, and, in this hypocritical process, puts aside, in fact shuns, one’s reality.

Hillary has become expert at this, her desire is to ‘win’ at any cost. Should she lose as president, she can aspire to an Oscar,

Obama is less so, he is at a crossroads, trying to determine how much of himself to sublimate in order to ‘win’. For our sake (and his), I hope he maintains his idealism, his true personal values, and shows them.

And I hope that we, the ‘mob’, for once have the good sense to take a chance, turn our backs on the ‘you gotta go along to get along’ political travesty of our history, and strive for what we could be, rather than what we are.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, April 29, 2008 at 6:11 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

“But what E.J. Dionne and voters are still incapable of is facing up to their own and society’s ongoing ingrained sexism in this first-ever campaign with a woman as the most-likely-to-succeed presidential candidate.”

Doug, this argument is almost as tiresome as the election.  Your aversion to Obama is “principled” but my dislike of Clinton is sexist.

Has nothing to do with her advocacy to pardon the folks who planted a bomb in my father’s office building (and 86 others in and around New York City.

(Check out “Clinton Pardon FALN”)

It also might be interesting to determine why Marian Wright Edelman has chosen NOT to endorse Clinton since the business-shill’s resume puts such a enormous emphasis on her (less than a year) service to CDF.

Report this

By Aegrus, April 29, 2008 at 6:10 am #

EJ, have faith in Obama to make this a big election. Hillary couldn’t motivate the population any more than Dick Cheney. I think everyone will be really surprised under an Obama presidency.

Report this

By jackpine savage, April 29, 2008 at 3:37 am #

First, maybe everyone is just fucking tired of petty bickering in the face of fundamental and systemic issues facing us.  It can’t be a “big” election if the people running make it small…and the media makes it smaller by focusing on bowling scores and beer with the boys.

Second, what would make it “big” is untouchable - politically.  These candidates aren’t going to speak unvarnished truths to the American people.  Truth equals political suicide, either because the American people really don’t want to hear it or because the candidates’ corporate handlers will yank their leashes.

The land of pleasant living likes its dreams; this election is nothing more than choosing which snooze button to press.

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, April 29, 2008 at 2:49 am #

This campaign is not only about candidates’ but about voters’ own opinions. Having had to face up to theirs and US society’s racist undercurrents has been exhausting even though it is only beginning.

But what E.J. Dionne and voters are still incapable of is facing up to their own and society’s ongoing ingrained sexism in this first-ever campaign with a woman as the most-likely-to-succeed presidential candidate.

Report this

By weather, April 29, 2008 at 1:38 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

Parasite, since when is a journalist measured as a profit center, unless you’re referring to Judy Miller as a saleman for the MIC?

Dionne is wise to point out that the 2 adult children lost their teething rings and are littering the sandbox, while lowering the bar of leadership.

Report this

By SpinCycle, April 28, 2008 at 11:41 pm #

interesting analysis, although you are buying unquestioningly into campaign spin when you refer to Hillary as ‘battle tested’ (two senate campaigns?)and ‘vetted’. (When it comes to the general election ALL of the trash about her from the prior Clinton term, like the White House Travel Office, Vince Foster, Rose Law Firm billing records, Lincoln Bedroom, yadda yadda yadda will be dragged back out by the 527s.  Obama couldn’t afford to go that negative, but the Swiftboaters will have no hesitation at all)

Report this

By Paracelsus, April 28, 2008 at 10:42 pm #

You are weary, stale, flat and unprofitable.

Report this

Add Your Comment

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






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.

 
Season's Greetings From Truthdig
 

 
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.