Matthew Continetti examines the fate of Barack Obama’s “change” message. It is getting thrown overboard, or perhaps restyled as a standard class-warfare attack. (“Change the government for the rich” appears to be where they are heading.) Why is it faltering or getting a make-over?
The same reason that The One is faltering and getting a make-over: it turns out that, aside from Obama groupies, not enough voters bought into Obama-mania and “change we can believe in” mantra. Either they didn’t understand it or thought it was an insufficient rationale for a presidential campaign. In part, Obama undid it himself by violating every precept of the New Politics he was offering (e.g. selecting a Washington insider running mate, flip-flopping on a dozen issues, resorting to negative ads). But really, it’s a mark of how narrow the base of his support in the primary was–young voters, urban elites, ultra-liberals–that the message that was so wildly successful with those voters (not to mention the fawning media) is ultimately useless with older swing voters who will decide the election.
At bottom, the “change” message was vapid. We’re going to find someone untouched by any real Washington experience, throw all the lobbyist out, rescue the “good ideas” that die in Washington and heal partisan divisions by virtue of the personal magnetism of the most extreme liberal candidate to run for the presidency since George McGovern? (Who’s a lot less liberal than he was in 1972 and probably than Obama is now.) Yeah, right.
What’s the downside of dumping “change”? The screaming Obamaphiles, those undependable young voters, might not be so thrilled about The Chosen One. If they don’t flock to the polls The One will be at the mercy of older voters who are wary (at best) about his qualifications. Once we dispense with the silly idea that being unqualified for the presidency is a plus, voters–especially the older, independent ones and some former Hillary Clinton fans–will be back to mulling whether Obama is really up for the job. In other words, if we aren’t going to “change” everything in Washington, why not get someone more capable and experienced?
All that said I think Obama is right to refashion his message. Populsim is always a Democratic favorite–Al Gore tried it and nearly won. In the second half of the Democratic primary it was this very message of little-guy populism, healthcare, jobs, tax help and the like which allowed Hillary Clinton to get back into the race and made her the unlikely heroine of blue collar voters. If Obama goes this route it will be one more bitter pill for Clinton fans to swallow: Obama took the nomination from their gal and is now stealing Clinton’s message. Such is the irony of politics.
