Well, a current example is how he sold the bailout to the American people.
His lack of understanding as to what motivates the typical American - outside of fear of immediate harm - is reflected in his economic policies. If he read newspapers and used other sources to connect more with the American people - instead of relying on ideology and sycophants - he would realize that Americans want an inherent fairness in economic dealings. They do not believe that the rich getting richer, and how that somehow trickles down to everyone, is a fair or even American policy. He would realize that the middle class do not want their economic health determined by how well the top 1% of Americans are doing.
When he tried to sell the bill to the American people, he used one thing he understands - fear - but having worn out that card, could not make the people understand the implications of the bill's failure. I believe it is because he is out of touch, and thinks that Americans think as he does - that economic health is strictly top-down. He doesn't realize that middle American now thinks that the rich are getting what they deserve, and that this punishment should not extend to people who had nothing to do with the mess.
If Bush read more, and kept a better finger on the pulse of America, he would have realized this. Clinton, for all his personal faults, realized this, and constantly confounded his political opponents with his ability to empathize with and reach into the lives of the American people. I believe this is partially due to the fact that he was and is a voracious reader, and not just of sources from 'his' side. Knowing what your opponents, and typical Americans, are thinking and reading is an important means of staying in touch. |
