Obama’s “Coolness” Key to His Success?
When John McCain suspended his candidacy last September to respond to the financial crisis, my gut feeling was that it was foolhardy. Later, as I read a few blogs, I saw the rationale behind it so that by the time I weighed in, I had “mixed feelings.” At the end of the day, I thought McCain’s bold action showed his leadership qualities, a man wanting to be in arena, fighting for his fellow Americans, the country he loves.
He did succeed in getting negotiators to include proposals from House Republicans, making the final package more palatable to conservatives. But, this demonstration of leadership hurt him politically, perhaps dealing a fatal blow to his campaign.
Commenting last month on the campaign suspension in the context of McCain’s reaction to the financial, Peter Wehner wrote:
Senator McCain, desperate to do something to change the trajectory of the race, ended up acting in ways that deepened the public’s doubts about him. And Senator Obama, while contributing absolutely nothing to the policy debate and constantly invoking Warren Buffett’s support, looked smooth and unflappable in the process.
In reflecting on McCain’s actions–and Obama’s–it seems the Republican wanted to govern, the Democrat to campaign. And that did not play out as I had thought it would. The American people did not recognize McCain’s commitment to action. They saw instead Obama’s appearance of leadership.
Michael Barone offers perhaps the best summary of Obama’s success since then:
Yet the narrow lead that McCain had after the conventions vanished (if the tracking polls can be trusted) precisely on September 18, the day that Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke observed a coagulation of credit that threatened to bring down the economy and, in response, advanced the 1.0 version of their financial bailout/rescue package.
In the days that followed, voters seemed to be unnerved by McCain’s impulsiveness and reassured by Obama’s calmness. A majority reverted to the default mode of those long-ago days before the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary: In bad times, throw the candidate of the in party out and put the candidate of the out party in.
Yet, Obama’s calmness masked his own indecision. He didn’t know what to do and deferred to Democrats in Congress. Obama benefited by being cool and by heading the ticket of the party out of power.
McCain suffered by appearing impulsive and by leading the the ticket of the party in power. As a result, Bruce Kesler believes, the Republican nominee “earned none of the points he should have for trying to tackle the credit-economic meltdown, even by comparison to Obama’s passivity.“
Obama may have appeared cool, but he did nothing. He is a master of appearances. And that’s what his potential victory tomorrow troubles me. Appearing calm in a crisis is one thing, a requisite, to be sure, for a leader. But, leaders have to do something. And in the most recent crisis, Obama deferred to others.
A president can’t do that. He has to act. Lacking experience in positions of executive authority, Obama has not provided us any clues how he would respond to a crisis.
11 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Ironic: one of the slams on Bush was his indecision ( staying seated at the school when he was told about planes flying into the WTC; not responding to katrina fast enough to suit CNN). I guess there are different rules operating here.
Comment by dan — November 3, 2008 @ 9:06 pm - November 3, 2008
Yup. As I’ve written about on my blog, it’s going to be much harder for Senator Government to vote Present on international crisis when he is President. He’ll probably defer to people with stronger views, like Ayers or Pelosi or Wright. Obama’s one talent is getting elected to office- once he is in there, there is going to be a lot of buyers remorse.
Comment by A Conservative Teacher — November 3, 2008 @ 9:22 pm - November 3, 2008
I believe you hit on the one thing that may have lost McCain the election. He cared to act and do something and get into the thick of the action to find a bipartisan solution. Personally, I think he should have said the heart of the crisis is the mortgage loan crisis and we need to have the Lenders get together with borrowers and fix it (as it turns out JPMorgan Chase is doing that) and it won’t cost the taxpayers a dime. It might have worked and said as to the banks if they have to write off the losses, they won’t be penalized and if for those homeowners that still might need relief, then FHA will come along and we will extend the length of loans to say 40, 50 and if need be 60 year loans at a reasonable interest rate and the government gets a piece of the sale or when the loan is paid off in a refinance or pay off of the loan.
Nobama appeared cool by doing nothing and the fact of the matter is he profited by it and has throughout his career by doing nothing. Indeed, it has been written that Nobama decided to run this time around because his advisors told him he best run now before he has a record ala John Kerry and then get beaten up by it.
John McCain stood up and did the right thing and tried to do the right thing…Nobama did the political thing and from that point on was able to beat McCain over the head with the economy.
sad but an excellent blog post. Now, what will the Marxist in Chief do when he is no longer campaigning and has to actually govern….which he gets very bored about doing. Interesting that the same inexperience/he gets bored argument that Democrats beat up Bush with they view as the joyous virtues of the Messiah/Chosen One.
All I can say, is Heaven help us and may the Good Lord save us from the Marxist in Chief so we don’t suffer as we did during the Carter years..my guess is those years will look like Heaven after The Marxist in Chief gets done with destroying the economy and he will do it quicker then Jimmy Carter ever did.
Comment by Rocket — November 3, 2008 @ 9:27 pm - November 3, 2008
I guess we’re all used to those “different rules”!
Great comments, GPW! In some ways, I think those supporting Obama are voting for a king not a president. The election has felt more like a coronation.
And I’m reminded of the Old Testament book (Samuel 8,) where the Israelites demand a King, so they can be like everyone else. Interesting. God’s comment back to the people is likewise interesting. After telling Samuel that the people are rejecting God, not Samuel, God gives Samuel the following message: Samuel 8:11-18 “this is what the king who will reign over you will do: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots. Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. He will take the best of your fields and vineyard and olive groves and give them to his attendants. He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants. Your menservants and maidservants and the best of your cattle and donkeys he will take for his own use. He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves. When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, and the Lord will not answer you in that day.”
Here’s a 2000+ year old account of people craving a dictator, despite the warnings that God gives them. Lots of interesting stuff in the Bible.
Did some doorbelling today for McCain-Rossi. I see no McCain signs in anyone’s yard, and almost no bumperstickers. Most of us in WA would be afraid our cars would be trashed, probably. As usual for this area (going door to door for any purpose), about half of the homes, despite there being signs of movement inside, produced no one at the door. The voters I did meet passed on the sentiment that they voted but didn’t expect their vote to matter. We shall see. I remain cautiously hopeful, at least with respect to our gubernatorial race.
Comment by Vivian — November 3, 2008 @ 9:31 pm - November 3, 2008
Dan, I have almost forgotten about the stupid outrage over Bush continuing to read the book “My Pet Goat”. Thanks for the reminding me.
Comment by Swampfox — November 3, 2008 @ 10:10 pm - November 3, 2008
The American people did not recognize McCain’s commitment to action. They saw instead Obama’s appearance of leadership.
I suppose because the Comrade Obama Glavlit told the people that his appearance was better. The way I saw it, both senators should have gone to Washington and carried out the duties of the job they have already.
Comrade Obama SHOULD have been finished when he said “Call me if you need me”. WT everlovin’ F??? We’re told that that’s leadership. It’s so back assward.
I’ve lost faith that anybody has any idea what leadership really is. Then again, these are the same folks who bastardized the word “patriotic” and continue to bastardize history and reality. Problem is, too many people listen to it and accept it as truth.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — November 4, 2008 @ 12:34 am - November 4, 2008
“A president can’t do that. He has to act. Lacking experience in positions of executive authority, Obama has not provided us any clues how he would respond to a crisis.”
What did Bush do?
Comment by jimmy — November 4, 2008 @ 4:42 am - November 4, 2008
Detroit has embraced Obamunism for the last 40 years, so it is fair to ask: Why isn’t Detroit a Paradise?.
Comment by V the K — November 4, 2008 @ 7:40 am - November 4, 2008
Come on, the campaign “suspension” was a political stunt. The public saw through it. McCain announced early in the week that he would suspend his campaign on Friday. But all through the week, McCain lieutenants continued their interviews, McCain did his, etc.
The result of McCain’s supposed work was that not enough Republicans voted for the bailout/rescue. This embarrassed McCain.
In contrast, Obama was seen as a multi-tasker. He campaigned and worked behind the scenes.
You can try to revise history but it doesn’t work.
Comment by blake — November 4, 2008 @ 7:50 am - November 4, 2008
Sorry, blake, I’m not rewriting history. I’m calling it as i see it.
And blake, go check the record. Prior to McCain’s return to DC, the House Republicans had been shut out. Afterwards, their proposals were heard.
Obama? Multi-tasker, hardly? Worked behind the scenes? Did you hear what Clinton had to say? Obama didn’t have a clue what he was doing.
Comment by GayPatriotWest — November 4, 2008 @ 10:17 am - November 4, 2008
[...] Continued here. [...]
Pingback by Obama’s “Coolness†Key to His Success? « Gay Reading — December 11, 2008 @ 12:24 am - December 11, 2008