Why Inspiration Will Make Obama the Strongest Candidate in November - And a President that Can Lead a Progressive Realignment in America
There are only two groups of voters who decide the outcomes of elections and are targets of communication that can be affected by political campaigns. They are "persuadables" and "mobilzables".
In general elections, persuadables are the voters who are switch hitters. They always vote, but they sometimes vote for Democrats and other times for Republicans. They have to be persuaded to vote for our candidate.
Mobilizables don't have to be persuaded to vote Democratic. They would support Democrats if they went to the polls, but often don't vote. They have to be mobilized to come out and vote.
The messages campaigns aim at persuadables are about the qualities of the candidate. The messages that work with mobilizables are not about a candidate -- they are about the voters. They are aimed at overcoming the sense of many potential voters that the act of casting a vote really isn't that important -- to their lives or those of the people they care about. Often we need to overcome the feelings of voters that they don't have much power to control their lives in general.
Very often, candidates are good at delivering one of these two messages but not the other. They are either very appealing to "persuadable", swing voters, or they motivate the Democratic "base" - but they don't do both.
That's where inspiration comes in. Inspiration is the one political message that works with both groups.
By inspiration I mean something very specific. Being inspired is about feeling empowered. When you are inspired by a speech or story or movie it isn't the "facts" or proposals that affect you. Its how experience makes you feel. When you're inspired you feel that you, or the country, or your group can overcome obstacles and do things you previously couldn't do. You feel that you can be more and achieve more than you could before.
Inspiration persuades "swing" voters because the candidate makes them feel good in his presence. He makes them feel more powerful and meaningful.
But inspiration also mobilizes voters because it overcomes the major obstacle to voter's participation -- the feeling of powerlessness.
It's his ability to inspire that allows Barack Obama to appeal simultaneous to swing "persuadable" voters and the vast number of "moblizable" voters who don't vote in [residential elections.
Obama's attraction to swing voters isn't that he promises to "compromise" with the right -- or adopt right wing values. It is that he inspires them with the traditional progressive values:
• That we're all in this together, not all in this alone;
• Unity not division;
• Hope not fear;
• That people are not commodities to be paid what the market will bear and discarded when they aren't needed, but human beings whose happiness and success are the purpose of the economy.
Inspiration comes from appeals to values, not ten point plans.
If Obama is the candidate for president this fall, he will attract Democrats, independents and even some Republicans. But he will also bring out a massive surge of young people, minorities, and many others who have never voted before. His candidacy will transform the presidential electorate.
That's why Obama is without doubt the best candidate to lead a potential progressive realignment of American politics this fall.
But just as important, Obama would be the best president to pass a progressive program of structural change that can democratize the distribution of power in America -- health care, tax, electoral, and trade reform -- new labor laws to allow average people to organize to defend their standards of living -- universal access to higher education. We won't pass this agenda if we rely on the insider game in Washington. Success will require a massive, on going mobilization of people across America. That will require inspiration.
If Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic nomination, she can win the General Election --though it will be harder. She could be a good president.
But Barack Obama could be a transformative figure in American politics, like Roosevelt or Kennedy -- presidents who used the power of inspiration to fundamentally alter American politics.
Economic self interest is a critical -- and often determinative self interest for voters. But it isn't people's only self interest. That's why the poorest counties in Ohio voted for Bush in 2004. That's why the working class Kansan's in What's the Matter with Kansas turn to cultural conservatism. People want meaning in their lives. They want purpose. They want to be part of something bigger than themselves - and to be able to personally play some significant role in that larger human endeavor.
That was the power of John Kennedy's call four decades ago to "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country". That's the power of Barack Obama's candidacy today.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I am 60 years old and my husband 62. We are the beginning of the baby boomers. We remember JFK's inspirational speeches, Bobby Kennedy's ideals and Martin Luther King's determination to change an entire nation because we lived it. Not since 1968 has anyone moved the youth of this country as Obama has.
We thought the younger generation would never get out there to change things. It took Obama to get them to act. Because of that action we intend to vote for Obama. Change comes with a movement not experience in a Washington that just changes faces never ideas. Ideas that protect our citizens and make this country what it once was - GREAT!
Obama 2008
Psst...I don't want to burst your bubble but I need to know from the inspirational speech how we are going to get out of the recession. I want a wonk, not a new age guru.
At 56 I'm not far behind enoughalready. I can't mark the days when I first heard them speak, but I was there and can mark the days when JFK, MLK and RFK died. I heard these men speak in the full context of the times. Their high words were the antidote for low minds and policy followed the prejudice of their high expectations.
The bald assertion that Obama does not offer policy is pure exploitation of the fact that his stump speech does not rely on it.
But can he get the job done? Especially with a Democratic Congress, which hampered JFK's efforts and even hampered Bill Clinton's efforts while they were in the majority.
We don't need inspiration. We need perspiration.
Obama is an outsider? "Been there. Done that" It was called the unproductive presidency of Jimmy Carter. Carter came in with great promises and was laughed off the national stage because no one would work with him. He had to even ditch Nader in the end in order to exert any influence.
The capitol is run by a bunch of gangs. If you think that can be changed by bringing in a new chief, look at NYC, Chicago, and LA. Gangs run those cities. Law enforcement tries to keep order.
Yeah, I love Lennon's "Dreamer," to listen to. But I'll take political leverage when it comes to getting legislation enacted. Hillary is feared because she is a gang leader. But she has a big heart. She will take care of people, because she can get the job done.
This is the reason I have a problem with HRC. We don't need a polarizing bully in the white house we have one right now by the way, we need someone who is able to work with everyone and not demonize them.
Carter had a poor relationship with Congress, even the democrats there. Obama is well-liked and thought of there. Carter was also full of very complicated and drastic ideas. Obamas ideas so far are much more mainstream. I don't agree with your comparison at all.
Hillary has a heart? Hillary doesn't give a crap about you. When told that most americans favored a single payor system for health care, she responded "now tell me something interestin
DITTO!
agreed with midimidi. Bush is to Clinton as Obama is to Reagan. Basically. The Bush method of "screw the consensus, I'm gonna pick this fight at win it" is a terrible approach and I hear a lot of Clinton supporters endorsing it. It's stupid. I don't want the democratic gang with a thug in charge any more than the opposite. Like most people I don't tow either party line and I want leadership that reflects our common values.
Obama is the REAL PHONY. You are all being gamed. He's planting women in the fronT who "pretend" fainting and Obama comes to the rescue. Such the good guy. Except he's done it at least three times in three different cities using the exact same words. It's actually caught on tape. HMM?.....I
Obama will lead the Dems off the cliff.
Personally I think that you are projecting. Besides, I have this gut feeling that you may be a right wing Republican afraid of running against Sen. Obama because of his appeal across party lines. I am quite certain that your comments are all made up. Otherwise you would cite the source(s) of your Claim that Sen Obama is 'planting women in the fronT who "pretend" fainting and Obama comes to the rescue." By the way the only reports I have read of politicians who plant people to ask soft-ball, and self-serving, questions are George W. Bush and Hillary Clinton. I will stand corrected if you can cite reputable sources to support your allegations against Obama.
Obama has WAY to many nuanced positions of critical issues. The Republicans will rip him a new one and when their done with him, hell we might not like what's let.
"God is in the details," as DeVinci said. His appreciation of the importance of nuance is one reason I like him.
That is not what I am hearing from many of my Republican friends who would prefer to run against Hillary Clinton. By the way did you notice that in Virginia Obama received more votes than all the Republicans combined? I think the game is up for the big and bad Republicans that you are so afraid of. They fooled us once in 2000, they fooled us again in 2004, but as George W. said: "Fool me once shame on me, fool me twice--eh-you can't be fooled again." And sure enough the Republicans could not fool the majority of us in the Congressional elections of 2006. For all of you who are so afraid of Karl Rove and the Republicans you might as well throw in your towels and go home. Some of us find inspiration in the biblical story of David and Goliath. And for sports fans, the story of the New England Patriots and the New York Giants. So please stop underestimating the courage and the common sense of the American people.
I am convinced that you're all crazy, just plain old loopy crazy. I have never seen anything like it and hope, lol, never to again. But hey, I hope you get your man. I am going to plaster told you stickers all over my car when that failure hits the fan.
Well let's see.
I've seen Obama inspire the Hillary haters, thinking they have a candidate the other side has to treat with kid gloves so they can let loose all manner of vitriol without fear of reprisal.
I've seen him inspire Black Americans who want to finally have someone who looks like them in the highest office, so they'll forget all that the Clintons actually did for them (I don't blame them, I'd probably do the same).
I've seen him inspire some of the youth to get out and vote because they think he's cute. Or as one young primary voter put it "I like him better than Hillary".
I've seen him inspire the gutless who want to win at any cost so they'll go with a candidate who supposedly has "no baggage" even though he has done nothing to deserve that support (I used to be one of them).
I've seen him inspire Republicans to troll as Dems and spew more hate and division.
But most of all, I've seen him inspire a lot of columnists on this Progressive site, where I thought I would get some reasonably unbiased news, to continually blow smoke up our rear ends.
Hillary, is that you??
Didntdrink
Bravo!
"I've seen him inspire the gutless who want to win at any cost so they'll go with a candidate who supposedly has "no baggage" even though he has done nothing to deserve that support (I used to be one of them)."
You just nailed it!
Obama's refusal (or inability) to define himself makes him a far weaker candidate in the GE. The Republicans will tear him apart-- just like they did to Kerry.
Obama is an empty windbag. His economic policies are absurd. The notion of “Obamacans” is nonsense. No one on the right will vote for this shady guy with his empty promises. He doesn’t unite anything except left wing moveon.org type America hating nutjobs. His Houson campaign office had a Cuban Flag with Che Guerra on it, a man who called for “100 Vietnams” to rise up against America. That’s a wonderful guy to idolize isn’t it?
-Obama’s pastor (who baptized his kids) refers to the U.S. of “whiter” America, and gave a lifetime achievment award to Farrakhan (whites are “jews” and “devils”)- you know, the anti-white hateful racist rhetoric. Why would Obama have an intimate relationship with such a racist? Hmmm..
That business is absurd and a lie. My gawd.
His economic policies are 98% like Hillary's.
If he's not a uniter, then explain the results of super tuesday. You don't have to vote for him, and he may not win, but it's silly to deny the obvious. Just because he didn't unite YOU doesn't negate the fact that he has far-reaching appeal.
Reading your post is so reveling. I suppose Obama is guility by your manufactured association. By the way you say that Obama "doesn't unite anything except left wing moveon.org type America hating nutjobs." I really have news for you. In Virginia Obama received more votes than all the Republicans, right wing and otherwise.
Obama is a graduate of Harvard Law School. He Served Eight years in the Illinois Senate and is credited with the passage of political Ethic reform in Illinois. He was elected to the U.S. Senate by almost 80% of the people of Illinois defeating a right wing Republican. I suppose George Bush and John McCain must be racists too because they are endorsed by Religious leaders in the South who have historically championed racist ideas and practices. Please stop all this nonsense.
Hillary has managed to turn "inspiration" and "hope" and "promise" and "change" into bad words, giving John McCain extra ammo to use on our candidate in the general election, by saying that Obama is just a talker.
"He's all talk and talk is cheap." What a mean, pointless line. Last I heard, all candidates give speeches, only some are better at it than others. When Hillary is on the campaign trail I don't think she's hammering nails and building houses, performing life-saving surgery, chasing down burglars and handcuffing them. She's making "promises" too. The "action" comes later. Her "solutions" won't start until late January 2009-- same as Obama or any other candidate.
It's not that Obama can't handle the negativity-- from Hillary now, or McCain later (though he is getting a head start). It's just the observation about how sad it is that Hillary-- who has to win 60% of the delegates in the rest of the states-- is going to damage Obama's best selling point-- inspiration-- by taking a decidedly cynical, gloomy turn in her rhetoric.
Bravo! The irony is that both Hillary and her husband are giving speeches criticizing Obama for giving speeches. I wonder how else we would find out about Hillary's "solutions" if she didn't make any speeches. I think the problem with the Clintons and their "loyal" supporters is that they expected a coronation. How impudent for this upstart black man from Illinois to wage an energetic and inspiring campaign challenging the anointed Hillary. I think what they forgot along the way is that, George W. Bush not withstanding, the United States the government is still chosen by the people. No one is entitled to inherit the presidency. Please don't blame Obama. Blame people like me who started out supporting Sen. Clinton,(because it appeared that she had no credible rival) but then listened to the message of all the Candidates, including this upstart black sen. from Illinois. However, the more we listned to Sen. Obama the more captivated we were. Not because we are "Crazy," or, a cult as Prof. Krugman alleges, but because his message of "hope instead of fear," unity instead of division, and a progressive agenda for the country connected with us. Finally, a candidate who challenged us to invest in our government, instead of a candidate who repeatedly reminded us of her qualified she was and entitled she was to be president ( I am ready ti be pres. on day one). Me thinks Clinton and her supporters are angry, and envious, of Obama because He is making it difficult for Hillary' scoronation.
Fantastic piece.
That's it exactly. That's why he's going to win, its a very simple forumula. But people miss it as they think cynically about power and the political game. People want more than the game.
Finally a pundit who understands Obama and why he should be President.
It is the Clinton scandals that got Bush elected. They hobbled Gore, which cost the Dems Florida, and sent it all to the Supreme Court. Neither McCain nor Hillary will fix anything in any serious way... one wants to turn the clock back, the other thinks we just need a better, stronger kindergarten teacher handing down the rules and telling us when to take a nap. If Obama gets cheated by the machine, I say a third party with Bloomberg runs, and wins. And good riddance to both of the other two.
Yeah, where the hell were either one of the Clinton's when Gore was running? I think the first time I saw Bill speak publicly was a week before the election.
Put Obama in a "Santa Clause Suit", and I'm sure they'd still vote for him. Because a message is transcendence. If a person has a message, an authentic message, and THEY believe in it, connection becomes automatic. And it's about time this belief in transcendence returned to the foundation of the American political theater - after decades of toxic, "decadent cynicism."
quote: "For, I say, the true nationality of the States, the genuine union, when we come to a mortal crisis is, after all, neither the written law, nor either self interest, or common pecuniary or material objects - but the fervid and tremendous IDEA, melting everything else with resistless heat, and solving all lesser and definite distinctions in vast, indefinite, spiritual, emotional power."
- Walt Whitman, Democractic Vistas (1871)
Please explain what "transcendence" is? And don't forget to tell us how i"transcendence" is going to balance the budget, provide health care, and get us out of Iraq.
Yeah, put him in a Santa suit because if he wins the nomination it will be a great big gift from the media.
Who, by the way, brought us GWB. You know, that non-qualified "uniter" guy with whom they told us we want to have a beer.
This sounds nice, but anyone have any idea how long the "Obamacans" are gonna stick around the "movement" once they see the words "progressive agenda"?
Comparing the "inspiration" of Barack with the competence and strength of Clinton is like drawing a comparison to a wedding day and a marriage. THe wedding day is music, toasts, and gauze, colored carnations, and everyone is happily DRUNK, its a show; people can't live that way everyday its ENTERTAINING. A marriage is long term, its dealing with life challenges with strength and aptitude, its weathering difficult times with skill, its understanding how to maximize the ups and guard against the lows. Barack is guaze, a toast and karioke clinton is the gold anniversary.
Thirty years experience in doing something the wrong way is not necessarily useful experience. JFK was the youngest man to ever hold the office, and he was one of the most popular presidents of the modern era. If all that matters is years in Washington, the lets hear it for Cheney in '08!
I don't want years in the system, I want vision and enthusiasm and the ability to bring people together. That is Obama, not Hillary.
Dot.com boom
Sup-prime housing boom
Obama boom
What could go wrong when the herd moves ahead?
that's why none of his proposals are bold, transformative, or progressive in reality. He's no progressive at all.
Hey Bob -
Great insight and exactly on point with what appears to be going on out here in "fly-over country".
Glad to see you posting here! Long time no see (yes, this is Thatcher from the 1998 Baird campaign).
This is an excellent and important post. Jim Creamer's gotten closer than most to what it is that Obama's selling, and why we're buying.
Leadership, with a capital L, is rare. Barack's showing us how it's done.
-- stan
Funny that you use the word "transformative" when you describe Obama. That was the word Obama used to describe Reagan's presidency when campaigning in Nevada. He also described Republicans as the "party of ideas". It turns out, Obama's speechwriter is Ben Rhodes, brother of Fox News VP David Rhodes. All that sort of indicates that the "agent of change" may be in reality be the agent of the Wall Street and G.O.P. establishments - naturally with some pretty clever packaging and a lot of help from bloggers on both the left and right. For more on the Rove strategy to re-take the White House this year, see the article I've posted at thecityedi
thats just silly, Reagan was transformative in a similar way for conservatives. He altered the political landscape. Obama wasn't saying it was a good thing, transformative power can be used to promote any agenda, but to suggest that Obama has a hidden conservative agenda is very strange and not consistent with anything he's every done or said.
Read the article I mentioned. The evidence is there.
From the "most liberal senator" to Reaganite Manchurian Candidate? Wow... that's one heck of a leap, factcheck2! You're not living up to your name:)
It appears that you're doing the "guilt by association" ploy typically used by political operatives. Well, regardless of party, you can draw all kinds of similarly dubious connections to any candidate (and every politician, for that matter). In fact, the neo-conservatives have already been doing that to McCain.
However, the lines you've connected are not simply conspiracy theory, you'd have to be fairly unstable to believe what you just wrote.
Obama said: "The Republicans WERE the party of ideas for a pretty long chunk of time there over the last 10, 15 years". He also said "The Republican approach has played itself out."
If you want to live in a dreamworld where Republicans didn't control the White House for 26 of the last 38 years, be my guest. It is your prerogative. But if you are not excited about finally having a PROGRESSIVE candidate who can inspire and motivate the majority of our country then I feel very sorry for you.
Your attempt to tar Obama because the brother of one of his employees works for FOX News is truly pathetic. Do you really think Obama is such a strong candidate that THIS is the best use of your time to campaign against him?
Reagan was transformative. That's not partisan, that's obvious.
As far as the Rhodes brothers, it'll be a cold day in hell when I vote the same way that my parents do, so family ties alone do not a conspiracy make. Speech writing is a gig. You do it for who hires you, not necessarily for who you agree with. I don't know Rhodes' political position, but this story so far is entirely speculative and circumstantial.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
