11 posts tagged “presidency”
June 3rd, this now historic date in US history, has dragged me back to the blogging keyboard to write about a subject I thought I was done with for quite some time. Even now, after many months getting used to the notion, I can scarcely absorb the significance of the fact that a black man has clinched the Democratic nomination for president of the United States, nary 40 years after desegregation.
While a keen follower of politics, my energy was sapped after the ALP's victory last year. Without Howard around, who was I supposed to hate? Rudd has been a super-competent technocrat, who seemingly inspires through actions rather than words (and God knows if you've heard him speak, words are not his main talent with the notable exception of The Apology). There is not much for me to rail against in the Australian political sphere.
Meanwhile, here in the US, CNN et al managed to dull my interest with their absurd analyses of the candidates -- shallow and sensationalist, typified by their hysteria over a mis-spoken word here, an embarrassing acquiantance there. Certainly the media's anointing of Obama as their chosen candidate from even the early days in the campaign made me a little annoyed that the media tail was trying to wag the primary dog. Then again, when the broad brushstrokes of the frontrunners' policies painted almost indistinguishable pictures (pro-universal health care, pro-environment, anti-free trade, anti-Iraq war), I'm not sure if I could resist the temptation to report on minutiae to distract from the rather dull number crunching that comprise caucuses and primaries.
Hillary will look back at this campaign, and surely should wonder whether if, had she stuck to her knitting -- promoting good policy that had broad bipartisan appeal -- could she have clinched the nomination instead of Obama. Her pandering played right into the hands of Obama's main theme of 'change', and the very politics that the Clintons were so good at was the exact opposite of what was needed for this particular battle.
So now we'll just have to wait and see what Hillary does; mathematically she's sunk, but it would seem highly unlikely that she'll bow out silently. Then again, nor can I see the Obama campaign offering her the vice presidency either; that would simply be counterproductive not to say contradictory.
We live in interesting times!
Barack Obama gave an excellent speech today on the race issue in the fight for the Presidential nomination. I started reading the transcript, and although it ran to seven pages felt compelled to read it all. It was a thoughtful, honest, and -- yes -- inspiring speech that addressed in very frank terms the racial divide that still permeates this country. What is most impressive is that he did so without condescension, without flinching from difficult subject matter, and without attempting to simplify what is a very complex issue.
The speech reminded me a lot of Kevin Rudd's address to Parliament earlier this year apologising to the Stolen Generation, in the sense that it tried to be bigger than the pettiness and cynicism that typifies the current state of the debate, in order to bring the country forward with solutions rather than go through an exercise of apportioning blame and recriminations. Unfortunately, there are still those who can only see the fact that Obama has refused demands to leave his church (for those who haven't kept up with the latest mini-scandal, Obama's former pastor is all over YouTube with footage of him damning America and calling it for example the USKKKA).
Visit Barack Obama's website yourself to check out the speech.
Apparently, some people seem to think Hillary Clinton's win in yesterday's New Hampshire represents a 'stunning victory'. This is just another example of the media's simplification of politics -- from what I can gather, a 3% margin over Obama does not represent a stunning victory unless it's a comparison with her position in polling prior to the primary!
In another overlooked point, Hillary currently has more delegates than any of the other contenders so far. Admittedly, we are very early into the race so it's hard to say whether that's of any significance, but that caveat applies equally to the raw number of primary victories.
I guess these kinds of simplications make for good headlines though...
Interesting article on Salon.com about the FairTax plan as supported by Mike Huckabee. What I can't get over in this instance is the brazenness with which proponents use the '23%' figure when (by the convention with which all other tax rates are quoted) this figure should read as 30%!
The devil in this plan is clearly in the detail, let's hope we have a real debate about this should this ever come within coo-ee of passing.
Well I mgiht as well return to one of my favourite topics: politics. And given that the first primary of the election year finally took place today I might as well blog about that.
So it seems that Huckabee and Obama got up today for the Republicans and Democrats, respectively, and by decisive margins. I think I'll reserve for another day my observations of the Democrat candidates, seeing as how I've blogged about them here and there before, except to say that the Hopemonger proved the cynics (including myself) wrong and romped home to victory. I did think that Edwards would perform slightly better than he did, but that's a blog post for another day.
On the Republican side, I'm not terribly surprised by the Huckabee victory. Given that it's Iowa we're talking about, a rural state with conservative sensibilities, was Mormon Romney (no matter how qualified) seriously going to romp home with the nomination? When someone like McCain who didn't even bother campaigning hard in Iowa can get equal third shows how iffy that state is about the candidates they had to choose from. I watched Huckabee on Meet the Press recently, and in spite of the fact that I oppose 90% of his policy positions (if not more), it's hard to dislike the man. He's affable, can crack a joke, speaks well and is non-threatening. He is probably the embodiment of the compassionate conservative Dubya claimed to be but fell far short of. If anyone is going to bring out the evangelical vote, Huckabee is it. Whether his actual policies are friendly enough to the Reaganista crowd to appeal to the Republicans who have silently been disappointed by Bush 43 is another story.
One thing I find funny, and I'm not the first person to comment on this, is the relative unsophistication of American election commentary. Where we have virtuoso psephologists like Antony Green and Malcolm McKerras studying marginal electorates and analysing swings and pendulums, American elections are typically just about this day's poll, or red states vs blue states, simplifications that make for easier digestion rather than any kind of serious analysis. On the other hand, the American system is simplified greatly by first-past-the-post voting, not to mention that voting is not compulsory in the first place!
The other thing that strikes me about American Presidential campaigns is the heavy emphasis on such intangibles as "character", "likeability", and "strength". I doubt America would elect a technocrat like Kevin Rudd to the Presidency, in spite of how "presidential" the most recent campaign seemed to be. Certainly, if Bush 43 is any guide, having the qualifications and intellect to run the most powerful country in the world are not prerequisites. Policies seem to run secondary, and are presented at the broadest brushstroke level without the level of detail and scrutiny we saw in the Australian election. And the differences are usually fairly stark, and fairly constant too. Where Kevin was accused of playing me-too with John Howard, here it's a few fairly simple positions that are prominent for each side:
Democrats: pro-choice, pro-universal healthcare, pro-gay rights, anti-Iraq war.
Republicans: pro-life, anti-government intervention on healthcare, anti-gay, pro-Iraq war, pro-gun.
Notice that I didn't mention anti-gun on the Democrat side of the ledger. Doubtless pretty much all the Democrat candidates actually are pro-gun control, but no one has said anything of significance for fear of putting offside the hick vote.
Another thing that hasn't gotten much of a guernsey here: the environment. Both sides haven't been rushing headlong to ratify Kyoto. No one even speaks of it, even as concern for the environment at the grassroots level here is impressively high. Nationally though, it's being presented as an economic issue, and mainly in the context of oil and energy security. Develop alternative energy sources within the US, whether it's biofuels or wind or solar or whatever else (so the story goes), and fewer American dollars end up in Middle Eastern countries who can both hold the US to ransom through higher oil prices, and state-sponsor terrorism.
I'm getting Satellite TV hooked up on Saturday, so hopefully I can get my political junkie fix soon. In the meantime, I'll simply have to enjoy wading through reams and reams of endless mindless analysis online saying the same old junk about this primary when in reality we've got 49 more states to go and a long long year ahead...
Well I mgiht as well return to one of my favourite topics: politics. And given that the first primary of the election year finally took place today I might as well blog about that.
So it seems that Huckabee and Obama got up today for the Republicans and Democrats, respectively, and by decisive margins. I think I'll reserve for another day my observations of the Democrat candidates, seeing as how I've blogged about them here and there before, except to say that the Hopemonger proved the cynics (including myself) wrong and romped home to victory. I did think that Edwards would perform slightly better than he did, but that's a blog post for another day.
On the Republican side, I'm not terribly surprised by the Huckabee victory. Given that it's Iowa we're talking about, a rural state with conservative sensibilities, was Mormon Romney (no matter how qualified) seriously going to romp home with the nomination? When someone like McCain who didn't even bother campaigning hard in Iowa can get equal third shows how iffy that state is about the candidates they had to choose from. I watched Huckabee on Meet the Press recently, and in spite of the fact that I oppose 90% of his policy positions (if not more), it's hard to dislike the man. He's affable, can crack a joke, speaks well and is non-threatening. He is probably the embodiment of the compassionate conservative Dubya claimed to be but fell far short of. If anyone is going to bring out the evangelical vote, Huckabee is it. Whether his actual policies are friendly enough to the Reaganista crowd to appeal to the Republicans who have silently been disappointed by Bush 43 is another story.
One thing I find funny, and I'm not the first person to comment on this, is the relative unsophistication of American election commentary. Where we have virtuoso psephologists like Antony Green and Malcolm McKerras studying marginal electorates and analysing swings and pendulums, American elections are typically just about this day's poll, or red states vs blue states, simplifications that make for easier digestion rather than any kind of serious analysis. On the other hand, the American system is simplified greatly by first-past-the-post voting, not to mention that voting is not compulsory in the first place!
The other thing that strikes me about American Presidential campaigns is the heavy emphasis on such intangibles as "character", "likeability", and "strength". I doubt America would elect a technocrat like Kevin Rudd to the Presidency, in spite of how "presidential" the most recent campaign seemed to be. Certainly, if Bush 43 is any guide, having the qualifications and intellect to run the most powerful country in the world are not prerequisites. Policies seem to run secondary, and are presented at the broadest brushstroke level without the level of detail and scrutiny we saw in the Australian election. And the differences are usually fairly stark, and fairly constant too. Where Kevin was accused of playing me-too with John Howard, here it's a few fairly simple positions that are prominent for each side:
Democrats: pro-choice, pro-universal healthcare, pro-gay rights, anti-Iraq war.
Republicans: pro-life, anti-government intervention on healthcare, anti-gay, pro-Iraq war, pro-gun.
Notice that I didn't mention anti-gun on the Democrat side of the ledger. Doubtless pretty much all the Democrat candidates actually are pro-gun control, but no one has said anything of significance for fear of putting offside the hick vote.
Another thing that hasn't gotten much of a guernsey here: the environment. Both sides haven't been rushing headlong to ratify Kyoto. No one even speaks of it, even as concern for the environment at the grassroots level here is impressively high. Nationally though, it's being presented as an economic issue, and mainly in the context of oil and energy security. Develop alternative energy sources within the US, whether it's biofuels or wind or solar or whatever else (so the story goes), and fewer American dollars end up in Middle Eastern countries who can both hold the US to ransom through higher oil prices, and state-sponsor terrorism.
I'm getting Satellite TV hooked up on Saturday, so hopefully I can get my political junkie fix soon. In the meantime, I'll simply have to enjoy wading through reams and reams of endless mindless analysis online saying the same old junk about this primary when in reality we've got 49 more states to go and a long long year ahead...
I think I may have just listened to a speech from the next President of the United States.
One nice thing about Microsoft's corporate clout is its ability to attract influential speakers to come speak on campus. Today, the Microsoft Political Action Committee, a bipartisan group that lobbies on Microsoft's behalf on issues relevant to our industry, invited Hillary Clinton to come speak with us. I only got told by a friend this morning when I arrived at work, although I got forewarning of sorts via an e-mail yesterday about "heightened security" in the area around my building (her talk was held in Building 33, where Microsoft receives all of its important guests).
I rocked up just after 9.30am, and the room was 90% full already! When Hillary finally came on to speak, she was greeted with thunderous applause (with a little extra from a small group of Wellesley alums). Then she spoke off-the-cuff (well, at least without notes) for a good 45 minutes on a wide variety of topics. She may have been labelled as a wooden speaker by some, but surely it's in large part because of the inevitable comparisons with her husband. I found her to be engaging and well-versed on many issues. I also couldn't help but compare her performance to those of Howard and Rudd in Sunday's debate. She was more polished, very deftly mixing putting forth her policy positions with some personal anecdotes and a few backhanders at the current administration.
Hillary's critics might accuse her of wanting to be something to everyone; she would respond by saying she wants to govern for everyone, something that she has done in New York state, approaching all voters even those who normally would not vote Democrat, on what she could do to help. Should she win the nomination, it will be interesting if she can turn around some of the swing states this way, and deflect or neutralize the personal attacks that are inevitably going to come her way. Whatever you might think of her or her policies, my lasting impression is that she's a very, very capable candidate and it would not surprise me at all if she becomes the next President of the United States.
The YouChoose debate between the 2008 Democratic Presidential contenders was actually pretty entertaining, even though I only got to watch part of it. Unfortunately it doesn't seem like it will be re-broadcast on YouTube to watch at one's leisure (which I thought would be half the point besides Joe Public uploading their questions). In any case, you can read Salon's entertaining coverage. I like the way Hillary swatted away questions about nuclear power (not that I'm for nuclear energy as such but she played it well), as well as Barack Obama's honest response to the question of whether he as President would be willing to work for minimum wage (a paltry $7.25/hr btw, and even that number will not apply until 2009!).
From seemingly out of nowhere, a guy named Ron Paul is running for the Republican nomination for the Presidency and amazingly is getting attention far beyond what opinion polls suggest he should. To demonstrate this, perhaps someone from my former workplace can put up a chart or something of Ron Paul Internet searches versus other candidates??? (hint hint). Or clickshare out of all clicks to Presidential candidates' websites?
You begin to understand why Ron Paul is causing such a fuss when he does stuff like this. Even though he belongs to a political stripe that differs from mine, I respect him a lot more than any of the other Republican candidates because he is true to the ideals of limited government in all senses of the word, a true Republican rather than a Republican when it's convenient, a spend-happy fundo warmonger when it's not. Accordingly, you also know he has no chance because he is far too unbeholden to vested interests and no one will make lavish campaign donations to someone like that, his ROI just wouldn't make sense.
Bring it on, the Republican side needs some candidates with colour. Btw is it just me who finds it striking that only the Democratic side is offering up a diversity of candidates -- white, black, Hispanic, male, female?
I can't believe it's February already, the year is passing by so quickly it only seems like yesterday I was celebrating Christmas! I keep putting off my trip back to Australia to visit family and friends. Back in July when I first got here to the States, I thought for sure I'd go back in December. By the time I got my finger out and investigated airfares, I discovered that US$2,500 was a bit more than I was prepared to pay! Then I thought perhaps mid-February for Chinese New Year, but the tight schedule for our next software release kind of put paid to that idea... Sure, I'm not so busy that I can't afford a day or two off here and there, but not the two weeks or more I need to really make the trip worthwhile and unrushed (and let's not forget the jetlag recovery time on both ends). So... it looks like maybe sometime in April? May? June? Of course it's a little ironic that the timing coincides with when Seattle finally decides to thaw out!
Speaking of time, the clock is ticking on Bush's presidency (not quickly enough for my liking), which means that the media is obsessed with the Democratic nomination (as I've blogged about previously). The big news (if news is really the appropriate term here) is Senator Joe Biden, who has a big mouth and is the latest politician to put their hand up. I'll get straight to the punchline and tell you that his could be the shortest Presidential campaign ever on the basis of his unfortunate and somewhat patronising choice of words to describe Senator Obama as "bright and clean and a nice-looking guy". Two things: (a) for a guy who said that "words matter", he suffered a serious lapse of judgment especially given that he should have known better having been on the Hill since well before I was born, and (b) it would be equally unfortunate if one lapse in judgment caused America to lose interest in listening to a man who has substantive things to say in foreign policy, an area in which this country has plenty of room for improvement. His mea culpa on The Daily Show may not be enough.
