Posts

McCain was behind in the polls being trampled consistently by Obama until late August.  He chose Palin which electrified not ‘the base’ as the pundits are now saying but everyone.  It had been a long drawn out campaign everyone was well known and genuinely this woman plucked from obscurity piqued the interest of everyone outside stalwart Democrats.

Her failure to make good on that freshness by revealing too limited a knowledge of international affairs, looking like she lacked credibility to carry the office should McCain pass away in office, embarking on a shopping spree of $150,000 and in the latter days plotting her own career beyond 2008 election.  All of this certainly failed to make good the boost in the polls that she had initially given McCain.  But failing to convert on promise and ‘losing it’ for the Presidential nominee are two very different things.

Palin was McCain’s choice.  All the evidence shows that he had not done enough homework.  But he was always going to have a tough time to differentiate himself from an unpopular President Bush.  But he was always going to have a tough time in the present financial crisis.  One of his least significant problems was that he had a running mate who was a bit too passionate, a bit too wet behind the ears and a bit too provincial for the majority of America to accept.  

The Republicans are in trouble when the legendary Karl Rove has produced a map showing a loss for the Republican Party.  The only major question now is by what margin Obama achieves a historic landslide.  Another footnote is whether or not the Democrats get a majority in the Senate.  Election night looks like it belongs to Obama and the Democratic Party.  This is a remarkable achievement of disciplined focus and unflappable dexterity that should stand Obama in good stead for the Presidency.  His most remarkable achievement in this long race is without doubt not his victory over McCain but rather the unseating of Hilary Clinton the matriarch of the Democrats as well as the most likely candidate for the Democratic Party.

His victory has ridden the tide of discontent, disbelief and incongruity as to what has been happening in the financial world.  It should be not doubted that the electorate would hold accountable the party in charge for such circumstances.  But is worthwhile to note that the gyrations of the markets are well beyond the control of any one set of politicians and that any reform or reformulation of how the markets work should be carefully considered.  One hopes that with victory assured that Obama dispenses with ideological premises for economic change and seeks pragmatic solutions to pragmatic problems.

The role of politics, of our politicians of our Presidents in a democracy is broadly twofold.  The first is to represent us, the People.  This includes articulating our dreams and hopes as well as our fears and trepidations.  The second role is to preside over peaceful and beneficial dialogue that advances the interests of our society.  The executive control that most automatically associate with politicians and Presidents is really only a bye-product of these two roles.  In this way it can be seen that a mandate to action relies on properly exercised authority and persuasion.

Pat Buchanan was one of the people who stated on CNN that McCain was wrong to make himself party to the jokes of Saturday Night Live as he saw this as a debasement of politics in general and of a would-be President.    This is a hard balancing act to make in democracy: Being one of the people, but just maintain the right distance from them in order to exercise the right authority in times of need. McCain has made much of his folksiness in comparison to Obama’s loftiness.  But Obama is in no way as lofty as Kerry or even Gore so this attack looks like it will fall short of the target.  As a result McCain might have ceded political credibility for folksy charm.  On paper this does not look like a good trade.

Obama’s infomercial was a brave attempt not only to win the election but also to change the way in which any future Presidential candidate must win. He framed the infomercial as a narrative ark of ordinary families with thick background music – rich with emotion and empathy.  All in all it was sleek and an impressive display of the both the human story and his political purpose.  There is, of course, a danger that it whets the appetite of the American people too much, but that is a battle for another day.

The main aim was to close down any speculation that Obama’s inspirational leadership was coupled with inexperience.  The half hour slot was peppered with testimonials from experts in government, business and the military.  A secondary aim was to bridge his sometimes lofty Professorial air with a rugged on the ground feel for ordinary Americans.  Both these aims can objectively be stated to have been achieved.  Any independent who saw the whole of this transmission cannot fail to have been impressed by his story as well as his fundamental decency.  Perhaps this informercial won’t win Obama any more votes in the election – but it certainly sets the tone.  All Americans must hope he realizes his big promises, and all of the resulting aspirations are met.

The two candidates have now virtually no time to change the momentum in time for election day: McCain cannot capture enough attention on the national stage and Obama has shown himself remarkably accident proof.  Reasonable goals the McCain-Palin ticket can aim for must be to stop an all out rout of the Republican Party, ceding one party control of the White House and the two Houses of Congress.  There is also valuable work to be done by the Republicans to try and frame the debate and at least some of the issues that the new Obama Administration will take on.  How this is done without surrendering is going to be incredibly difficult for the Republicans.

Obama must seek as big a mandate as possible.  Only with a resounding endorsement will he have the power that, he should argue, the current situation necessitates.  The Democrats will have the poisoned legacy of a financial system in turmoil and a war to end.  The problem for them is that they will be expected to bring an elegant end to them both.  This is much easier to suppose than to execute.  Unless there is a clear timetable to work to six months passes remarkably quickly and that is about as long a political honeymoon as any person or party in power can expect.

Even with the conclusion of the election beyond doubt – there is much to play for in these last days.

McCain has started attacking Obama’s tax plans.  This is a area that the Republicans have, hitherto, failed to make much political ground.  The American people resent taxes almost more than any other country being more transparent and less amenable to efficient tax planning than most other jurisdictions.  As a result, it has been surprising that the Republicans have not made more of an issue with Obama’s repeated assertion that those earning more should pay more to the government.

The main problem with this is that they already do.  The top 5% of taxpayers already pay just under 60% of the tax revenue from federal income tax.  At what point does increasing tax on these people, as Obama advocates, kill the goose that is laying the golden eggs?  Or in economic terms when does this decrease economic efficiency and activity?  McCain has a legitimate point when he states that America was not built on spreading the wealth but on creating it.

In these troubled times this is a hard message to get across.  The American people know that this is the case intuitively.  They need McCain and the Republican party to articulate this as a rebuttal to the Obama and the Democratic party’s contention that because a segment of people can ‘afford’ something that is the right thing to do.  Such economic populism might get a party elected but it also destroys the great turbine of growth that is the American economy.

Suits and the hair-dos have been making headlines since it was revealed that GOP has spent $150,000 on the appearance of Sarah Palin since she was selected as vice-Presidential candidate.  But what does this or Biden’s botox tell us about the American political system?  The answer is that appearance is an incredibly important factor in winning elections.  Whilst many might bemoan this lack of ‘substance’ we must never forget that politics has always been a theater.  Franklin Delano Roosevelt pretended to be able to walk in order to seem more capable at running the country.

Obama or Plain’s fresh face were (and still are) an attraction for many bored with the same old aged Washington junkies. We should not complain about how all of the actors have to be immaculately turned out for 24/7 news society.  Obsession with the exterior image is a reflection of what we seek not of what an individual is.  Visual messaging is important and can be an election loser.  Let’s just hope that the internal content matches up to this perfectly maintained exterior.   

One of the most important issues facing modern liberal democracy is the funding of political parties.  Part of this conundrum is that political parties are very political and will find it hard ever to give up temporary advantage that they might enjoy for the long term common good of the country.  The funding parties also mirrors the lobbying something that has great and profound significance in Washington D.C.

But we are reminded that it is possible to get cross party consensus as it was revealed this week that both Republicans and Democrats got AIG to voluntarily cease professional lobbying over the contents and nature of rules that directly affect the company going forward.  This was a preventive measure against what would have been public outrage at public money being recycled so transparently into the political world.  Whoever is the next President will have to address these issues in a forthright and straightforward manner.  Both lobbying and political funding are miniscule parts of an otherwise enormous spending machines (it has often been noted that Americans spend about as much on chewing gum as on the political process) yet they have the power to corrupt the political process.  They also have the power to degrade the seemliness of political process in the view of the American people.  These are issues, therefore, on which it is right and proper for a President to lead.

McCain campaign must be in pain from Powell’s endorsement of Obama.  At the beginning of the election process – back during the primaries one of the most serious indictments of Obama was that he was a foreign policy lightweight.  In the United States Powell is just about as foreign policy heavyweight as they come.  He has an impeccable military record and despite all of his misgivings has not been overtly disloyal to his former employer George W. Bush.

This will deprive McCain of yet another line of attack on his rival in the closing weeks before the election.  Yet McCain would be wise to ignore the news to the best of his capacity and push on an area in which he has been making significant inroads.  The part of the third presidential debate at which Obama looked most vulnerable was his connections to Ayers and to Acorn.  If McCain wants to make inroads he can’t just repeat these accusations but blend them into a narrative ark that portrays Obama as lacking in judgment both about the people he knows and the company he keeps.  Time is running short but it is not facts that convince the voters but rather the theory.

There may a very good reason that Mayor Michael Bloomberg is the only man in the city to solve the problems that the city faces over the coming years.  In a metropolis that is renowned for shady city hall politics and opaque political tradeoffs he might well be the type of independent figure that is required during such troubled times.  He should, however, seek to extend term limits in the same manner in which they were originally put in place; that is to say by a city referendum.  This would allow all issues to be heard, the pros and the contras in a legitimate debate that would encourage and energize local politics that is all too often left to smoke filled rooms of power brokers. 

The recent allegations made by the New York Post that the Mayor has used city slush funds to reward his supporters or possible opponents in City Hall should only emphasize the logic that necessitates this measure should be subjected to the people.  To avoid any form of conflict of interests, or even the perception of conflict of interests, this term extension should be put to the people.  This might be an inconvenient and burdensome affair (on top of the election itself) but then and democracy tends to create such inconvenient and burdensome tests.