Michigan, the ugly

The role that New Hampshire plays in US presidential politics as the primary state geared my impetus for writing this blog. Swept into the state's hands-on action in the run-up to the 2004 election, I was wide-eyed with admiration. This, truly, is the democratic process, I thought. This is the people connecting with their politicians, putting them on the spot, picking holes in policies... This is the politicians, being tested on every level from stamina on the gruelling schedules to quick-thinking in the genuinely open forum conditions of house parties and town hall meetings. New Hampshire has been the first primary state for a very long time and its inhabitants have taken their role almost as a constitutional responsibility on behalf of the rest of their vast country. They are the nation's testing ground.

The old entrepreneurial spirit of America, however, turns out to be incompatible with this concept. The entrepreneurial spirit sees campaign expenses as a potential profit line. Politics be damned. Look at all that money!

Hence, the ugly jostle to steal dates, to push the primary dates forward until the first primary becomes meaningless.

Michigan is the latest culprit, going for January 15. That steals a month from the old schedule and pushes the primary primary and caucus states to yet earlier dates just to keep the status quo. It also forces the candidates to put more resources into Michigan - and that is what the game is all about. It is not that Michigan's 10 million people are in the least bit interested in taking on the political scrutiny game or even that they could. The sort of hands-on scrutiny that takes place in New Hampshire can only happen in the manageable demographics of a 1.3 million-strong New Hampshire, not in a hugely populous state. House parties in Detroit, population 5 million? Whose house is big enough? Intimate political contact is not a mass activity.
Mass political communication is - guess what? Advertising.
Hence, what Michigan seeks to achieve is to harness the campaign dollars into television advertising campaigns in Michigan. Forget human contact, genuine scrutiny of candidates and their policies. Let's have your dollars and whoever has the best advertising agency can win the presidency.
This is the short-sighted and mean-minded campaign now being waged in the USA. "Entrepreneur" is another word for "get rich quick" or "greedy". By definittion, entrepreneurship lacks wisdom, foresight or magnanimity.
These US states playing ugly entrepreneur games with the presidential primary are doing a serious disservice to their country.

Joe Biden, Democrat presidential candidate from the tiny state of Delaware, put it very well:


"Powerful interests are trying to change the Democratic nomination for President into a game of Monopoly, replacing the retail politics of Iowa, Nevada and New Hampshire with a process in which the only credential necessary to be President is to be the wealthiest candidate.
Under the current calendar, voters can regularly meet candidates in their homes, town halls and diners. This provides an almost one on one opportunity to hold candidates accountable for their ideas and records for solving the most pressing issues facing this country. The communities of Iowa, Nevada and New Hampshire provide a diverse array of voters and a level playing field for candidates to compete in, as a lead up to the larger states which will decide who the next Democratic nominee will be for President.

I call upon all of my fellow Democratic candidates to reaffirm their support for the retail role Iowa, Nevada and New Hampshire and publicly ask their supporters, such as Democratic Senate Leader Mark Schauer, and Governor Granholm to oppose any attempts to break the Democratic National Committee’s “calendar window” as Republicans did in Florida on behalf of Mitt Romney.”

Hillary the nutcracker

When first I saw this satirical object, my hackles rose. Hillary, the nut-cracker?
But, then I thought about it. Hillary, the nutcracker, is no bad thing.
The symbolism here is not what the makers intended.

It is about time that the nuts were cracked.

I would never call myself a card-carrying feminist since I despise sexism of any ilk.
However, the Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld patriarchy, the patronising attitudes, the macho hubris...these need cracking, cracked down upon, crunched into the miserable place they will assume in the history books.

Hillary the nutcracker is a fine campaign tool.
I want one.

Hillary's hissy fit

Hillary was angry about the China scandal."I don't want to eat bad food from China or have my children having toys that are going to get them sick," she exploded. You could almost see the steam coming from her ears in the last Democratic debate. And, she was right to be overtly furious and not evasively nodding towards free trade, as were so many of the other presidential candidates. It is not good enough that China is flooding the US and the rest of the world with poisons - not just lead paint on toys but polluted toothpastes and contaminated dogfoods. A proper leader would be making a stand. Hillary is the only politician yet heard with genuine anger in the voice. Barack Obama is just missing the point altogether. "China is not yet our enemy. China is a competitor," he says. Oh, really?


Barack has other things on his mind. He has been back in New Hampshire giving the state lots of attention as the primary comes closer - perhaps closer than we all thought, since with the other states jostling and grabbing at earlier dates, it will probably be in December. Oh yes, it is later than we think.


Barack continues to look to the youth vote, the fun vote. In the cut and thrust of serious politics and with the country at war, he told his Nashua crowd on Monday: "We have the most fun, the best music." He will have the New Hampshire motto "Live Free or Die" tattooed on his back, he laughs, acknowledging that New Hampshire is the nation's "due diligence" test on presidential primary candidates.
He definitely has the youngest supporter base and, as they are as enthusiastic as they are young. They remind me of the Deaniacs of the Howard Dean campaign of 2004. And, I'm still not sure what is beneath the BO surface. I'd like to hear more substance and less Hillary bashing from him.

Making a blonde joke of politics

Now it is the Romney Girls - ditsy blonde triplets who seem to have been employed to be the YouTube campaign answer to the Obama girl. They are so vapid that they make Obama girl look like Einstein.

Why do they like Romney?
"He's so handsome!"
Would they vote for him?
Giggle. "Why not!"

The lowest common denominator scrapes the bottom of the barrel. The Britney/Paris syndrome of mindless, underdressed publicity-hungry bimbos creeps insidiously into politics - mocking the crucial issues behind the political process, not to mention the concept of the educated vote. I get the feeling that fundamentalist Christians and moronic sex kittens now are holding political hands. That, at least, amuses me, albeit in a sour way.

Campaigns are moving steadily onto YouTube and MySpace - desperately seeking a popularist image. The illusion lies in the demographic they find - lots of young people who can't vote at all and certainly are not going to listen to serious policy when they can have titillating footage of scantily-dressed airheads.

Ironically, the dividend comes from the old media mainstream - the television news and the print media - wherein newsrooms now monitor the Internet as a source of prime time news thus efficiently on-feeding the online ga-ga gimmickry to the conventional news consumer.

One can only hope that the news consumer sees this cheapening sexy nonsense for what it is.

Waitress puts the Mitt up

How out of touch is Mitt Romney?
Absurdly!
First we hear the story, reported with gawking shock by the Utah media, of the waitress who dared to challenge the Mormon presidential candidate on the issue of health care. A mere waitress in a mere diner! Not only did she challenge the millionaire Republican but also she answered back and interrupted!
A number of people have forwarded reports of this encounter to me with varied comments, mainly astonishment at the Red Arrow diner waitress's daring. Of course, these were not New Hampshire people. The whole point is that this was a waitress in a New Hampshire diner and she had every right and then some to question this or any other presidential candidate. New Hampshire is the barometer state, the first primary and its voters take their role very seriously. Yes, waitresses and all! The other states pushing and shoving for a run at being first primary state are pissing into the wind if they think they can replicate the educated political people power of New Hampshire. Not that they would care, since their quest is simply to "have" or be "first" - not to improve the political process.
Indeed, opportunities for the likes of the New Hampshire waitress to speak up would go right down the sycophantic drain.

It is quite possible, although not probable, that the daring New Hampshire waitress was a Republican. In New Hampshire, party loyalty is no impediment to asking the hard questions and putting candidates on the spot. Quite the opposite, really. I saw Rudy Giuliani's besuited brown-nosers asking quite confronting questions. I have most certainly seen the Hillary supporters putting her on the spot on issues.
The New Hampshire voters test the candidates through and through.

Romney seemed askance at the waitress's impertinence and his response seemed blustering. He did not seem to realise that he was in New Hampshire and not Massachusetts, referring to his health care reforms as Governor of Massachusetts. These had no application in NH, of course.
One might forgive the campaigning candidates for getting a bit confused as to which state they are in as they whirl around the country - unless it is NH.
Mitt is out of touch.

Yet more so in the things he has been telling the Granite Staters.

"I think the presidency ought to be held at a higher level than having to answer questions from a snowman," he told the Union Leader when asked if he will take part in a YouTube/CNN Republican debate in September.

Glib answer, Mitt. But, oh, so wrong.
The YouTube snowman is not simply genuine incarnation of today's voter, he represents a vast and powerful generation. You are just out of touch with the people, Mitt Romney. And you sound embarrassingly arrogant, to boot.

The millionaire Mormon also acknowledged that he had flown F-16s and shot Uzis and an AK 47s.
"They're fun, but I don't think anyone is suggesting that these kinds of weapons are going to be in the public domain," he said. Huh? Eh? Where is this man coming from?

Frighteningly, he is the Republican front-runner and it is where he is going that we have to worry about.



(pic - with thanks to Flickr MittRomney photopool)

Political strategists in the mix

Sometimes one wonders just who is the real candidate.
I have no doubts about Hillary Clinton. She is the old hand. This is not her first time at the rodeo, so to speak. She has now spent decades in among the strategists, handlers, staffers and keen-bean volunteers. She has observed them from varied perspectives and I am pretty damned sure she is a step ahead of them and well aware of their assorted ambitions and motives.
Political strategists are both ally and encumbrance in the electoral process. One sees candidates fall into desperate holes thanks to the misguided directions of their strategists and, oh my, haven't we been seeing some firing, drop-outs and swerves of allegiance among the staffers as the primary plays out!
Hillary's association with the Mandy Grunwalds of this world go far back to a point of mutual understanding - or so I choose to think, having done the archival Hillary reading.
I see Mandy still there, a strong shadow in the scheme of things. Indeed, perhaps a stressed shadow, since last spotted on the campaign trail, she seemed to have put on a few pounds. Fast foods on rushed schedules, comfort foods in late night hotel rooms..?
I had an interesting insight into some of the localised campaign strategising for Hillary and, while charmed by the quality of some of the dedicated Democratic support, I found myself a little underwhelmed by the concepts of strategy. Well, put it this way, I've been to a few rodeos in my time, too, and there is not a lot I have not run into before. Oddly, there was no encouragement for us to put forth ideas. Strategic mistake. But it matters not a jot in this context, since all Hillary really needs to win votes is to be heard. Hardened cynics swing into her camp the moment they have actually seen and heard her on the stump! I've watched it happening!

Barack Obama, on the other hand, is surging towards a huge tumble as he follows the leads of his strategists who would seem to be urging him to "show some balls".
So he is uttering warmongering words - threatening Pakistan, for heaven's sake.
"The war we need to win" he touts - the chase for Osama bin Laden and al Quaeda. His latest campaign push is based on this strategy - and one can only assume it has been directed by strategists who seek to lure votes from the Right.

"Political masterminds have transformed the candidate from a political visionary into an electoral product like every other presidential aspirant", writes Chicago Times op ed columnist Salim Muwakkil.

Mukakkil has known Obama since the early 90s and offers dismal observations on the path that his campaign has been taking. He looks at the strategists. I look at the strategists. These people have their own agendas. They are potentially dangerous.

Indeed, they are a study in themselves - as are so many of the young staffers, each so very anxious to claim a piece of the action, the ingenuous quest for self-aggrandizement posing all manner of subtle problems for the smooth forward movement of the message.

With devotion and enthusiasm comes paranoia and territorial imperative.

The successful candidate will prevail, not because of their staff, but despite them.