An Outline of the General Election?
From McCain's victory speech tonight: “To encourage a country with only rhetoric rather than sound and proven ideas that trust in the strength and courage of free people is not a promise of hope,” he said. “It is a platitude.”
This is, to put it mildly, not a well-turned phrase. I'm not even 100% sure I know what it means. Did a professional speechwriter actually write this line? Or did McCain make it up on his own?
But, doing the best I can to interpret this muddled thought: Is McCain's campaign against Obama going to be "tried and true conservative ideas" against "false hope"? In the wake of across-the-board conservative failure in governance, that is undoubtedly even a worse contrast than HRC's preferred narrative of "experience" versus "false hope."
Is this REALLY an outline of the general election campaign McCain wants to run?
P.S. Obama's victories in VA, MD and DC are truly stunning tonight. HRC's base was significantly narrowed - in Va. she was down to white women, the only significant demographic she won. That's a big constituency in the Democratic party, but it doesn't get you the nomination.
posted by Frances @ 11:44 PM
6 Comments:
Too bad MD, VA, and DC were holding caucuses instead of primaries, cuz then Hill woulda swept em'! What's that? They were primaries? Oops. There goes that pathetic Clinton rationalization of failure.
Hill must be crazy freaking out right about now. It has been patently obvious for quite some time now that she does not take Obama seriously. Have you noticed that she when she tends to talk about him as if he were a special needs child who had wandered outside without his saftey helmet?
"Barack has never been tested. Never. Tested. He just won't be able to handle those mean things people will say about him. Mean. People. He doesn't understand the world out there. He thinks you can just talk pretty and adults with give you a penny." That's how she sounded on 60 Minutes, and it has been her pattern for a while. She seems to think that the nomination is her entitlement for all those years of suffering, raised by a single mom, confused about her racial identity. Or is she the one who was born rich, got the finest education, joined a swanky law firm, married a soon to be governor, became one of the youngest first ladies ever, and then parlayed that fame into a Senate seat? I forget. Anyhoo, she seems stunned by the injustice of it all.
Better watch what I say. She may be poise for a comeback, and I don't want to get Shustered.
The worst was the contrast between the victory speeches (Obama and McCain) that played back to back on the cable news channels last night. Obama gave a tired speech, a version of his standard stump speech, which he raced through--it was a subpar performance for him, and he must be absolutely exhausted. BUT it was in an arena at Wisconsin Madison, in front of 17,000 screaming supporters, of all ages, and it was still pretty good.
McCain gave a tired, crazy-ass speech right after--to a small ballroom of tired, cranky old people somewhere in Virginia. Behind him on stage were the doddering John Warner, who looked old even with the recent facelift, and hair-dye abuser Tom Davis, NoVa congressman who's retiring from the House. Plus some old ladies to round out the demographics. In other words, it looked like a speech by an old guy, supported by other old guys, to a roomful of even older guys, and their wives.
And the speech itself was just a mess. I don't think it was his standard stump speech. I think he was just kind of making shit up as he went.
On MSNBC, Keith commented that you should always give your victory speech before Obama. That's good advice.
If this campaign does boil down to ancient McCain versus young Obama, I think that it might be hard for McCain to sway voters. Especially once the Obama people start airing their "100 years in Iraq" ad.
3, you're dead on. That was EXACTLY my impression of the two speeches last night. McCain seemed very small and very old following Obama on what was otherwise a mediocre night for him. But it shows how high Obama raises his own bar--if you had never seen him before, you would have been bowled over by that speech. Not so for McCain.
Obama really needs to get some sleep. I hope they schedule him a little down time this week.
BTW, have you guys seen the two "music videos"? The Obama "Yes, We Can" speech as done by Will.i.am, Scarlett Johansen and John Legend, and then the parody of it with McCain's "100 Years in Iraq" speech? Another favorable study in contrasts.
This post is not in defense or support of JM's rhetoric. That said, maybe I've read too much Cicero, but with just one word added, the contrast seems clear enough:
"To encourage a country with only rhetoric rather than [WITH] sound and proven ideas that trust in the strength and courage of free people is not a promise of hope, it is a platitude.”
The entire infinitive phrase "To encourage a country with only rhetoric rather than sound and proven ideas that trust in the strength and courage of free people", while wordy, is merely the subject of "is". Cadence could easily make that clear.
While I don't agree with the sentiment, it strikes me as standard political fare that can be unpacked:
BO is the candidate of unfound hope, unsound ideas, and untested character, while McCain is the experienced candidate of tried and true conservative ideals that let the people fend for themselves.
McCain's speech was just horrible.
I've seen him deliver versions of it before, though. I think it might actually be a version of his stump speech. So lethargic and old that it doesn't matter what he says. If he doesn't improve it will be very easy to brand him as old and out of touch. And if the polls are to be believed, being 72 is about as lethal as being a Mormon. Which is to say: very lethal (not as lethal as being an atheist - the worst! - but that's a topic for another time . . .)
I shudder to think at what the sick GOP fucks have in store for Obama.
Post a Comment
<< Home