pork barrel spending – Organizing for Change

By Melinda Donahey….

OBAMA WINS

The press will argue who won the debate on points. It’s totally irrelevant. (On points, it was a draw.) Speaking as a former state champion debater and as a former professional campaign organizer on the senior staff of two presidential campaigns in the 80s, I know that it just doesn’t matter.

Based on the results of previous debates going all the way back to Kennedy-Nixon, it’s well known that the American public doesn’t score presidential debates on points. (Nixon won on debate points, Kennedy won over the public and won the election.) I think polls tomorrow and in days to come will show that a majority of Americans believe Obama won, and I’ll be surprised if it turns out otherwise. Here’s why:

1. Expectations. Obama’s the challenger, the outsider. Expectations were lower for him, especially on foreign policy, supposedly McCain’s strong suit. He needed to show that he could stand on the stage with McCain, be credible, be knowledgeable, be forceful, be confident. He did all that extremely well. People could feel comfortable with him. The newbie met or exceeded expectations. Kennedy did this in 1960 and won. Reagan did it in 1980 and won. So Obama wins category one.

2. Body language. McCain looked angry, cranky, was disrespectful; he hunched over and never looked directly at Obama. Barack looked directly at McCain repeatedly (showing no fear), stood up straight, never grew flustered or angry, challenged McCain directly but without showing contempt. (In 1960, Nixon lost this category because he looked tired, wan, and hunched over. Kennedy looked rested, relaxed. In 2000, Gore lost this category because he sighed audibly, made faces and shrugged, showing evident distain for Bush. The American people don’t like contempt openly displayed.) Barack wins category two

3. Non-Partisanship. Obama agreed with McCain on some points. (The right will spin this as a win for McCain. It’s inside baseball, important to the right but not to anybody else. If the press buys this, they’ll demonstrate again that they’re idiots.) Obama’s agreement, like his demeanor in general, demonstrated the willingness to rise above partisanship, something Americans have said in poll after poll they want to see.) McCain talked about reaching across the aisle, but most importantly, HE DIDN’T DEMONSTRATE IT. OBAMA DID. Rule No. One: SHOW, DON’T TELL! Obama wins category three.

4. The Future. Obama talked about the future a lot, McCain about the past. People care about what the next president will DO, not what he did or where he went 25 years ago. A significant segment of the public doesn’t remember most of those events, and another significant segment was born too late to remember them. It’s history book stuff. Policy wonks get caught up in it, but the public doesn’t care. Obama understood it’s about the FUTURE. He wins in category four.

5. Style of Speaking. Obama kept his answers short, straight-forward, easily understandable. He never wandered, his asides and one-liners made sense in context. He talked REPEATEDLY about how the economy affects the middle class and how the policies he will pursue will affect the average person. People care about how the policies of the next president will affect THEM.

McCain’s anecdotes were often discursive, he rambled a bit, he didn’t stay as focused on the points he was making. He made a few asides that didn’t quite make sense or sounded odd (and he didn’t provide the context to make them understandable.) References to Miss Congeniality simply reminded people of beauty queen Sarah Palin, who has turned into a liability and a reminder of McCain’s bad judgement. Above all, he didn’t bring it down to the “how will this affect YOU!!” level. Obama wins category five.

6. Change. McCain didn’t talk about change, which polls show people want this year especially. He talked about being a maverick, but polls show that people are not connecting that with change. Obama talked repeatedly about change. Obama wins category six.

(posted with permission from the author)

Little Facts Add Up on Palin

This thread is posted in it’s entirety with the written permission of the author, Melinda Donahey.

Some “Little Facts” About Sarah Palin

By Melinda Donahey

The American public has less than 60 days to judge Sarah Palin’s fitness for high office, dangerous risk-taking indeed when as vice-president she would be next in line to a 72-year-old man who has had bouts with melanoma, whose father and grandfather both died younger than he is now, and who, as a former prisoner-of-war, confronts the likelihood of a shorter-than-average lifespan.

Palin has been kept under extremely tight wraps since her nomination. Reporters can’t ask her questions directly, and she never appears on the campaign trail unless accompanied by John McCain or delivers a speech that isn’t written for her.

Though Palin is a virtual stranger to most Americans, McCain campaign aide Rick Davis is indifferent to the public’s right to know anything unscripted about her policy views, stating “We’re going to do what’s in our best interests to try to win the election.” Apparently, the best interests of the electorate don’t figure into the equation.

Press reports about Palin pour forth, but no one has put all the information together in a coherent whole, as this article attempts to do.

Meanwhile, the McCain campaign complains loudly that Palin has been maligned by the media in a sexist manner, and should be judged by the same standard as male politicians seeking the highest offices in the land. Fair enough.

Let’s see exactly how well she’s actually performed as mayor and governor of Alaska. And since she seeks a position with awesome responsibility in the most diverse, complex, multi-faceted superpower in history, a country with over 300 million citizens–let’s see how the size and complexity of her previous responsibilities compare to the job she seeks.

Don’t let them insult your intelligence