Guest post by veritas
“Sen. Obama and I are long-time friends and allies. We often share ideas about politics, policy and language.” – Deval Patrick
Finally, a national newspaper has exposed the uncomfortable similarities between Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick and Senator Barack Obama. Jon Keller, a political analyst for WBZ-TV in Boston, has written a must-read Wall Street Journal column, President Obama: The Preview?
There may not be two politicians on the national stage more alike than Barack Obama and Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick. Both went to Harvard Law, are African-American politicians with mass appeal, and use soaring rhetoric to promise a bold new postpartisan politics.
But the two men differ in one critical area: Mr. Patrick has an executive record. And, unfortunately for the senator from Illinois, it reveals that the Patrick-Obama brand of politics isn’t really new. It is, in fact, something akin to the failed liberalism of old, in a new vessel…
Voters in Massachusetts had hoped Mr. Patrick’s reformist promises and appealing style would mean a makeover for a tired political culture that has long since stopped producing satisfactory results. Instead, they, along with voters in southern New Hampshire and northern Rhode Island (which receive Boston news), now seem wary of the Obama-Patrick connection. These areas turned out heavily for Hillary Clinton in the presidential primaries and helped her carry all three states.
Mr. Obama has self-servingly said of himself and Mr. Patrick, “We are the change we’ve been waiting for.” But what Mr. Patrick has demonstrated in office is that once the initial rush of making history has waned, these fresh faces seem to offer little change beyond the rhetoric.
The good people of Massachusetts have learned the hard way, and it’s the reason we voted overwhelmingly for Hillary Clinton on Super Tuesday. No amount of posturing by Ted Kennedy, John Kerry or Deval Patrick could explain away the bamboozling, as some would call it, of our bluest-of-the-blue liberal electorate by a campaign constructed on a compelling life story and “just words.”
Besides the famous “Just Words” shared speech, Deval Patrick spoke to Massachusetts voters using words like “change”, “hope”, “aspirations”, “community organizing” and, wait for it – “Yes We Can!”
Unfortunately, Keller’s piece had one glaring omission, and it’s a biggie. The crucial bond these two men share is their political guru: David Axelrod – The Kingmaker!
Ben Wallace-Wells wrote a revealing commentary in the New York Times last year, which uncovered Axelrod’s unique method of “persuading” voters. By employing his finely-tuned campaign formula, just about anyone can become President. All you need is a good narrative. Who knew? Axelrod also admits he pilfered some from Karl Rove. That makes sense, but do we really want to go there again?
Axelrod says that the way to cut through all the noise is to see campaigns as an author might, to understand that you need not just ideas but also a credible and authentic character, a distinct politics rooted in personality. (“David breaks them down,” Peter Giangreco, a Chicago direct-mail consultant who often works with Axelrod, told me. “Who is your mother? Who is your father? Why are you doing this?”) This, Axelrod says, is what Karl Rove understood about George W. Bush. “One of the reasons Bush has succeeded in two elections,” Axelrod says, “is that in his own rough-hewn way he has conveyed a sense of this is who I am, warts and all” For Obama, because of Senator Hillary Clinton’s far-greater experience and establishment backing, this is a particularly essential project. “If we run a conventional campaign and look like a conventional candidacy, we lose,” Axelrod says.
Axelrod’s is a less grand, postideological approach, and his campaigns are rooted less in issues than in the particulars of his candidate’s life. For him, running campaigns hitched to personality rather than ideology is a way of reclaiming fleeting authenticity.
Another Boston editorial writer, Joan Vennochi, has been documenting the outcome of the David Axelrod – sorry – Deval Patrick gubernatorial victory last year and has some suggestions for Barack Obama.
Barack Obama is welcome to use Deval Patrick’s words on the campaign trail. But if he makes it to the White House, Obama should definitely borrow someone else’s playbook for his first year in office. In Massachusetts, the rhetoric of hope quickly collided with the reality of governing, with disappointing results for the new governor. That – not silly charges of plagiarism by Hillary Clinton’s campaign – is what makes their shared language worthy of some attention.
Beyond words, the parallels between their quests are obvious. David Axelrod, their mutual consultant, acknowledged it from the start.
“The Deval Patrick campaign in Massachusetts is a model, because of the way the grass roots drove the campaign. People felt ownership in his campaign,” he said in a December 2006 interview, after Patrick won the governor’s race and Obama mulled a presidential run. The hardest part of the outsider’s campaign, explained Axelrod, is “to assure good people that it’s safe to believe again, that you can suspend your cynicism and invest your hopes in a campaign.
David Axelrod may well choose candidates of character, intelligence and good intentions to market. My problem with these men is simply that they are not prepared. The United States cannot afford to hire someone for the most important job on the planet unless they are ready to assume the major responsibilities and tackle the grave problems facing our country, both nationally and around the world.
In other words, “Ready on Day One” is not just a slogan.
Comments are closed.