Filed under: Author - ACG,Politics,Religion | Tags: Barack Obama, Election 2008, John McCain, Religious politics
Today at 8-10 EST (to be broadcast on CNN), Rick Warren, author of The Purpose Driven Life and self-described reinventor of evangelical Christianity in America, will get John McCain and Barack Obama together on stage for the first time, at the “Saddleback Presidential Forum on Leadership and Compassion.”
I regret that I may not be able to cover this event live. Instead, I’ll have this pre-debate analysis, and post-debate coverage.
I’m thrilled to have the candidates finally on stage together (though they’ll answer questions separately). I share Progressive Conservative‘s about the relatively light debate schedule in this critical election. While I think Obama’s plan is to deny McCain the limelight, that’s (1) bad for American voters and (2) sends the way wrong message.
Warren’s debate promises to be critical for a number of reasons, and it carries a great potential for Obama to refocus the election.
First, this debate is what some have described as an evangelical “changing of the guard” – out with the old focus on abortion & putting down the gays, in with a multifaceted agenda for charity throughout life. While there’s reason to doubt Warren’s commitment to downplay the culture wars – Warren famously promulgated list of “no compromise” issues in 2004, including abortion and cloning (huh?) – a focus on a full-bodied political philosophy of faith bodes well for the American people, and for Barack Obama, who should feel comfortable in that territory. He can put to rest the accusation that he’s a “secret Muslim” – and maybe force McCain to give up that talking point.
Second, by all accounts, Warren wants this to be a different kind of forum, one that poses difficult questions, like, “what is your view of the Constitution?” Unfortunately, politicians have a miraculous ability to turn tough questions into opportunities to spout platitudes. Just ask Mitt Romney. Mitt, what’s wrong with America?
Gosh, golly! Ugh.
Confronted with tough questions, it’ll be interesting to see which candidate turns to the platitudes – “my view is that the Constitution is just great!” – and which decides not to patronize the American people, and instead give a full answer. I have an idea of who will go each way. Using the Constitutional question as an example, I would expect McCain to give a “judicial activism” spiel, and Obama to speak intelligently and accessibly about the Constitution’s role in social change. The former answer keeps the party line happy, but convinces no-one new; the latter could shock voters into realizing that, in many cases, intelligence comes before experience. By giving Barack Obama a chance to lay out his beliefs in excruciating (but listenable) detail, and respond to questions from a moderator and a target audience that remain suspicious of him, this could be a turning point, especially if McCain’s awkwardness when discussing religion shines through. Especially since Obama’s ideas are relatively underexposed, there’s huge potential. Obama has points to score with the religious right & middle America; McCain just has ground to defend.
Leave a Comment so far
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
[...] salient point about tonight’s Rick Warren Faith Forum thingamabob Submitted to a Candid World: Confronted with tough questions, it’ll be interesting to see which candidate turns to the [...]
Pingback by A salient point about tonight’s Rick Warren Faith Forum thingamabob « break the terror August 16, 2008 @ 4:21 pmAmes… are there any cases where intelligence shouldn’t come before experience?
For that matter, is there anything that intelligence shouldn’t always come before?
Comment by Steve August 16, 2008 @ 5:15 pmNo, it should always come first. Just, people don’t argue it that way. I wish they would.
Comment by Ames August 16, 2008 @ 5:21 pmThat’s not entirely accurate. Long-term, sure, an intelligent candidate will eventually be better than an experienced candidate, but there’s an initial period in which a sufficiently more experienced candidate will make better decisions. What’s important here is that the type of experience that McCain has doesn’t really apply to the presidency (there’s very little reason to think that being a US Senator is good ‘practice’ for being president, and of course fighting in a war has almost nothing to do with leading one).
Also, concerning the particular case of Obama answering a question on the Constitution, it’s worth noting that his answer would almost certainly be mostly determined by his experience in the field of constitutional law. There’s of course a lot of interplay between experience and intelligence, but I would hope that even the least intelligent law student could say something reasonable about the Constitution as an instrument for social change (especially given the prep-time and motivation that Obama has), seeing as how he’s undoubtedly read quite a bit on just that issue.
Comment by Gotchaye August 16, 2008 @ 7:48 pmAs I have said before, there have been plenty of smart Presidents who were lousy leaders (Carter).
On a separate note, having watched both men answer their questions, I am even more ticked than before that Obama punked out on the debates. McCain’s answers came out rapid fire and they demonstrated EXPERIENCE. Obama spent most of his time acting like it was a therapy session and inner reflection was the order of the day.
Comment by Progressive Conservative August 17, 2008 @ 9:48 pmI don’t know, PC – I’ll admit that McCain’s answers made for better sound bites, but I don’t feel like this really told me anything about McCain that I didn’t know already. McCain’s answers were -too- quick; he sounded like I sound in job interviews. He was clearly pandering on a lot of the questions (“at conception”) and he was trying very hard to bring everything back to campaign talking points (“drill here drill now”). It’s strategically sound, I suppose, but it’s not what I would have liked to see and I don’t think it tells us much about McCain as a man or as a potential leader.
Obama seemed to actually be giving some thought to many of his answers (granted, a lot of it was likely just better acting or a professorial style that he’s gotten used to). It seems like you’re criticizing him for this though, now that I reread your comment, you might just be commenting solely on the strategic implications.
Basically, Obama just came across as much more sincere to me. Even his awful fumble of the abortion question seemed to stem from a desire to explain his actual views. McCain’s answers generally sounded more sure and straightforward, but I just never felt like he was doing more than reading off of a script.
Comment by Gotchaye August 17, 2008 @ 11:40 pmI liked McCain’s answers better because he sounds like he has conviction. You probably noticed lots of stories behind all his answers which demonstrated to me that most of his positions have been formed from personal experience.
Obama seems to feel the need to nuance his positions as much as possible and I get the impression his slow, measured answers either come from someone just now forming his opinons or from really good acting.
Comment by Progressive Conservative August 18, 2008 @ 8:17 amPC
Comment by Oneiroi August 18, 2008 @ 9:10 amI would say that’s how he approaches every question and issue, there’s no hidden negative. It is what it is. I mean he was the same way on his race speech, but I wouldn’t say that meant he just thought about it.
I will agree that Obama is very good at sounding like he’s giving an opinion, but then you realize he nuanced his opinion in a way that almost no one can disagree with. It’s like his Berlin speech. He framed everything in that speech in a way that almost no one could disagree with.
Sometimes you have to actually take a position others can dispute.
Comment by Progressive Conservative August 19, 2008 @ 9:55 amAs I said before, I think of McCain as brash and reactionary, which I think leads him to wrong decisions, but I did temper that with saying that Obama is sometimes too meanderingly thoughtful on subjects. This has been evidence since his first book. And from what I’ve read of his professorial work there too (but that’s kinda normal in academics).
I believe that the campaign is forcing him to lessen that a bit though.
I just don’t think because he’s thoughtful or however you want to put it, that means he’s lying/acting or whatever.
Comment by Oneiroi August 19, 2008 @ 10:51 am