Barack Obama's trip to Europe and the Middle East did what it was supposed to. It untapped a stream of presidential images: the candidate addressing 200,000 delighted Berliners; the candidate mingling comfortably with American soldiers, riding in military helicopters like a commander-in-chief; the candidate dealing with foreign leaders as an equal. For most voters, it is the images that will stick - what else was there? - and they are priceless. John McCain's chief line of attack against Mr Obama, that he lacks experience especially in foreign affairs, has been blunted if not neutralised.
Poor Mr McCain had the worst week of his campaign. Unable to lie low and let Mr Obama have his European moment, the only wise course, he made matters worse. He ran a television spot that said "blame Obama for the high price of gas", a patently ludicrous assertion. (Republicans were laughing at their own candidate.) Campaign officials said he might announce his vice-presidential choice - a sad and unsuccessful attempt to steal some of Mr Obama's limelight. And having spent months goading Mr Obama for his lack of foreign affairs experience, Mr McCain portrayed his own schedule of dreary and sparsely attended small-town events as proof of his superior authenticity.
In this election, the image war is turning into a rout. As Mr Obama grows in self-assurance (not that he was lacking any to begin with), Mr McCain looks older and less sure-footed. The greater surprise, though, and the real let-down in this campaign, is that the image war is all there is. In a way, last week's contrasts sum things up. And what a pity this is. This was supposed to be an election about substance, with candidates - each of them an outsider in his own way - capable of mutual respect, capable of challenging party loyalists and keen to engage with each other in a new kind of politics. Instead we have the old kind of politics, only more so.
You can read the rest of this column for the FT here.
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
Federal elections in America will be run on substance when campaigns run on emotion and messaging lose, repeatedly. The uber model for a successful image campaign has been Nixon's 1968 winning effort with all its vile messaging and low emotional appeals. Until this basic model is broken it will continue. (Please see Rick Pearlstein's Nixonland for details)
What is funny about you article is that you somewhat fail to see that the Obama campaign has taken the process half way to issue oriented campaigning. The final step is for the republican candidate to drop enough of the negative messaging so that the only place left for the media to have a conversation is over the policy. You see it's a basic game and both sides have to pick the same electoral strategy to get the mythic optimal choice 'issues campaign'
Mind you perhaps we are both fooling ourselves. I mean despite its incredible demonology and constant ad hominem nature, the election of 1860 was an issue election. Perhaps this is an issue election too but like 1860, the inherent positions of each side are so well known that to comment on them is self evident and boring.
Unfortunately, neither candidate's actual positions on issues would be particularly popular--one is extremely liberal, the other is basically a neocon--so neither one is likely to want to spend much time on that field.
Hmmmmm.
Mr. Crook I'm glad/sorry to say that you're completely wrong.
Consider this. Obama spent more time giving a speech to Germans than he did to Americans in some states. There are states here in the USA that Obama has never been to, yet he put Germany ahead of them.
That's not a bonus.