Log In | Register
John McCain, restless and emotional, couldn't resist the temptation to join the battle to rescue our financial markets and save the economy. It was the biggest and most important fight around, bigger and more important than his campaign scrap with Barack Obama. Being engaged in the action--in the arena--is where McCain always wants to be. So he cast his presidential campaign aside, temporarily, and headed back to Washington. The campaign could wait. It might even benefit.
Obama, placid and professorial, had a different reaction to the fight over the bailout. Even before McCain's maneuver he'd rejected the idea of putting his campaign on hold and joining the legislative battle.
The Warrior and the Priest: The revealing campaign styles of John McCain and Barack Obama.
Seeded on Sun Sep 28, 2008 11:20 AM EDT
Article Source: Campaign Standard- Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
- Public Discussion (11)
Cooper described Roosevelt, the warrior, as "exuberant and expansive," a man who "epitomized the enjoyment of power." He gained fame "through well-cultivated press coverage of his exploits as a reformer, rancher, hunter, police commissioner, war hero, and engaging personality." And TR was "associated conspicuously and consistently with one issue above all others--war." Sounds like McCain.
Wilson, the priest, was "disciplined and controlled," Cooper wrote. "He seemingly embodied a less joyful exercise of power." Until he ran for office, Wilson was "a spectator and a bystander." Roosevelt was a "tireless evangelist for international activism," but Wilson had "a more pacific vision." His entry into politics at the highest level was created by his reputation as "a widely regarded public speaker." Obama isn't Wilson personified, but he comes close.
- 1 vote
#1 - Sun Sep 28, 2008 11:21 AM EDTshaun:
Well blow me down. An interesting and intriguing bit of non-McCain-hackery from TWS, and by Freddie "The Beetle" Barnes no less. Once every five or ten years he writes a 700-word column that isn't a complete waste of time.
He does not, however, explore the OBVIOUS question. What if the American public doesn't want a "warrior" this time around?
- 1 vote
#2 - Mon Sep 29, 2008 2:00 AM EDTWhat if the American public doesn't want a "warrior" this time around?
You miss the nuance regarding the term, warrior, Jack. You are taking it too literally failing to digest the metaphor.
I think you will be surprised on election day, regarding what the public wants, despite the polls.
- 3 votes
shaun:
Actually, No. I meant it just as literally or figuratively as Freddie did.
He described two personality types. Obama's, in part:
Obama, on the other hand, doesn't like quick changes or taking risks. His campaign, like the man himself, has been a picture of steadiness and careful planning.
Maybe that's the kind of President voters want next cycle.
- 1 vote
Obama, on the other hand, doesn't like quick changes or taking risks. His campaign, like the man himself, has been a picture of steadiness and careful planning.
Actually, Presidents need to make quick decisive decisions.
The world is not a classroom in which one can do a retest or grade on a curve.
Obama's problem is that he does not seem to understand that point.
- 2 votes
Shaun:
You're making the wrong rejoinder. I'm not arguing about what are and are not proper personality traits in a President of the United States. You could very well be correct about "quick decisions." (You're not, but that's another argument.) You might even be correct that Obama doesn't get that. (You're not, but that's another another argument.)
The point I raised is that the public may not want that impulsive, quick-decision character type this time through. Maybe they WANT a President who'll take a little time and make a considered and fully-informed decision.
- 2 votes
The point I raised is that the public may not want that impulsive, quick-decision character type this time through. Maybe they WANT a President who'll take a little time and make a considered and fully-informed decision.
You are over analyzing my response, Jack.
The point is: IMO, you are wrong. Either we will learn that on election day, or later, when Obama, is impeached.
Obama may have people bamboozled for now, but it won't last. People are playing the blame game right now. The blame game is so much easier than confronting reality. If Obama is elected, Obama's skewed reality will be revealed soon enough.
- 2 votes
shaun:
First I under-analyzed it, then I over analyzed it?
I guess I need to simplify and re-iterate.
I think Freddie Barnes actually did an excellent job limning key character distinctions between the two candidates. Surprisingly clear-headed and objective, actually.
The point I'm making is that it may well be that the electorate DOES NOT WANT the character traits that Barnes says he wants, i.e., McCain's as opposed to Obama's.
- 1 vote
The point I'm making is that it may well be that the electorate DOES NOT WANT the character traits that Barnes says he wants, i.e., McCain's as opposed to Obama's.
Speculative.....so? Anything, may well be, and we won't know until we know.
I get your point, but let me make things even simpler....It's a worthless neuronal gyration, at this point.
I am glad you think Barnes was objective.
The election is going to be close.....That's my objective, albeit totally worthless, speculative opinion....an opinion that tells everyone absolutely nothing as do all opinions, at this point in time. .
- 2 votes
shaun:
The election is going to be close.....
You don't have to tell me that! I've been pressing that analysis since December. Looks like a 49-48 election to me still.
- 2 votes
Jack:
I am glad to see we agree that the election will be close.
- 3 votes
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
