Comments on: The Audacity Of It All http://larison.org/2008/02/04/the-audacity-of-it-all/ n. the principle of good order "Observe the strange inversion of all order and sense! Dignity debased; how vilely is the function of a consul prostituted!" ~The Craftsman Fri, 25 Jul 2008 10:48:50 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4 by: Justin Johnson http://larison.org/2008/02/04/the-audacity-of-it-all/#comment-8835 Tue, 05 Feb 2008 22:22:58 +0000 http://larison.org/2008/02/04/the-audacity-of-it-all/#comment-8835 You always pick the least charitable explanation where Obama is concerned. It's a snapshot of Hilary's strategy against him: She plays the policy wonk to his visionary posturing in order to highlight the difference in experience. But if you delve into their websites, you'll find almost the same policy papers, with the same hopeful schemes to implement this or that. The real difference with Obama and McCain is that they're not making speeches out of those policy papers; thus they offend the commentocracy who want to tear them apart on substantive grounds. What Obama seems to recognize is two things: The Democrats continually lose when they run issues campaigns. They secure the intelligentsia at the cost of the vast majority who want to feel good about their candidate, not their candidate's 12 point plan. Gore and Kerry were both far, far better wonks than Bush; but in hindsight their failings as campaigners are obvious. The blogosphere doesn't seem to have gotten out of its system the need to project onto the candidates their desire for the reflectively, intellectually grounded election of a particular candidate. Nothing speaks to the disconnect between the pundits and the voters like McCain's voter-driven steamroller against incredible opposition from the Republican commentariat. Reams of policy papers have little relevance once office is obtained. A candidate can have all the plans in the world, but once elected, they have to do the hard business of politicking, which is a different beast. I'm reminded of Jerry Brown, as mayor of Oakland, showing a reporter a roomful of good proposals to revitalize the downtown core, and observing that ideas weren't the problem, executing them in the face of entrenched interests was. You're mistaking a very strong campaign strategy for Obama with a counterfactual of his term as president, if elected. As Andrew Sullivan is with Hillary Clinton, you are with Barack Obama. You always pick the least charitable explanation where Obama is concerned. It’s a snapshot of Hilary’s strategy against him: She plays the policy wonk to his visionary posturing in order to highlight the difference in experience. But if you delve into their websites, you’ll find almost the same policy papers, with the same hopeful schemes to implement this or that.

The real difference with Obama and McCain is that they’re not making speeches out of those policy papers; thus they offend the commentocracy who want to tear them apart on substantive grounds. What Obama seems to recognize is two things:

The Democrats continually lose when they run issues campaigns. They secure the intelligentsia at the cost of the vast majority who want to feel good about their candidate, not their candidate’s 12 point plan. Gore and Kerry were both far, far better wonks than Bush; but in hindsight their failings as campaigners are obvious. The blogosphere doesn’t seem to have gotten out of its system the need to project onto the candidates their desire for the reflectively, intellectually grounded election of a particular candidate. Nothing speaks to the disconnect between the pundits and the voters like McCain’s voter-driven steamroller against incredible opposition from the Republican commentariat.

Reams of policy papers have little relevance once office is obtained. A candidate can have all the plans in the world, but once elected, they have to do the hard business of politicking, which is a different beast. I’m reminded of Jerry Brown, as mayor of Oakland, showing a reporter a roomful of good proposals to revitalize the downtown core, and observing that ideas weren’t the problem, executing them in the face of entrenched interests was.

You’re mistaking a very strong campaign strategy for Obama with a counterfactual of his term as president, if elected. As Andrew Sullivan is with Hillary Clinton, you are with Barack Obama.

]]> by: OldNewEngland http://larison.org/2008/02/04/the-audacity-of-it-all/#comment-8825 Tue, 05 Feb 2008 01:27:54 +0000 http://larison.org/2008/02/04/the-audacity-of-it-all/#comment-8825 "If we have an Obama v. McCain election, it will be one of the first times in recent memory that we have had two candidates vying for the leadership of a managerial state with little or no interest in managing." Maybe, but it won't be the first time we've had two candidates vying for the leadership of a managerial state with little or no ABILITY in managing. So . . . Plus, I think you're underselling John McCain. The man has decades of experience maneuvering throughout the political machinery both in Arizona and in Washington. His prolonger incumbency and status as a household name suggest his ability to play people -- the play The Game. And that's the key to managing: the skills necessary to build enduring -- not to mention self-advancing -- interpersonal relationships. “If we have an Obama v. McCain election, it will be one of the first times in recent memory that we have had two candidates vying for the leadership of a managerial state with little or no interest in managing.”

Maybe, but it won’t be the first time we’ve had two candidates vying for the leadership of a managerial state with little or no ABILITY in managing. So . . .

Plus, I think you’re underselling John McCain. The man has decades of experience maneuvering throughout the political machinery both in Arizona and in Washington. His prolonger incumbency and status as a household name suggest his ability to play people — the play The Game. And that’s the key to managing: the skills necessary to build enduring — not to mention self-advancing — interpersonal relationships.

]]>