Deep stuff

This profile of Barack Obama by Larissa MacFarquhar is interesting in the picture it paints of a deeply contradictory figure, a politician who seems to not give too much of a damn what people -- especially the boys on the bus -- think of him; a guy who writes about how confused and angry he was growing up who would be unrecognizable to the people who knew the confident, peaceful man they knew by his 20s.

When Christopher Edley first met Obama, in law school, he decided that he would go far, because of his centeredness. Then when, later, he read Obama’s first book and saw how Obama had suspected and vivisected himself for so many years, he decided that he would go far because of that. “The capacity for self-reflection is in my experience invaluable for a candidate or a President,” he says. (Edley worked in the Carter and Clinton Administrations and for Dukakis’s campaign.) “It’s difficult to describe to someone who hasn’t been involved how tough a Presidential campaign is. When you spend day after day flying around the country in an aluminum tube at forty thousand feet, it’s the easiest thing in the world to lose yourself. And when every misstep becomes a thirty-six-hour media disaster there’s every reason to second-guess your instincts, so being sensitive to your strengths and weaknesses and having the courage to come to terms with them is helpful when you’re facing a crisis. I’ve seen candidates who, like a deer frozen in headlights, can’t find their way forward and have to be led around by staff. I’ve also seen candidates who, faced with adversity, turn into the stubbornest of mules and can’t adapt or adjust. Most candidates walk into the room asking everybody ‘How’m I doing? How’m I doing?,’ with no ability to look at themselves in the mirror. So the ability that Barack shows in the book to be brutally self-reflective—this is deep stuff.”

I'm with Duncan and Ezra (I think, but can't find a link) on this. It is way too early in the pre-primaries to pick a candidate, and certainly too early (and impossible) to base that pick on "electability." Despite what the pundits are always claiming, that voters are so booooored by it all, I think voters actually enjoy the races (the general campaign, in which the scripts are basically fixed in place, is a different matter). Certainly, you never hear anyone in Iowa or New Hampshire complaining about all of the attention lavished upon them at pot luck suppers and 4-H club meetings. The presidential primary season is long, but it should be instructive. In 2004 I initially scoffed at the Dean campaign, but was impressed by their understanding of the power of new media and later learned enough about Howard Dean to be impressed by him. I initially put my faith in John Kerry based on his "electability," but as I learned more about him, electability stopped entering into the equation, replaced by admiration.

So, at least for the next few months, I'll point to profiles like this one simply because the Democratic slate of candidates offers a bunch of people about whom I'd like to learn more. The Republicans? Not so much, as they seem for the most part to be a craven (yes, that's the facade of Yankee Stadium in the background), pandering, and pretty dull lot, though I'll be interested to hear their answers to some of these questions.