Candidate Differences

04/24/2008

Paul Munnis


Lately I have been noticing a difference in the two Democratic candidates that was at first puzzling. Clinton talks with the voters while Obama talks at the voters. This is not some semantic foolishness. There really is a difference in the style of address and so I wondered why?

Finally it hit me. It has to be that way:

Obama is speaking to a young audience without a track record of voting and who are notorious for not showing up to vote. They talk the talk but they don’t walk the walk. There are a lot of reasons for that. As November rolls around the first semester tests are being given and students are busy trying to stay alive academically. Living in dorms it isn’t always easy to get transportation to the polls. Gas prices are going to be a factor now too. At this time new social encounters are happening as students make new friends. There isn’t a lot of spare time for students during this period. The colleges do not grant any voter relief from class attendance. For all of these reasons students don’t show up to vote. Obama lectures this group, much like a college professor and he talks at them hoping they will learn about the issues and show up to vote.

Obama's other large audience is black voters. The first problem is that they don’t show up to vote either. Often it’s not their fault. For years the GOP has created roadblocks to letting blacks vote. This is especially true in the south. In the north there are states that provide inferior and insufficient voting equipment in black neighborhoods and there is some reluctance for people to want to work the polls as poll watchers in tough urban neighborhoods during a long election day and into a long night. Another thing is that the Obama audience doesn’t often understand the issues and so they have to be taught about them. This leaves the candidate talking at the audience using a lecture format.

By contrast, Hillary’s audience tends to be female, well informed, both white and blue collar workers, and generally pretty savvy on the issues appearing in the news. Therefore she can hold more of a conversational tone with her audience and as a result she takes a more straightforward approach to talking with them. She doesn’t have to explain economics to her audience and she doesn’t need to lecture them on privacy issues, many of these people could teach Hillary a thing or two as college professors, senior and middle managers, and they are an educated voter group that does show up to vote and who wants to discuss things.

When Obama addresses a Hillary type of audience people just go to sleep. When Hillary addresses such an audience they want to know more about the policy proposed or the style of government and they certainly want to know about Bill and whether he is an asset or liability. When Obama talks to such an audience he comes off strict and formal and that is often read as being “hoity-toity” as the Irish call it meaning that he seems elitist. When Hillary addresses the Obama audience they are all clamoring for change but when pushed they can’t give much by way of solid proposals for what they want to see changed and why.

Both candidates are very well rained and educated. Obama is a Harvard graduate and Clinton has a PhD in the Law.

Often when Hillary speaks it is to discuss major policy proposals and planned new programs. She seldom talks about issues in the abstract and she is given to talking policy, and politics. Her audience wants to know how the policy and the proposals will impact them. When Hillary has a blue collar audience she unveils her proposals and policy changes and she shows how these will impact the daily lives of workers and consumers.

When Obama talks to an audience and is asked about some sort of program that Hillary advocates the most frequent response is: “Me too, I support that.” The policy and program stuff is secondary to his audience. They want a system that takes care of them at the gut level. The result is that when it comes to the big issues the candidates look like a pair of exchangeable parts. Actually Obama is much more polished in his proposals and plans than what Hillary is and the difference can be seen with a trip to their websites. This drives Hillary crazy for her team is doing much of the work and Obama is staying even by just saying: “Me too.” Some have labeled Obama as “The Me-Too Kid.”

Super delegates are pretty savvy and they understand about what groups actually vote. They are not intimidated by threats than an ex-Republican will vote for McCain if their candidate is not selected.

At this point the Clinton campaign has Hillary back doing what she does best – talking about policy and proposals for change while Obama is often found advocating the notion of change. The difference lies in specificity and the appeal to an audience. Youth wants change and so do blacks while Hillary’s audiences want program specifics.

There is nothing wrong with these different methods -- they fit the audience -- but they don’t work well when one speaks cross-audience. Soon we will be into the national campaign when a candidate must reach both audiences.