"....or whether she wants to try and keep coasting on vibes alone. The week we’ve had so far suggests she would be happy to do the latter—and, depressingly, that a ton of voters won’t care if she does."
It may be depressing, but it's a simple fact: American voters, by and large, do not decide to vote on the basis of policy minutiae. Late-breaking news: EVERY campaign runs on vibes. Donald Trump's campaigns certainly weren't full of policy details: every nebulous plan he mentioned was going to be "released in two weeks." His vibe was rage and resentment, and that's all he needed to squeak through in the Electoral College. Barack Obama didn't get elected twice because of his detailed policy proposals, and neither did Bill Clinton. The candidate who inundated journalists with the pickiest policy white papers in recent memory was Hillary Clinton, and all the press harped on was "her emails." So let's not agonize too much over Kamala's sketchy proposals. Voters got all the policy info they needed every time someone at the DNC said, "We're going to" or "Kamala's going to" (fill in the blank). And that's all the policy detail we're going to get -- and all we need -- in the campaign speeches and commercials to come. That's the way American elections work. Maybe it's depressing, but it's the truth.
The minute the presidential debates started being televised (1960, Kennedy v. Nixon), presidential campaigns became vibes-based. We've had 60 years of vibes-based campaigns by this point. It shouldn't be news anymore.
Good point! I'm so old that I can remember listening to the Kennedy v. Nixon debate on the radio. As a very young foreign policy wonk, I came away thinking that Nixon had definitely won the day. I was the only student in my Catholic grammar school to vote for Nixon in our classmate straw poll. But never fear: I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now...
You know, give it a minute. Yes, her policy info is light, but she’s been running for a month. Yes, no one is talking about Gaza, but there are not a few rumbles about a cease fire on the near horizon, which often means the best choice is radio silence. Besides, she has two sucky choices here: “I support Biden on this,” which is a sticky party line, or “I think he’s been making bad decisions,” which could cost Biden/Israel fan voters, and she needs every one of those she can get. I like that she’s smart. I like that as a prosecutor she can be tough. Is she perfect? No, but she’s looking better every day. Any time we vote a new person as President, we’re getting a pig in a poke. This year is no different. But we know the crazy they’re selling on the other side. Know him too well. I’m more than ready to take a chance on people who promise decency.
On the jobs front, you’re also way off base. Biden produced about 20 million new jobs in the past 3 1/2 years. In fact, the dems have way outperformed the GOP in job creation, as Clinton pointed out yesterday. Fact checked here. https://www.rawstory.com/bill-clinton-dnc-speech/
A former Trump press secretary got to speak on stage at the convention. I'm not sure what clearer signal anyone could ask for that this is a pure "vibes" candidacy. Capital saw people how dissatisfied people were with a Biden vs. Trump race and switched to Harris hoping the "good vibes" would wipe away any pesky demands for things to materially change.
"....or whether she wants to try and keep coasting on vibes alone. The week we’ve had so far suggests she would be happy to do the latter—and, depressingly, that a ton of voters won’t care if she does."
It may be depressing, but it's a simple fact: American voters, by and large, do not decide to vote on the basis of policy minutiae. Late-breaking news: EVERY campaign runs on vibes. Donald Trump's campaigns certainly weren't full of policy details: every nebulous plan he mentioned was going to be "released in two weeks." His vibe was rage and resentment, and that's all he needed to squeak through in the Electoral College. Barack Obama didn't get elected twice because of his detailed policy proposals, and neither did Bill Clinton. The candidate who inundated journalists with the pickiest policy white papers in recent memory was Hillary Clinton, and all the press harped on was "her emails." So let's not agonize too much over Kamala's sketchy proposals. Voters got all the policy info they needed every time someone at the DNC said, "We're going to" or "Kamala's going to" (fill in the blank). And that's all the policy detail we're going to get -- and all we need -- in the campaign speeches and commercials to come. That's the way American elections work. Maybe it's depressing, but it's the truth.
The minute the presidential debates started being televised (1960, Kennedy v. Nixon), presidential campaigns became vibes-based. We've had 60 years of vibes-based campaigns by this point. It shouldn't be news anymore.
Good point! I'm so old that I can remember listening to the Kennedy v. Nixon debate on the radio. As a very young foreign policy wonk, I came away thinking that Nixon had definitely won the day. I was the only student in my Catholic grammar school to vote for Nixon in our classmate straw poll. But never fear: I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now...
You know, give it a minute. Yes, her policy info is light, but she’s been running for a month. Yes, no one is talking about Gaza, but there are not a few rumbles about a cease fire on the near horizon, which often means the best choice is radio silence. Besides, she has two sucky choices here: “I support Biden on this,” which is a sticky party line, or “I think he’s been making bad decisions,” which could cost Biden/Israel fan voters, and she needs every one of those she can get. I like that she’s smart. I like that as a prosecutor she can be tough. Is she perfect? No, but she’s looking better every day. Any time we vote a new person as President, we’re getting a pig in a poke. This year is no different. But we know the crazy they’re selling on the other side. Know him too well. I’m more than ready to take a chance on people who promise decency.
[pointing_up_this_right_here.gif]
On the jobs front, you’re also way off base. Biden produced about 20 million new jobs in the past 3 1/2 years. In fact, the dems have way outperformed the GOP in job creation, as Clinton pointed out yesterday. Fact checked here. https://www.rawstory.com/bill-clinton-dnc-speech/
A former Trump press secretary got to speak on stage at the convention. I'm not sure what clearer signal anyone could ask for that this is a pure "vibes" candidacy. Capital saw people how dissatisfied people were with a Biden vs. Trump race and switched to Harris hoping the "good vibes" would wipe away any pesky demands for things to materially change.
Maybe that's slightly unfair. There have been some changes, the Dems dropped abolishing the death penalty from their platform. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/democrats-scrub-death-penalty-campaign-platform_n_66c67a0de4b0b9c7b360296b?1jq
This kinda tracks with how the DNC seems more interested in courting Nikki Haley voters than the Undecided folks.
It's the difference between a drunken night out with friends and a binge. It's time to come down, sleep it off, go to work. And yet.
(great article, is what I'm saying)
Great piece, really good read.