Glamour… Glitz… Zingers:
A Poor Way to Cover
a Presidential Election

by Sue Gillis, Publisher

The United Nations is in session in New York City, convened to address critical global issues.

The U.S. economy is on the brink of disaster; at press time Congress is on the verge of passing an unimaginable billion dollar bailout to address the economic crisis.

And the media?

The media is in a frenzy, chasing after French First Lady Carla Bruni and Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin.

Bruni, the former model from Italy, is on the September cover of Vanity Fair.

Palin, Senator John McCain’s irresponsible choice for running mate, is on the cover of Time Magazine.

Bruni is all glitz and glamour.

Palin is all glamour, glitz, and contrived zingers.

The difference is Bruni is not running for Vice President of the United States.

Much has already been written about Gov. Palin’s scanty education and thin resume.

Unknown to the majority of Americans until three weeks ago, Palin instantly morphed into a celebrity. And McCain is enjoying the ride.

McCain chose Palin, a woman he met briefly, once, to bolster his chances of winning.

Palin was selected to solidify McCain’s waning conservative base, as well as to draw the blue-collar male and female supporters of Senator Hillary Clinton into the Republican camp. McCain knows he cannot win without them.

And neither can Obama.

So here’s what I don’t get.

Why would these former supporters of Hillary believe that McCain/Palin and the Republican platform support what they so desperately need, to improve their lives and the lives of their families?

Do they not know that just about everything McCain/Palin stand for works against their interests? For example: the issues of tax relief; a solution to the health insurance coverage crisis; college tuition costs; continued engagement in wars; job creation; financial institution oversight and regulation; no leadership in dealing with global warming; issues of land conservation. Not to mention, reproductive choice, Supreme Court appointments, gay rights policies, gun control, and so much more.

In other words, more of the last eight years?

From the polls, apparently not.

What matters is “Feelings.”

How a potential undecided voter “feels’ at a particular moment in time will be the determining factor in how they will vote.

For example, how does the candidate look? Is he stiff and wooden or relaxed and “one of the boys?”

Is the candidate more like “Me”?

That’s one I really don’t get. If you need brain surgery, don’t you want the smartest, most experienced physician to operate? Then why not expect and demand the same for the presidency of the United States?

The phenomenon of voters acting in accordance with their “feelings” is supported by plenty of evidence of past voting behaviors and well known to party operatives.

Karl Rove honed this knowledge to an exact science, parsing off percentages of particular categories of typically Democratic voters (Catholics, Latinos, et al) precisely by region, state, cities, and neighborhoods.

Logic has little to do with how multitudes of citizens choose a president.

In alarming numbers, one-time Hillary voters are jumping like fleas to the McCain/Palin ticket.

Apparently they have no concern that it’s perfectly conceivable that Palin could, through unforeseen circumstances, become president the day after the inauguration.
(Keep in mind that the following vice presidents ascended to the presidency: Andrew Johnson in 1865; Teddy Roosevelt in 1901, Calvin Coolidge in 1923; Harry Truman in 1945, Lyndon Johnson in 1963, and Gerald Ford in 1974.)

In the primary elections, Hillary Clinton had the voters wrapped up in so many of the states now considered essential for Senator Obama to win: Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio, Florida, Michigan, Wisconsin, and New Hampshire.

Assuming Hillary would have delivered those voters to the Obama ticket, why was she not even considered as Obama’s pick for Vice President?

And I just don’t get it.

Don’t the Democrats want to win?

As we go to press, we are 38 days from the presidential election.

By the time you read this message, there will most likely be a positive resurgence and uptick of confidence in the US economy as a result of Washington’s actions.

Presidential debates between John McCain and Barack Obama, and Joe Biden and Sarah Palin, will have begun.

Many jittery Americans, who are responsible enough to vote will carefully weigh the strengths of each candidate and determine who they believe can once again restore American pride and by deliberative action instill confidence in our nation around the world.

Yet thousands more will vote for the man (or Palin) who makes them feel a certain way in the moment and cast their vote to the wind. It is this group that will most likely swing the election one way or the other.

I, like many Americans, are stunned that this election could turn on what is considered the zinger of the night. There may only be a slight, cosmetic difference between a pit bull and a hockey mom, but there is a world of difference between the very serious choices we have to make on November 4.

Suzanne Gillis is Publisher of Vermont Woman.