The YouTube Effect

Imagine how different history would be if a century and a half ago politicians (Henry Clay, Martin Van Buren, Silas Wright, James K. Polk, Andrew Jackson) had been able to use resources like YouTube to promote their campaigns and smear their opponents.

Indeed it’s likely James K. Polk might never have been nominated, and that Van Buren might have been returned to office in 1944.  This is just one example, of course, but the general idea here is that YouTube seems to enforce the notion that candidates must be accountable for their message.

I pick the Polk example here because his administration is one of the most significant in American history.  Under Polk, the United States made a land grab the likes of which will probably never be seen again.  Under Polk, America finally stretched from the Atlantic to the Pacific.

But what if Van Buren had been the nominee, and not Polk?  Or better yet, what if Henry Clay had used YouTube to defeate Polk in the general election?  America might well be a very different country today.

The YouTube effect is not necessarily a long term positive one either.  It’s plausibly, certainly, that candidates in the mold of W. could use YouTube to their advantage by taking-down the opposition.

In the following example, John McCain gets the shank:

Of course, it cuts both ways in 2008.  In this more conventional spot, McCain plays the Hillary card:

YouTube also allows for greater saturation of campaign ads since they do not charge for airtime.  Accordingly, more innovative ads (and often, more negative ones) which might not otherwise be aired on television, are finding a home on the Internet.

But YouTube is part of an overall paradigm shift in American cultural thinking.  As we become more skeptical of our leaders, we demand greater accountibility (hence the ‘niche’ filled by YouTube).  For example, it is no longer the case that politicians can simply enact foreign policy on-the-fly without significant fall-out in the media.

YouTube is one of the primary tools through which Americans are examing politicians.  But who is watching?  There are a wealth of studies showing that most everyone of voting age owns a cell phone and uses the Internet on a regular basis.  And it is often the latter, where people are getting their information.  But again, who are these people, and how much political power do they have relative to those who do use the Internet, but don’t pay attention to YouTube?

Conventional wisdom suggests that these people are young (age <35) and tend to be left-leaning.  These folks might also be more cynical than others about the political process, as well as the media.

There is still much to be learned about the effect YouTube will have in the future, but I suspect it will grow in significance over the coming decades, or until something replaces it.

The Palin Saga Revisited

Yes, I know, I said I was sick of Palin. Yet, there are a few things I need to get off my chest before I can move on.  For one thing, I’m becoming more and more convinced that she actually seems to have all of the bad qualities of both George Bush and Hillary Clinton.  Examine:

  • She’s not qualified to run anything, but does.
  • She’s a pitbull.
  • She’s close minded—e.g.  tried to ban books from the Alaska library system.

Add to this the litany of stuff we don’t know, and we really do have a dangerous person on our hands. So, let’s hope that the media is willing to continue vetting Mrs. Palin. Let’s hope Mrs. Palin is willing to subject herself to the scrutiny required of all candidates for national office.

Palin fatigue

I did not think it was possible to get sick of someone I know so little about, yet it has happened.  Yes, my friends, it has happened: I am sick of Sarah.

I don’t think it matters how many colleges she attended or how pregnant her daughter is.

This fall I cast my vote for more commitments to energy independence, more emphasis on penalizing corporations for sending jobs overseas and for universal healthcare.

On the matter of the Palin saga

The knock against Jerry Ford was that he played too much football without a helmet.

  • Dan Quayle was not terribly good on his feet
  • Bob Dole was too angry
  • McCain has a temper
  • George W. Bush lacks curiosity
  • Obama is too liberal
  • Biden talks too much

Sarah Palin, on the other hand, appears to be too mortal, too much like us (in a completely non-ideological sense) to lead a nation.  She’s got a daughter who is 17 years old and very pregnant, and (gasp) has described herself as a “hockey mom”.  Add to all this that her resume is a bit thin and you have one of the great media stories of 2008.

Her selection as John McCain’s running mate appears to have been a rather hasty one, and now the fall-out could hand the White House to Barack Obama.  Poor Republicans.

So how much of all this is the medias fault, and how much of the blame can be placed at the feet of the Democrats?

The truth is, unfortunately, that no one knows how someone else is going to lead a nation until the time actually comes.  Sarah Palin, for all her misguided ideological stances, appears to be a capable leader.  Whether or not this last statement is true depends upon time and history.

Thankfully, none of the candidates are George W. Bush.

Sarah Who?

Photobucket

MSNBC is reporting that Sarah Palin will be John McCain’s running mate.

Here’s what we know:

  • 44 Years old
  • Governor of Alaska
  • Former Miss Alaska runner-up
  • First female Governor of Alaska
  • Staunch Conservative

My sense of this selection is that McCain is trying to appeal to women, while appeasing his conservative base and making a few headlines.

This is the greatest risk a presumptive Republican nominee has made since George H.W. Bush picked Dan Quayle.

Mrs. Palin will debate Joe Biden this fall.

How I wish I had grown up in Obama country


From listening to his speech and following his campaign, I gather that Barack Obama might have been a very different leader than, say, Ronald Reagan. He might have led the country in a different direction and might have inspired legions of Americans to a higher calling, if he had been president in the 1980’s. But it was not so, and we still do not have some of the very basic rights that ought to be accorded to all those born in America: free healthcare and free higher education.

It isn’t that Obama is more authentic than McCain or Reagan, Bush or Clinton in general, but that he seems to be authentic where it counts.  We heard pledge tonight to make healthcare affordable to all people, and that he would make America energy independent in 10 years (or two years after his second term expires).  His statements are indeed rosy and inspiring, but like all political rhetoric and all political promises, they are subject to circumstances, and indeed (ironically enough) subject to change.

You won’t find an Obama badge on this site, nor will I formally endorse him, or anyone else for that matter, because I don’t want to imply that you ought to vote a particular way because of how I feel. Rather, you need to make up your own mind and approach the voting booth on your own terms.

John McCain was my pick in 2000, and if he had been elected, the country would have been better off.  Let’s see if he can outdo Mr. Obama next week in Minnesota and give us a reason to support him.  Truth be told, I don’t think he will.  I think it’s Obama’s election to lose, and this is probably not a bad thing.

An administration that will believe in science

In Mark Warner’s keynote address at the Democratic Convention last night, I did a double take at something the speaker said.  It was a simple statement, yet struck me for both its simplicity and (paradoxically enough) for its profundity.  I paraphrase:  In four months time, we will have an administration that believes in science.

In case you missed it, here is Warner’s speech:

The Solution: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton

Recent polls are showing a dead heat in the race for the presidency, and let’s face it 2008 is starting to look and smell an awful lot like 1988.  The difference, fortunately, is a weak Republican nominee and an even weaker economy.  Yet, the slippage of the Democratic party candidate, Barack Obama, can now almost positively be attributed to the loss of support from “Hillary Clinton” voters.

At this rate, Barack Obama will likely lose in November if he does not find a way to appeal to Clinton voters.  So I have a solution: make Hillary Clinton the next secretary of state.  Obama needs to find a way to convince Clinton’s supporters that if they vote for him, he’ll give her the job.  End of story.


The time for Obama to make his case is now

According to today’s New York Times’ editorial staff:

Americans need to hear how [Obama] plans to halt the economy’s frightening downward spiral and help millions who have lost their jobs, homes and hopes while also preparing our children to compete in a globalized world.

In a nutshell, the candidate who can best answer will likely win the election.  Neither candidate has even come close to laying out an agenda for addressing the current financial penury millions of Americans are finding themselves in.

For Obama, he must emphasize a plan to better regulate the practices of those on Wall Street in so far as how money is loaned.  The reason for the current crisis is the failure of both the legislative and executive branches of government to protect consumers from questionable lending practices, and more specifically, regulate how loans are sliced, pooled and then converted from debt securities into front-end investments.

Because there was little meaningful oversight over Wall Street funds, good and bad monies were mixed together and presented as perfectly safe vehicles of investment (comparible to government backed bonds). The blame for the inevitable collapse and distress of hedge funds and banks could be placed at the feet of those who propagated the schemes, but the US congress could have prevented this mess and ought to be compelled to enact stricter regulations.

The forces that caused the current financial mess lobby our elected officials for greater and greater influence each year.

Barack Obama must articulate a plan to not only increase GDP, but also prevent future debacles from occuring.   This week’s convention will be a prime example as to whether or not he’s up to the challenge.

Related:

Bernanke looks for new regulatory approach
http://www.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idUSN2343593420080824

Mr. Obama’s Task
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/25/opinion/25mon1.html


When it comes to tv ads, McCain is Able.

The latest McCain ad pits Hillary Clinton against Barack Obama.  To put it mildly, it is this type of ad that could be a problem for Obama this fall, especially with Clinton supporters looking for a reason to either vote for McCain or (insert protest candidate name here) or not vote at all.  Obama’s response will be pivotal.