What I Learned From the Election

Now that the dust has nearly settled (we still don't know about that filibuster-proof Senate yet, do we?) I've realized I've gotten a lot of lessons from the election of 2008. And I'm a big believer in taking note of lessons learned, since if you ignore them they tend to come up over and over.

1. People are easily scared: Hillary's three ayem phone ad was, according to polls, actually effective. Obama was seen as the less-steady hand, the shaking newby who would crack under pressure. Seems pretty silly now, doesn't it? The man's proving to be a rock - and a confident one.

2. Scared people get angry: Once the fear of Obama was spread around thickly enough, people reacted with anger. Who can forget the Republican crowds screaming "terrorist!" "Kill him!" And that anger turned against John McCain when he tried to reassure them they had nothing to fear from an Obama presidency. And these were his supporters!

3. Scared people will latch onto things that make them feel safer. Conservatives clutched Just Sarah From Wausilla to their hearts. She was young, she was pretty and she was absolutely certain everything was going to be okay. Progressives held Obama equally tight. Ditto. Luckily for Just Sarah, she's not going to be held accountable for this poop soup that used to be our economy. Our president-elect, you must admit, is a brave soul. I wouldn't want to take this job on.

4. Even scared people can be won over. I have some very conservative relatives. One of them will also freely admit to being a racist. So imagine my surprise when, in a recent conversation, he told me he "didn't think too badly of Obama" anymore. "He's certainly smart," he told me, "and he seems to be sincerely trying to fix things. I wish him well and hope he can do it." Score one for the Obama Team.

5. The people in charge don't necessarily know more than I do. It's a holdover from childhood - this assumption that if you're in charge, you must know more than me. You'd think that eight years of George W. Bush would have beaten that out of me. But it took Hank Paulson to do it once and for all. The poor man is clearly in way over his head - he's trying to come up with a rescue plan without a firm handle on what might work and a mandate to take care of old pals....but don't forget to not totally alienate public opinion! Remember that old Star Trek episode where Kirk used logic to short out the bad robot? "You say you are lying, but you tell the truth..." Paulson's conflicting imperatives are forcing a series of epic flip flops and I am expecting to soon see steam coming from his ears as his circuits overheat. I believe this problem is going to take a committee - a bunch of smart people bouncing it around until they come up with a plan...not a unilateral fix that is politically expedient. Score another for the Obama Transition - the team's gelling.

6. The media is ridiculous. Yes, I know. I'm one of them. But really. It's downright embarrassing. Because cable and satellite have created a 24 hour news cycle, the news shows most resemble a bunch of old people sitting around a table hashing and rehashing the same topic as they play canasta. "Is this change or just more of the same?" "Should Obama be keeping a lower profile?" "Is Obama taking charge too soon?" "Which dog will the Obama's get?"
It's the same stuff over and over and over and there's rarely anything new. When there is, everyone pounces on it like a pack of dogs in an alley. Pretty soon it's so mangled there's nothing left but a little bone.

7. Rachel Maddow and Jon Stewart rock. Jon Stewart is my favorite media watchdog. He's smart, he's willing to take on the people he likes as well as the ones he disagrees with, and he's essentially good hearted. This man brought on the tightly wound Bill O'Reilly and offered him not a tongue lashing, but a cup of cocoa and a teddy bear. It was a dig, but there was an element of sincerity. Stewart's essential warmth (remember him after 9-11) and obvious idealism make him the critic with a heart. And man, does the media need to be watched. Opinion masquerades as news everywhere now.
Maddow has a similar warmth. She may be progressive, she may be snarky, but she's human. When she says she's been waiting years for infrastructure to get sexy, you know she means it - and she's thrilled that it's happening. She's not standing on the sidelines jeering, she's emotionally in the middle of things and talking about things that she believes matter. I can't watch the news much now - it makes me twitch. But Stewart and Maddow still tell me what they're thinking most nights.

8. I Don't Know Much. I never thought I knew much...lots of people had more information and lots more opinions. I've come to realize I know very little - and any opinions I hold are subject to change as more information becomes available. I think the good thing is once you know you don't know much, you're willing to listen and learn. I'm listening.

What's Wrong With Using Your Head?

Barack Obama's been doing the last-minute media blitz, and it's been a great opportunity to get into his head a little. All the speeches in the world won't tell you what one good interview will.

Here's what I see: He's clearly an ambitious guy - no one who wasn't would run the godawful gauntlet our election process has become. And he's organized - you can tell that from the descriptions reporters have of his staff...they can, at a moment's prodding, spill over with every fact, figure and possible remedy for every rumor of election suppression that comes up while maintaining a calm facade of optimism. As Dana Bash said on CNN, "They KNOW what's going on."

He's not a great off-the-cuff raconteur: his scripted jokes in NYC were hilarious - but his attempts to tell a joke during an interview sometimes fall a little flat. But he likes to laugh and does so easily.

He's thoughtful, he's measured in his answers and Handsome Significant Other noticed one important thing as we watched Obama speak with Rachel Maddow last night (by the way - I want HER if I ever have to put together a softball team!): Obama loves this stuff. He clearly relishes the problem-solving aspects of being president. His answers on issues are not emotional - they reflect a mind that circles a problem, checks out every angle, considers the possible results of each solution and finally settles on the one that seems to best suit the situation.

I'd bet money I'm right. All the evidence is there - his unflappable demeanor which spreads to his campaign staff ( dubbed "No Drama Obama" by the press), his choice of a campaign director who has created a noiseless engine for victory using computers and cellphones as well as good old enthusiasm, the campaign's clear attempts to stay on message and not descend into the negative campaigning hole that swallows candidates alive, Obama's constant use of reason instead of emotion to try to get his message across.

Here's a perfect example: John McCain and Sarah Palin in particular whip up the Republican crowds to a frenzy by bashing the Democratic ticket. The crowds respond with boos, shouts of 'terrorist' and 'kill him'. Palin doesn't miss a beat. McCain finally had to stop a woman as she clutched the microphone and told him that Obama was a Muslim. Flip that view...look at Obama this week as he spoke before a cheering crowd. He said McCain's name and the crowd started to boo. His response was lightning quick. He told them he didn't need them to boo...he needed them to vote. Emotions defused, rerouted, and turned into positive energy.

So the guy's smart. He's got a logical bent. Why, oh why, America, is that so threatening to some of you? The people who love Joe the Plumber and Sarah Palin cheer when they call Obama 'elite'. What is elite about him? He doesn't have more money that John McCain. He doesn't have as many houses or cars as John McCain. He went to an Ivy League school, but McCain went to private boarding schools and Annapolis. That's pretty elite. McCain was a Navy brat, traveling from school to school. Obama was a kid without a father raised by his mother and grandparents.

So if Obama's background doesn't make him elite, what is it? I submit that it's his intelligence.

McCain is no dummy - I hear he's a bright guy and an avid reader. But his appeal to voters is always emotional - "my friends," he calls us as his campaign tries to either make us fearful or mistrustful of his opponent. It's a classic appeal to the emotions and when he ventures into substance, it's usually to criticize particulars of Obama's plans for health care or economic relief or foreign policy.

Obama's appeal, at first, was also purely emotional. He spoke to the hope for unity, the hope for a better country and our hopes for the future. When his campaign fell flat was when it went negative, but they seemed to figure that out and used it sparingly. (You must remember my vantage is from a state that is considered a lock for the Democrats...what people are experiencing in swing states may be very, very different).

But every emotional appeal seems delivered from a higher place - a vantage just a bit above the usual which is looking farther into the distance and taking the wider view. Obama, for instance, won't bash Republicans. Why? Because, he told Rachel Maddow, we're going to need them to help rebuild this country. He says there are many moderate Republicans who might be willing to work with Democrats so long as they're not actively pushed away. He wants to invite their participation. He's not expecting their vote - he's looking past the election to the need to work cooperatively after the election. He's the kind of guy I can see accepting a position in a McCain administration because it would be best for the country. That's putting your head before your emotions...and that's a quality I think may be the best medicine this country could get.