The McCain Bounce #5: Conclusions

Conclusions

Chance

For the first time this cycle it looks like the Republicans might actually win. They managed to, quite accidentally, nominate the only candidate who has any credibility on the most important issue this year: "throw the bums out."

The Democrats managed to nominate a candidate that makes people nervous... again. He's suave, but inexperienced. It's the same problem Kerry faced in 2004 when the folks decided that Kerry (mostly as an extension of his party... he ended up being an empty suit) was just not up to it. So the choices each party made for president set up a race where one should not have existed. By the numbers the opposition party (Democrats) should have run away with it this year but for whatever reason they won't. McCain has a chance.

Policy vs Politics

Most of the policy debates are so complex, and shrouded in honest disagreements, that they can be debated forever. "The issues" have become irrelevant. To put it a different way, Americans have become cynical enough to assume that anybody might be right, so nobody can win on substance.

However, strangely, despite the basic cynicism and partisanism the broad political consensuses of the 1980's and 1990's (a strong but limited welfare state, less government intervention on social issues, low taxes and fiscal responsibility) have pulled the parties CLOSER together ideologically. There is very little substantive difference between Barack Obama and John McCain in the grand sweep of the political spectrum. One prefers a bit more socialism, one prefers a bit less. But just a bit. It's like arguing over two cents while ignoring the agreement about $2,000.

Finding the differences

So the electorate seeks ways to differentiate between two candidates who stand a hair apart on "the issues." Demagoguery, exploitation of demographics and shameless political stunts are employed by BOTH SIDES (Re: "How many houses do you have," "Sarah baby is really Bristol's baby," "My Muslim faith," and "Lipstick on a Pig") in an effort to tarnish their opponent. Both sides are seeking to undermine the other's trustworthiness because the complexity of intractable issues and the narrow ideological band in America make the character of the president one of the few features that distinguishes one candidate from another. "Do you like him?" becomes a legitimate political question because all of the other reasons to vote one way or the other tend to balance each other out for the folks in the middle who decide elections. The election comes down to sound bites, quotes out of context and rallying the faithful not because the American people are stupid but because there's very little difference between Obama and McCain otherwise.

Your soccer team

The non-devotees who often do not follow politics closely populate the 'squishy middle' that is so decisive. Those who read blogs, consume news and read newspapers have often picked their team aren't really in play. It is beyond the imagination of most partisans that someone might not see the self-evident reasons to vote for one side or the other. The "duh factor" that one candidate is clearly better than the other, further evidence be damned, short-circuits thought on the matter and leads to a confrontational attitude. Even when bumping up against a less zealous person on the same side the partisan will decry their apostasy as harshly as he would his opponent. This behavior is absolutely NUTS. But, it's why some of the widest read, smartest and most insightful people are complete and utter morons who are not reliable sources of analysis despite all their clever virtue. A well composed and researched polemic opinion is still polemic. So even the best read and most knowledgeable voter usually does not consider "the issues," when they vote because they often don't have the ability to even think about them them despite exhaustive study. They're blinded by their loyalties. The only reason they consume information is to confirm their pre-conceived notion and nothing is going to pierce the intellectual armor of their convictions.

I don't care who the partisan is they're almost certainly voting a party (D or R), identity (Black, White, Woman, Man, Poor, Rich, etc.), or a character(Obama, Palin, McCain, Biden(?)). I don't care how deeply one reads the news, or researches the minutia of policy making, nobody and I mean nobody gives a damn about "the issues" when they vote. They vote their conscious.

The vexing nature of partisan politics carried on mass media has created identities out of ideologies and die-hards out of reasonable people. Those who assume that their particular trusted source is the only source of truth are out of bounds. This phenomena is very much like being a fan of a soccer team... while there may be compelling data that the team is flawed it does not stop the fan from supporting it. Don't forget that "fan" is short for "fanatic."

Conclusions

So with an electorate that is deciding for whom they want to vote based on their core values, and is frankly not interested in "the issues," a media flap involving Sarah Palin moves the dial. People are voting for the characters that they LIKE and identify with when they see them on TV.

So McCain's bounce had everything to do with capturing squishy nothingness in American politics best described as "ya know, I like..." Folks liked Palin and when they saw the media attack her they cried foul and swung to her side. And when the Palin vs the Media story spurred interest in McCain they liked him too. That's about all there is to it.

It's not to say that the race is over. Goodness knows that the folks like Obama! But he's got to get back in the game and realize that nobody is interested in a civil debate on "the issues." Least of all those brilliant partisans who might have a slight grasp of what "the issues" actually might be! The polls have picked up on a McCain Bounce that is real, tangible and important. If the Obama campaign dismisses it as a "convention bounce" or as a "blip" he will do so at his peril.