Jude Hammerle
Election 2008 will be decided in the same manner as the Bush-Gore nailbiter of 2000. The candidates’ showings in a handful of battleground states will determine the winner, possibly by the narrowest of margins.
In Election 2000, a Normal near-incumbent, Vice President Al Gore, squared off against a rebel challenger, Governor George Bush. The current election is a tale of two rebels. The most Normal Democrat, John Edwards, and most Normal Republican, Mitt Romney, effectively disappeared from contention by July 1, 2008.
The Republican nominee, Senator John McCain, embodies the Affluent voter identity, as every Republican candidate has since Ronald Reagan.
The Democratic nominee, Senator Barack Obama, has a hold on the Fun voter identity, by virtue of his youth and the youth of his supporters.
Obama’s tense but convincing victory in the Democratic winnowing process resulted primarily from a miscalculation by Senator Hillary Clinton. Her connection to the Strong/Affluent voter identity, a circumstance of her tenure as First Lady, limited her ability to represent change in the minds of voters, and she did too little to correct this shortcoming.
The competitive dynamics of the general election mirror those of the Clinton-Obama preliminaries, but are even more clearly cut. The Normal voter identity remains diminished by the unpopularity of the present administration. Obama controls the Fun identity, while McCain controls Affluent. Given these circumstances, the key perceptual battle in the general election will be for control of the Strong voter identity in the battleground states.
In terms of their rhetoric and command of facts, McCain and Obama are equally Strong. In terms of their resumes, McCain is considerably more Strong than Obama. The fulcrum of this election lies in the realm of physical identity. Specifically, the key fact in the campaign is that Obama’s physical identity is profoundly Strong, while McCain’s is profoundly weak.
At 72, John McCain would be our oldest first-term President, nearly a year and a half older and considerably less vigorous in demeanor than Ronald Reagan on their respective days of inauguration. By contrast, at 47 Obama would be our fourth-youngest President, just a few days older than Bill Clinton on the day he took office.
In order to win, McCain must turn Obama’s youth and enthusiasm against him. In their debate of 9/26/2008, McCain did precisely this, repeatedly invoking images of Obama’s presumed naivete and need for on-the-job training. McCain also boasted of his world travel and frequent liaisons with modern, relevant political and military leaders, and reminded voters that Obama lacks similar esteem.
For his part, Obama’s core challenge is to invalidate McCain’s experience by asserting that he is the product of a past that is no longer relevant, a noble old soldier whose time to fade away has come. Obama can justify this assertion by linking McCain more convincingly to the disastrous outcomes of the current regime’s policies: the inefficient war, the FEMA flop, the energy crisis, the financial meltdown. In their first debate, Obama failed to accomplish this. While McCain staked a strategic claim to the Strong voter, Obama skirmished tactically, parrying facts with facts.
Given that the contest will be decided in the Strong sector of the identity battlefield, and given McCain’s appropriately Strong showing, Obama’s performance in this first debate seemed dangerously weak.
September 29, 2008 at 11:36 am
Thanks; very helpful in clarifying some things for me.
It’s fascinating to observe how candidates begin their campaigns with broader, more scattered attacks, but then focus and consolidate their position(ing)s over time. Obama’s earlier attempts to court the Affluent Arugula crowd have given way to his anthems for the middle class. Meanwhile, during the last weeks of the campaign marathon, McCain appears to be abandoning certain youthful, progressive, Fun elements, increasingly proud of connections to the corporate elite and the ways of the past.
I think you are right about the looming battle in the Strong sector. Now I look forward to visual (comical?) photo-ops: more jackets off, more sleeves rolled up, perhaps swinging an occasional ax or sledge hammer. Moose-hunting anyone? McCain did Nascar; will Obama do a tractor-pull?
- By withdrawing from the Fun sector, is McCain free to use nastiness and belligerence to bolster his Strong cred?
- And will Obama’s (indirect) focus on McCain’s health paint the 72-year-old as less Strong (and less youthful/Fun)?
As Charles Atlas said: “Nobody picks on a strong man.”
September 29, 2008 at 1:21 pm
If Obama keeps it clean, if he only challenges McCain’s relevance, he has a chance to win the battlegrounds. Probably the cutest way to do this is to paint McCain as an Alpha emeritus, an old soldier whose time to fade away has come. Thanks Bub, I will add that to the post.
September 29, 2008 at 6:27 pm
McCain’s recent erraticism should create pause for any Normal voter. Obama should focus on this and create doubt in voter’s minds concerning McCain’s ability to coherently “pull the strings” of government at the presidential level. From his Alexander Haig-ish comment about firing Christopher Cox, to suspending his campaign, to attempting to pull out of the debate, to impulsively selecting Palin, McCain continuously and scarily reacts during pivotal events. Obama should use McCain’s reactions during the past two weeks to create legitimate concern about McCain’s mental state and emotional intelligence. Obama was right to call out temperment in his acceptance speech and should continue making this a key factor in the mind’s of voters.