If he gets elected, you'll see him change back as well. The same would have been true of Mitt, and I think Mitt would have likely been the better choice on the Rep side. On the Dem side, I think Hillary would have been better, accept for the hate issue.
This election is now highlighting the deeper issues of what Americans choose Presidents for. For most Americans, they want an old fashion tribe leader, someone who reassures them, who will "lead" in times of danger, etc. So you can only get elected if you have suitable personality to attract people. Palin does this for one side, Obama for the other. While I think Obama is spades smarter than Palin, I can't say either side is any more deserving than the other wrt to this issue. Both are rallying around someone who makes them feel good, who they can resonate with. I suppose this would all be fine if the role of President were to go around like the British Royals, give pep talks, show the colors, comfort the distressed, etc. Unfortunately, the Office of President has considerable powers (and Bush has made it even more so) and it pays not to have an idiot in office. Finding individuals who combine both the necessary personality appeal with actual acumen is not proving easy. |
