Why Does This Presidential Field Seem So Blurry? --WaPo

[Demeter]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/28/AR2007052801052.html?referrer=email&referrer=email&referrer=email&referrer=email


Losing Focus
Why Does This Presidential Field Seem So Blurry?

By Eugene Robinson
Tuesday, May 29, 2007; A13



The presidential candidates of both parties have been campaigning for months now, introducing themselves to the nation. So why do so many of them seem to get progressively fuzzier and less distinct, like photographs left out in the sun? Is it the process that's causing this steady attenuation, or does the problem lie with the candidates themselves?

There are two major exceptions to the general rule I've just posited. Hillary Clinton and John McCain are as vivid as the subjects of the artist Chuck Close's hyperrealist portraits, in which you can see every wrinkle, every blotch, every pore. The problem is that when people know exactly who you are, or think they do, they tend to form hard and fast opinions. There are so many Democrats who "just don't like Hillary Clinton" and so many Republicans who "just don't like John McCain" that the two candidates once considered presumptive favorites to win the major-party nominations could both fall short.

By contrast, the images of their opponents range from gauzy to blurry to practically incorporeal.

Barack Obama's phenomenal rise as a candidate came as he was brilliantly sketching the outlines of who he is and what he believes. His identity and philosophy are based on inclusiveness, which is a soothing message for a nation bleeding from wedge-issue politics as practiced by George W. Bush, Karl Rove and the like. But not all either/or propositions are false choices -- some are real choices, with real consequences. While we know much about who Obama is and how he thinks, the question of precisely what he would do in a given situation is like the bottom line on an eye chart -- you can almost make it out, but not quite.

Obama's sudden prominence lowered a scrim in front of John Edwards's candidacy -- he was going to be the anti-Hillary, but that role is now taken. Joe Biden certainly speaks his mind clearly enough, but it has been hard to persuade people to see him and Chris Dodd as anything other than creatures of the Senate -- unlike Clinton and Obama, two senators who are blessed with escape-velocity star power.

[bemildred]

1. More narcissistic drivel from WaPo.

"Hillary Clinton and John McCain are as vivid as the subjects of the artist Chuck Close's hyperrealist portraits, in which you can see every wrinkle, every blotch, every pore."

Talk about pulling stuff out of your a**.
:puke:

[Demeter]

2. It's more a Sub Rosa Critique of the MSM

perhaps as direct as one can get at WaPo

[bemildred]

3. I thought it was an attempt to "shape our opinions" some more.

But it's hard to be sure with something so nebulous. If they want to criticize themselves, they ought to be direct about it, in my opinion. Subtlety doesn't get you anywhere with a mass audience.

[Demeter]

4. Too True--One Can Read Almost Anything Into It

On the other hand, it does provoke some thought...

[bemildred]

5. I am mostly taken by the fact that we have all these people running HARD

for an election that is 18 months away. What is that about? I can think of lots of speculative ideas about that, but mostly it's got my attention. I've been watching US politics off and on since 1959 or so, and I don't ever think I've seen it look like this.

[Demeter]

6. Good Point

I think the press is ignoring that, but the Internet rubs their noses into it daily. My local fishwrap puts national new on page 10, if it's REALLY important.

The last time there was so much effort was when Gary Hart got caught--there were a lot of people running really hard. (Was that Reagan's Morning in America election?) Things haven't been that hot and bothered since.

[bemildred]

7. That's a good comparison, it was all up for grabs.

That was the one that got Bush I elected. Things were messy in 1992 too. But not since then (with all due respect for Dr. Dean's effort). Personally I think we are just warming up. I'll be surprised if we don't get some new 3rd parties or intra-party insurgencies later on.