« No Place to Hide | Main | Lies & Lying Liars »
Democracy In Action
So last night I watched the Hillary-Barack lovefest and I was happy.
And happy is not a word I use often, lately. Times being what they are and all, I really have to think about the things that I do feel happy about.
Kittens. Godiva hot chocolate. My two friends who are in love, at ages 51 and 44 respectively and at last.
But last night, I was happy because I saw and heard the choices the American people have. And those choices are getting clearer and the lights are coming on.
Illumination always makes me happy. Without all the noise (and ignoring Wolfie), the two Democratic candidates got to elaborate on their views and demonstrate their respective styles, as did the Republican front runners the evening before. I analyzed the movement and I saw what I think we need to be paying attention to.
In terms of content, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are not that dissimilar, and now that we, the people, have made our concerns ever-so-much clearer, they are listening to the will of the voters and not so much to the will of the consultants. I hope this trend continues and the policies evolve to include some rational ideas about how we can get through this mess, take care of people, and end this war nonsense.
But in terms of style, OH, so different! Let's go to the videotape:
Obama gestures close to his body, in movements that connect and bridge to others. His head floats above it all, nodding and looking around with an open focus.
Clinton opens by advancing her case, with gestures that lay out the agenda, her focus is softer than it often is, but she gets into some long, repetitive phrases. She spends time laying out her policies, stating the facts, and she is quite serious.
Obama is relating to her, opening up to her. She is closed off to him for much of the debate.
Clinton presses forward with her proposals. Obama is a comprehensive thinker and we can see him considering. She has already made up her mind.
Hillary comes across as competent and a deal-maker. Her hand gestures in a palm-down, elbow-bent tamping down movement as if she is putting down any other suggestions.
Barack is laying it all out reasonably. He explains, he weighs options, he references his own experiences and presents the pathways to his conclusions.
Hillary operates within highly defined space, drawing boundaries around the ideas. When she speaks of her own experiences, she places them as if on a table or desk in front of her, asking us to look at them.
Obama fluctuates between light, quick, short moments of gesture and strong determined focused pauses. Clinton stays on course, steadily pushing forward.
Hillary has more core strength; Obama has more fluidity and this is the good news and the bad news about each. Will voters see her core strength as decisive and powerful or as unwilling to listen well? Will voters see his fluidity as versatility and open-mindedness or as weakness?
She operates and pushes through, he presents and prioritizes. Both of them share and communicate well but her style is to bring the message in by bringing her hands together as she makes a point, while he opens up more often than not, showing his hands expressively, and perhaps a little vulnerably, but with a sense of WYSIWYG.
She is more private in her decision-making and his reference to her operating behind closed doors makes perfect sense. He reveals his thinking process more readily and that allows her to point out that he has not been in the decision-making spotlight long.
She gestures with a strong impact at the end; his finger-pointing hand gestures have a lilt in the middle and end with a quick emphasis, giving him a different kind of rhythm--revealing his ability to roll through ideas as compared with her clear punctuation.
It was interesting that BOTH of them were far less comfortable talking about Iraq. Both stumbled more, and had lower postural investment in what they were saying. Until Barack Obama made his statement on "no permanent bases", which was full and highly invested, he was not any better than she was in terms of body language.
One reporter asked me about the look Obama gave Clinton when she laughed at the question about what she would do with Bill; apparently the newsroom found her laugh startling, but his look even more so. I thought he stayed open and relaxed throughout her discourse, and he was certainly gracious about her taking so much time to spin explain her plans.
I was far more startled by the relaxed camaraderie they showed each other at the end, but I was also glad to see it. Democracy requires that we take a long look at the leaders who will be making such important decisions and guiding us through what promises to be a major struggle. Although I cannot say who "won" the debate, what made me most contented was that we saw an honest exchange of tough stuff, and we saw the style each uses to think through those decisions.
Each of us can bring our own yearnings and concerns to the choices before us, and each of us can care deeply about the type of person we want to see in the role of leader of the free world. These are the Democratic choices, but I also want to discuss the Republican front-runners' styles. The more we know and understand, and the more we share what we know, the better those choices will be, and the closer we will come to true democracy in action.
6 Comments
Leave a comment
Not registered? Click on 'Sign-in' above and then select 'Sign up' in the lower right corner. Don't forget to click on the link in the confirmation email that will be sent to your email address.
Check this out--speaking of styles--from Obama's webpage
Speak your mind and help set the policies that will guide this campaign and change the country.
* Present your ideas
* Discuss with others
Looking at the picture now...I can see why one of the Kennedy's who supports Hillary was saying that Hillary shows how she listens to people and that is how she won over the Republicans in NY.
Karen, your observations only confirm my instincts about these two people. Hillary really does think that she knows better than everyone else. She exhibits an air of superiority that I've noted in many borderline authoritarian personalities. We tend to think of only right-wingers as authoritarian, but life demonstrates that they exist on both sides of the political divide. At heart, the primary concerns of both she and her husband has been the accumulation, and then retention, of raw political power - by nearly any means necessary. Maybe that's what it took to withstand the right wing barrage, and the years of romantic and emotional trauma - but it should give one pause when weighting the virtues of a Clintonian sequel; it also explains why she exhibits so little remorse over her votes to support Dubya's obsessions with Iraq and Iran.
Barak is much more of a philosopher, and a professor. He's also the product of a very different generation. The first two "baby boom" Presidents have IMHO reflected my generation tendency to be self-obsessed, and to see everything through a narcissistic, "me, myself, and I" lens. Neither Bill Clinton nor Bush were willing to own up to their mistakes as Presidents, or failings as men. And Hillary certainly looks to me as having similar traits.
Well put, Matthew!
Ok. So this is funny.
What were they saying?
Matt:
Agreed. I watched Clinton speak this weekend on CNN and the way she used her arms, in a "chopping motion", indicated to me a cut-and-dried personality. Its MY way, and this is how it is.
Obama looks like a captain on the ship. Looking ahead, gauging the seas. He then commands based on the trajectory. Its a leadership attitude that commands respect and expects all crew members to help him guide the ship to shore.