As I am listening to the pundit class this Sunday morning, it is becoming clearer that election 2008 is really coming down to who can appeal to people like the fictional "Bunkers." Remember the Bunkers, Archie and Edith? They were the lovable working class white family that represented "real Americans." McCain was very clear in making sure to note that Sarah Palin's "story" should appeal to Americans; therefore, I am convinced that he is trying to go for symbols over substance.
Let's forget that McCain lives a life akin to a character on "Dynasty." That's not important. He wants to portray his campaign as an "All in the Family" campaign. I mean can those types of folks ever really relate to the Huxtables from "The Cosby Show?" Cliff and Clair Huxtable, clearly examples of those elitist, college educated, "un-American" types, have never had anything in common with Archie and Edith. As a matter of fact, I bet that people like Archie and Edith look at Cliff and Clair and just know that they were nothing but affirmative action beneficiaries who really have no skills or abilities worthy of consideration. Sarah Palin is like Gloria Bunker (with a properly conservative husband). Palin is who "Americans" can relate to. Palin is the one "Americans" can trust.
The more I consider it, the more I see the selection of Sarah Palin as a potentially deft move. It's identity politics on full display. Yet it's identity politics done by a Republican, and like affirmative action (can we say Clarence Thomas?), these types of moves are alright when the GOP does it. It's only un-American when Democrats do it.
So there it is. A vote for McCain/Palin is a vote for the America you know. A vote for Obama/Biden is a vote for the America you can't quite trust. Which way do you think that Archie or Edith would vote? And what will be the consequences? Are we ready?
3 comments:
I read an interesting piece on the Huffington Post that suggested a variety of reasons why her selection is a bad idea.
The one that really resonated with me, though, was this: If she becomes VP, she takes over the role of First Woman in the Executive. That's a role Hillary Clinton wants. It's vital to her next campaign that she can present herself as a pathbreaker.
So by choosing Palin, McCain provided the best reason yet for Clinton to campaign for Obama. If he wins, she can still energize her supporters by presenting herself as a historic choice. If Palin wins, then she's a strong challenge to part of Hillary's pitch.
As for Archie and Edith, are we so sure they still exist? (Outside of PA, IN, and OH, I mean). In large parts of the country, there are families that look like the Bunkers demographically but who send their kids to Jack and Jill in summer or who speak Spanish/Russian/Chinese. Does Sarah Palin speak to them?
Fiona,
That is an interesting perspective, and certainly one that I'd not considered. Regarding the Bunkers, I think that there are more of them than we give credit. Perhaps their children are doing those interesting things, and it will help them infinitely in the future, but the parents are still the ones who will cast their votes this November.
Fiona, Ron here. I like your question: "As for Archie and Edith, are we so sure they still exist?" I believe the geographical areas you depicted provide the answer. Perhaps they only live in these areas and the other agri/rust belts both past and present, but they do exist. This being the case - they're still quite "real" and they do play a big part, especially as active voters. I believe a large portion of the registered voters in these areas (some of them "swing" states) would fit this A&E simile. It appears they must be out there as they are being pandered to because many believe/know(?) they will be the ones to decide the next POTUS. Unless a new block of younger, more urban voters starts showing up at the polls the A&E's, no matter how much they're stagnating or even on the decline, will determine our future executive leadership course.
Post a Comment