Chuck Todd muses on Republicans' labelling of Obama as a 'typical politician':
The problem with trying to use this line with Obama is that the historical nature of his candidacy makes it harder for the voter to think the word "typical" when they see him. (And, of course, Clinton had her own problems on this issue.) That said, Obama continues to fuel this line of attack by making conventional decisions like ducking the town hall idea, flipping on campaign finance, trying to straddle the fence on guns, etc. And unlike McCain, Obama doesn’t have years of good will with his brand; he only really has about 18 months. McCain has made a lot of subtle shifts away from his so-called maverick independent streak. But because his brand was cemented over years, he’s been given more of a benefit of the doubt with the public. Obama’s brand reservoir isn’t as deep, and he should be much more sensitive to this collecting narrative that he isn’t what he claims.
I'm not sure I agree with the latter point, at least not with regard to the 'typical pol' claim. The fact that he hasn't been around for ages makes it more difficult to paint him as just another Washington operator - he seems fresh because he's new and relatively young - and of course because he's black. So I think he can go on making these somewhat dodgy shape-shifting moves for quite a while before people start to think of him as anything but a big signifier of CHANGE.
The real danger of his 'shallow brand reservoir' will always be, not that he represents too little change from the norm, but too much change - that's he's an un-American outsider or secret Muslim or whatever.
In that context the 'typical pol' allegation may actually help rather than hinder him, in the end, by normalizing his image a bit for those whose are wary of him.
Comments