Recently President Obama has been expressing his displeasure with Democrats. Not Democrats on Capitol Hill but registered Democrat voters. At a number of speaking engagements and in interviews President Obama has been trying to energize youth voters who came out to support him in the general election of 2008.
"It is inexcusable for any Democrat or progressive right now to stand on the sidelines," the president declared in a Rolling Stone magazine interview. He said that supposed supporters who are "sitting on their hands complaining" are irresponsible because the consequences of Republican congressional victories could be dashed Democratic plans.”
Another problem with this tactic is that Obama is appearing to put partisanship over policy. Rather than profile what issues the Democrats are supporting, and what policies risk being overturned if the GOP succeeds in taking seats away from Democrats in the House and Senate, he is merely asking voters to blindly vote based on the image of him, the President, as the leader of his party. And at the moment, this is not an image many people are looking to vote for.
Although this new approach could be considered Jacksonian in the sense that “Through direct appeals to the people, Jackson drew a connection with the common man” (Waterman, 24), Obama is going about this is a way which I feel will prove ineffective.
With scare approval ratings, the rapidly approaching midterm elections, and an ever lengthening presidential campaign season, it is pretty clear to see where Obama’s head is at. However, his current strategy of “strongly speaking” with democrats and urging them to not be lazy and vote is beyond interesting as a tactic.
ReplyDeleteObama during the 2008 political campaign was beyond successful at rallies and gaining public support. He was able to bring crowds to campaign rallies unlike any previous candidate before. People came out in droves to hear Obama speak and he reached a sort of rock star status.
Now, instead of using that awe inspiring gift he was graced with he has shifted his tactic to almost shaming the democrats into voting. Now with his approval ratings where they currently stand, he might not be able to draw the crowds like before. However, speaking from a condescending fatherly political pulpit does not seem like the solution. First, people do not tend to listen or respond well to criticism especially from the United Stated Government. Secondly, this is not the Obama the country voted for or fell in love with. He was not critical and cynical but rather optimistic and “full of hope and change.”
Republicans of course have been criticizing this strategy. However, even fellow democrats are noticing Obama’s disconnect with the American people. Former Vice President Walter Mondale in a current article blamed Obama’s use of teleprompters for his disconnect with his constituents. In the article he stated, “"I've seen places where he's done it. The Milwaukee speech, I thought was terrific. I think some of these backyard events are terrific. But I think he -- he's very bright -- as a matter of fact, brilliant. And I think he tends to -- and he uses these idiot boards to read speeches on television and I think he loses the connection that he needs emotionally with American voters." (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Mondale-Obamas-teleprompters-are-idiot-boards-keep-him-from-connecting-with-audiences-104306374.html)
Whether Mondale is right or not, Obama is clearly not using the Waterman suggestions outlined in chapter 5 in regards to speechmaking. Criticizing the American public, especially people who are more likely to be in your corner, definitely does not promote or help to improve his image. It will be interesting to see how this strategy will affect not only public opinion of Obama, but more importantly the rapidly approaching midterm elections.
I have a hard time seeing how this aggressive and almost message threatening message that he is sending to Democratic voters of all ages...not just the youth, can work in his favor. I feel as though Obama is taking on this role due to his own sort of impatience and his heightened sense of fear for the upcoming election.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the previous post that he was EXTREMELY successful in his 08' campaign at rallying large crowds from all corners of society. Yes he did win the young vote and that did play a major part in his getting elected, however I think he really needs to hone in on the middle class citizen. Similar to the video we watched a few classes ago with the african american woman who is sick and tired of standing by him when he has so frequently let her down. The amount of people that feel like her really need to gain trust once again with not only him but with his administration as a whole. He really needs to re-inspire people on the idea of change seeing as that was the main forum through which he connected with the people. Instead of taking an aggressive approach and telling democrats not to "stand on the sideline" he needs to motivate once again and that it has only been two years and to stay patient although it is difficult to in these times.
Waterman writes in Chapter 5 about how the forum of the speech really determines the sort of outcome or response it will get. If its a national speech, one like the state of the union address then it will get more attention and likely more substantive information to the public. However minor speeches like the ones Obama has been giving recently gives "less potential for substantive policy information to reach a broader audience."
So not only is President Obama using the wrong forums to reach the public, in my opinion, but he is doing so in a way that almost serves as a double negative due to his aggressive and threatening tone.
In chapter 5, Waterman talks about “style versus substance” in public speaking. Waterman breaks types of speeches into three categories: major speeches, news conferences and minor speeches. He defines minor speeches as ones “delivered in front of specialized audiences, and there is thus less potential for substance policy information to reach a broader audience.” I think Obama’s recent PR difficulties are a testament to how the change in media has influenced the President’s image. Even only 10 years ago (when Waterman’s book was published) minor speaking engagements were just that - minor. But today, there is constant news coverage, people using personal technology to record speeches, video clips going viral online and political pundits analyzing every speech. Politicians used to be able to tailor their speeches according to their audience at minor speeches. In theory, when Obama is speaking at a campaign event for a Democratic candidate, he is addressing the Democratic base. The people that would be attending these events already know the party’s platform and agenda, therefore such events are more about stimulating the base for support. However, minor speeches have recently taken more of the role of news conferences in the sense that they provide information to the public as a whole. With that being said, politicians can now longer approach these minor speaking engagement as they have in the past. They are no longer just addressing a specialized audience like the party base, but also the general public, which includes independents and undecided voters. Obama’s recent rhetoric is definitely focused on mobilized (or calling out) the base, but in turn, his speeches haven’t appealed to the general public.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that yelling at the younger side of the Democratic Party will not work in getting them excited to head to vote, but rather further discourage them from doing so. I think that his strategy is connected to what Waterman called as the "reduction of substance" of speeches and how they are now the growth of the influence of Television and the division between speeches and policy making. With television ads becoming more important in elections it is sad to realize that negative attacks resonate more with voters than commercials about actual policy. This in turn might be why President Obama has resorted to attacking the Republican Party without talking about their policy. (However, one can argue that there isn't a Republican Policy at all and therefore can't be attacked) I also find it interesting that most of his speeches that we have seen in class and on the news are almost always the same. So he is speaking a lot but he isn't really saying anything new. Now that Presidents are speaking more often they are laying the ground levels for the huge expectation gap they always inherit upon taking the Oath of Office. Yet, what I don't think they realize is that the more they talk about their own policy or non-policy, they are setting up for the American people to expect those things to happen simply because the candidate has said it will so many times. To get back on the topic of the blog post, I also agree that not only will Obama's recent tactic not necessarily get him the outcome he wishes but it might also start to alienate a part of the vote that he received back in 2008.
ReplyDelete