In a sign of where we are in the race, the NYT's conservative columnist David Brooks writes a great column on the temperament and potential of Obama whilst barely mentioning McCain. Indeed the only contest in Brooks's column is between two possible President Obama's:
...it is easy to sketch out a scenario in which he could be a great president. He would be untroubled by self-destructive demons or indiscipline. With that cool manner, he would see reality unfiltered. He could gather — already has gathered — some of the smartest minds in public policy, and, untroubled by intellectual insecurity, he could give them free rein. Though he is young, it is easy to imagine him at the cabinet table, leading a subtle discussion of some long-term problem...
...It could be that Obama will be an observer, not a leader. Rather than throwing himself passionately into his causes, he will stand back. Congressional leaders, put off by his supposed intellectual superiority, will just go their own way. Lost in his own nuance, he will be passive and ineffectual. Lack of passion will produce lack of courage. The Obama greatness will give way to the Obama anti-climax.
Overall it reads like a cautious, qualified endorsement based on Obama's impressive temperament. The New Yorker's George Packer writes a post that also extolls the virtues of Obama's temperament and makes a similar point about his "lack of passion":
Obama’s character is a political triumph. His cool, unlike McCain’s tic-filled anger, is tactically deployed; throughout the campaign it’s become his main weapon against crisis and attack. But if he wins, he’ll need to play far more of his psychic register to have any chance of succeeding at the impossible job he’s so skillfully pursued. He’ll have to draw on humor, on empathy, on audacity, on courage, in order to inspire the kind of confidence the country badly lacks and needs. He might even have to get angry.
If Barack Obama wins the US presidency, it will be for the same reason that Jimmy Carter won -- overreaction against a recent Republican president, like Nixon, who so mucked things up that disgusted voters automatically select the opposite party. And like Carter, once the honeymoon phase is over, Obama's inexperience will cause missteps that swing public opinion against him. Despite his uncharismatic presence, John McCain would actually make a more seasoned and effective leader. Otherwise, in the name of change, America is destined to substitute one inept prima donna for another.
Posted by: Rough Familiarity | October 29, 2008 at 06:16 PM
If Obama can run his presidency the same way he ran his campaign - we have a winner for the country. He has been cool, methodical and strategy driven, never losing his temper. Contrast that with McCain's rash temper and Bush's snickering style - and you would have to admire the man. Besides his speech on 4th Nov which was honorable, there was nothing McCain did that displayed a bigger man. And his pick of Palin proved he has poor judgement. Obama has come across to all as a bigger person, tolerant and smart. Eve in his acceptance speech, he has been humble. True mark of a man. He won 51% of popular vote, the last one to do it was FDR.
He deserves to win. People talk about big government under democrats. But Bush run a 5 Tril deficit in 8 years for nothing. With 3 Tril, Obama can set right this economy besides making it work for all segments of population.
Obama makes this country and its global rhetoric commonsense again. Godspeed to Obama!! God bless America.
Posted by: Will bartlett | November 05, 2008 at 06:14 PM