why barack needs to get mad

From my latest piece for The Guardian's Comment Is Free:

In the second of 1988's presidential debates, Democratic candidate Michael Dukakis was asked the following question: "Governor, if Kitty Dukakis [his wife] were raped and murdered, would you favour an irrevocable death penalty for the killer?"

Dukakis replied: "No, I don't, and I think you know that I've opposed the death penalty during all of my life." He went on to discuss the decline in murder statistics in his home state. His answer was coolly delivered, well argued and coherent. It was also disastrous. Dukakis's poll ratings dropped several points the day after, and his answer to that question was blamed by many, including the candidate himself, for his subsequent defeat.

It's no mean feat to make George Bush Sr seem emotionally empathetic, but that's what Dukakis did that night, if only by contrast. Instead of betraying any hint of the anger such a scenario might be expected to evoke, Dukakis gave an entirely rational answer. In doing so he came across as a bloodless bureaucrat, a robo-politician with no heart and soul. The guy's asked about what he'd do if his wife is raped and murdered and he barely blinks?

That moment remains a powerful reminder of the role of anger, and overt emotion generally, in presidential elections.

Read the rest of the article here.

Comments

[Leah]

This was addressed briefly in an episode of West Wing - season 4, I think, when the President and senior staff play a joke on Toby while prepping for a debate.

[Jon]

I actually believe that it is way more important for Obama to be cast as the warped view that a lot of low info white blue-collar voters have of young blacks: hot headed radicals. Jesse Jackson Jr today made a comment saying that you don't know how important it is for Obama to avoid giving the slightest impression of anger. And this is in comparison to the well documented fits of McCain.

[Jon]

I meant to avoid being cast as the angry black radical, sorry for the typo.