Thursday, September 4, 2008

What wins elections

I was thinking, after watching Sarah Palin's sarcastic, snarky, and dismissive speech, about what it would mean if John McCain wins this election. Not in terms of policies or what it will do to America's well-being or place in the world--that's a whole 'nother depressing topic. I mean--what does it mean about politics in America? It will mean, I think, that cynicism, sarcasm, and avoiding the issues wins elections. It will mean that counting on the fact that voters aren't paying attention to your lies, stretched truths, flip-flops, hypocritical statements, and full-of-shit spin wins elections. It will mean that cheap, political stunts win elections.


Obama has tried to run a different kind of campaign, in a lot of ways. (He is still a politician, of course, but a far less cynical one than we've become accustomed to.) Obama has tried to criticize John McCain without demeaning him. He has always insisted on honoring McCain's military service, while pointing out the truth of what he stands for politically. He has insisted that Sarah Palin's family is not up for criticism, despite the other side's unfair and demonizing criticism of Obama's wife. He has tried to run a campaign that involves the input and energy of thousands of every day people. He has spoken seriously about topics of great importance to the country--energy independence, war and peace, job losses, and the failure of modern politics and politicians.

John McCain's campaign has been about sarcasm and belittling its opponent. Instead of touting any realistic proposals for the economy or the war, they spend obscene amounts of money on advertisements saying Obama is like Paris Hilton. I mean, come on! They lie and say that Obama will raise taxes on the middle class (he will return tax levels to pre-Bush levels on the very wealthy--in other words, repeal the irresponsible tax cuts McCain himself originally opposed, until it became politically expedient to support them, which he now does.) Then, McCain pulls a political stunt and puts a laughably unqualified evangelical woman on his ticket in a transparent attempt to get some Clinton and Bush voters in one swipe. Who cares if her experience is far less than the man they said was too inexperienced to be president? Then, she gets up on stage and spews lies and sarcasm, belittling the work of community organizers, falsely claiming that Obama has never authored legislation (in fact, he's authored important legislation on securing nuclear weapons and ethics reform, among others). She lies and says she opposed government pork, when she in fact supported ridiculous earmarks for her town and state, including the "bridge to nowhere." And, instead of talking about real political issues, or revealing that she knows or thinks ANYTHING about national or international affairs, she makes fun of Obama's stage, his speeches, and his time helping poor people in South Side Chicago find work.

If THAT'S what the American people vote for, then it means Bush and Rove were right: Politics is about appealing to the worst in people. A lot of us were hoping Obama could prove them wrong. He still might, but the fact that it's even close is downright depressing.