Setting aside the substance of the most recent debate for a moment -- and both candidates' batting average was high in that regard -- let's think about the subjective subtext or impression that each candidate left. Hillary took visible control of the stage, of the camera, and also of CNN's Wolf Blitzer from the outset, projecting and thrusting herself at the audience as much as simply talking to them. And talk she did -- often giving long, interminable answers, riffing from one wonkish point to the next, as if the debate were a policy circus and she were one of the Flying Walendas. Meanwhile Barack just sat there, dignified, composed, still, as if he were a highly intelligent Buddhist monk. When he answered questions, he answered them -- he got to the point. His body language was quietly coiled. If you were taking in only the words they dispensed, it sounded like he was losing the debate -- until Iraq. But was it really Iraq that turned the tide for him? Or was it the fact that his entire manner was just wearing better as the debate progressed, that his evident comfort in his own skin, and simple directness in fielding questions, made you feel as if he didn't need to throw his stuff at us in order to be who he is, and to be, in a word, fitted for the role of president? Mrs. Clinton was auditioning for our favor, vamping it up. Obama was simply having a conversation with us. And that eventually is what makes voters most comfortable with a candidate. If he wins, this will be a reason why.
posted 02/01/2008 at 01:09:10
posted 02/01/2008 at 01:09:10
No comments:
Post a Comment