The Rational Psychic

I watched the 60 Minutes interviews of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. I think that these interviews were not incredibly revealing in terms of content (no surprise) but showed a lot of the difference between their rhetoric and personalities. To give Senator Clinton her due, I would never want Katie Couric interviewing me for a story about my run for the presidency. Questions regarding a possible Obama victory, such as, “Even in your deepest, darkest moments, when you’re exhausted, you don’t think, ‘I’m so tired, I’m going through this, I’m spending so much money, I’m so tired, and this could be all for naught,’ what if that happens?…” I’m thinking, Is Katie Couric doing an interview for her high school newspaper? Is Senator Clinton seeking votes for Homecoming Queen? And speaking of high school, Couric brings up the fact that Clinton was had gained the nickname “Frigidaire” during high school. With interviewers like Couric, who needs Republicans?

Still, Hillary later had to attack enthusiasm in order to make a case for herself. We all know this has got to be part of her repertoire in order to make Senator Obama evaporate, but it’s ugly to watch. Essentially she’s saying Obama needs to clear his plate from the adult table and sit with the rest of the kids. In response to a question about the “thousands” showing up at Obama and whether or not it translates into real votes or momentum for Obama Clinton discounts makes an argument for false consciousness. “I don’t see that,” Clinton states, and proceeds to tell us all that her experience “trumps the…y’know…the excitement factor.”

I think I’ll vomit if I hear Clinton utter that line about being ready on “Day One” again. I’m not ready for her level of cynicism to take over again. I think that independents would see a Clinton candidacy and victory simply trading one guise of the devil for another.

Obama’s interview with Steve Kroft revealed little, I felt. However, if you look and listen a little closer, you find out some of the best things about Obama. For example, when it’s pointed out that he hasn’t really run anything other than the Harvard Law Review, he says that he’s running his campaign, which has gone from 30 to 700 paid staffers and hundreds of thousands of volunteers in just a year. He makes the point that sometimes length of time in power doesn’t equate to effectiveness. While a lot of companies have been around for longer than Google, he argues, Google’s performing–I guess that’s a quality over quantity argument.

In the interview, Obama answers Clinton’s statement that Obama is untested against Republican attacks while she has been “vetted.” Obama said “going up against the Clinton machine is no cakewalk. They’re pretty serious about winning as well.” When asked about how he’s holding up under the strain of the campaign, Obama is understated: “It turns out that even under this kind of stress I’ve got a pretty even temperament. I don’t get too high, I don’t get too low.”

His responses in this interview and others always seem measured and appropriate to the situation. We haven’t been treated to any Howard Dean-like moments for the press to skewer him on. I like Obama’s ability to be cool under pressure and his distaste for dirty tactics.

If the experience question is a factor for you in discounting Obama as a contender, I’d like to suggest a biography of Lincoln to you. It’s called A Team of Rivals by Doris Kearns Goodwin and it shows that sometimes conventional wisdom is wrong and the best man for the job has experience in understanding other people and himself, not in the columns of legislative and administrative experience. I don’t think that Obama and Lincoln are the same man but I do think that Obama is a rare person in American politics at this time and would go into the White House with more experience than Lincoln.

^ # ^ # ^ # ^ # ^ # ^ # ^ # ^ # ^ # ^ # ^ # ^ #

This excerpt is from a Reuters wire story: Clinton did not spell out why Solis Doyle was being replaced, and a Clinton spokesman said the move did not reflect any change in the candidate’s overall strategy.

But Larry Sabato, a political science professor at the University of Virginia, said the shake-up “can’t be a good sign.”

He said that replacement of Solis Doyle along with Clinton’s acknowledgment last week that she had made a personal loan to her campaign of $5 million were indications the candidate and her aides are concerned about the direction of the campaign.

“It indicates that they understand that things have not gone as well as they had hoped because if they had, the campaign would’ve been wrapped up by February 5,” Sabato said.

Obama’s landslide victory in South Carolina seemed to be a turning point in the race.

Sabato said that while Clinton may be in a bit of trouble, “It’s not over,” he said, adding that if she does well in Ohio, Texas and Pennsylvania, she could win the nomination.