"Change you can Xerox" (boooooo)
I don't really follow the details of politics like I do, oh say, the New England Patriots, but my perception of the Democratic Primary race is that Clinton is a little flustered while Obama seems quietly confident. I'm not informed enough to know which candidate I'd rather have in the Oval office, but from the standpoint of who has a better public image right now, Obama seems like the clear favorite.
Just judging images from tonight's presidential debate that were flashed on the local news, Clinton appears nervous, and Obama is calm and collected. Clinton's line about "change you can Xerox" was pretty lame for something so clearly prerehearsed. It also registered pretty low on the cleverness scale. Doesn't it seem desperate to try and attack Obama's alleged plagiarism when it's clear that this is a non-issue? Plagiarism is one of those things that's really upsetting to journalists and academics, but not to most Americans.
2 Comments:
Clinton is definitely surprised Obama is ahead of her and also has been so strong throughout. Also, there's really nothing she can do about it.
This so-called plagiarism thing is sort of ridiculous. Is it really plagiarism when you're using the same language to discuss issues as one of your friends? Especially when that friend supports you? Doesn't seem the same as say, copying an academic you've never met.
There are several problems around this election. First, the media talks too much about it. Obviously it's a big story but they are so quick to label people as a certain way. I think a lot of this stems from 24 hour news coverage.
Second, isn't it interesting how people want to be attached with a winner? People seem to change their votes based on a perception of momentum more than. Nobody wants to be hitched with a loser.
In terms of policy for Democrats it probably doesn't matter who wins, but in terms of how the general election goes, I think there is a big difference. Either way, I think both Democrats have a challenge ahead in trying to beat an old white man.
Even if he did plagiarize something, would anyone care? Plagiarism has no pizzazz, no pop, no oomph! It's not headline-grabbing stuff, even if it were true.
There's definitely a herd mentality when it comes to elections. Remember back in 2000 when young people were voting for Nader? It's as if people were doing it because it was hip, not because Nader would have been a good president.
The book Freakonomics made a good argument about how the amount of money someone raises isn't the cause of them getting elected--it's the effect of them being elected. The idea is that companies give campaign contributions because they want to be backing the winner, not because their interests align with the candidate (though that helps).
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home