Barack Obama: Values vs. Issues.
Since I read Thinking Points a few months ago, this question has been on my mind:
I am inspired by the way that now-presidential-candidate Barack Obama speaks of shared progressive values. Already, most criticism from the Democratic party is that he is weak on issues, presumably because of this emphasis. Here is a quote from the NYT about a statement he made to Democrats in Washington: “There are those who don’t believe in talking about hope: they say, well, we want specifics, we want details, we want white papers, we want plans,” he said then. “We’ve had a lot of plans, Democrats. What we’ve had is a shortage of hope.” This statement was apparently dismissed (scorned was the word used in the Times) by many of those he was speaking to.
Is this going to be a major test about the efficacy of speaking about values first and issue later? I would argue that it is this approach (and the fact that he is an excellent speaker) that has contributed to his popularity. At what point should he start speaking about issues in more depth? How much did GWB and Reagan speak about specific issues and policy during their successful campaigns?
Can speaking about values to biconceptuals alienate the issue-driven democratic base and therefore be ineffective in a close primary?
Thanks.
None assigned
Good points
This is an interesting topic. I think you're right in saying he can tie his values to issues. Let the values guide him and his campaign, but at the same time he should illustrate how he plans to act on his values with legislation and leadership.
Beyond pragmatics
Issues are important, but I want to know the "why", not the "what or the how". What he (or anyone) thinks about an issue may help define him. How we get the troops out of Iraq is a definition (logistics). What needs to be done to get them out is a definition (policy). Why they need to be withdrawn doesn't define, it associates the listener with the candidate. If his definitions differ from mine, he may or may not lose me. If his values differ from mine, he never had me in the first place.
Story on Huffpo addresses this Issues issue
- Arianna Huffington addresses the Conventional Wisdom of policy papers vs. leadership in this blog post:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/wheres-the-beef-ii-t_b_41054.html
Great Quote: "This is one of Obama's most appealing attributes: his willingness to address perceived liabilities head on (apply directly to forehead), and to turn potential negatives into attributes.
Think I don't have enough experience? Then go ahead and elect Dick Cheney - he's got a lengthy resume. Think I need more meat on my policy bones? Then gnaw on the endless, and endlessly detailed, policy laundry lists that, absent true leadership, have gone down to defeat together with the uninspiring Democrats holding them -- again and again and again."
Hoover's campaign slogan, 1928
"A chicken in every pot and a car in every garage"
It's a good slogan, speaking to both values and policy issues.
Another oldie could illustrate an approach: instead of saying "by 2008" Obama could say he will "bring the troops home for Christmas", which invokes values of family and hints at spirituality.
Such tropes can express both specific plans and values.
New! Excellent Insight!
Hello Bouwma,
I think you have hit the nail on the head with this one. The issue silos of most Democrats have both lacked in moral authenticity (lacking in clearly and consistently articulated values) and kept the Democratic party from becoming unified (as we can see with the nasty in-fighting among Democratic presidential hopefuls). In some respects this appears like wild dogs fighting for scraps while no one sits high on the table.
The questions you raise are good ones. I don't know that I can offer a full answer (as they are quite complicated issues), but will offer a few thoughts of my own.
1. I think it is necessary to articulate clear values at all times. This includes times when issues are discussed and times when they aren't. For starters, it is helpful to frame issues as expressions of values so that talking about issues is an act of value expression.
2. When talking about issues, it is helpful to talk about several in relation to each other. This can be done by expressing the values that cross many issues. For example if a politician talks about the responsibility to provide a healthy environment for raising children, it is possible to connect this value with clean air and water, safety tests for chemicals to be used in our homes, concerns about genetically modified foods, the relationship between poverty and violence (while talking about economic measures to raise minimum wage or provide social programs to communities in need), and so on.
I think Obama has stood out as a uniquely popular Democrat because he speaks his values before discussing issues.
Thank you for raising this important issue. It is at the heart of what Rockridge is trying to accomplish.