the real dream ticket
by Joshua Lustig
Published: May 15, 2008
Yesterday, at approximately 4 p.m., my roommate received a news alert on her blackberry. John Edwards, in a late-game move, was endorsing his former rival Sen. Barack Obama for president.
At approximately 7:30 p.m., Pat Buchanan was red-faced on MSNBC, spouting about just how foolish a rumored joint Obama-Edwards ticket would be.
At approximately 9 p.m., Matt Drudge posted what every pundit wanted to say but was afraid of speculating on: that John Edwards was going to join the leading ticket to be Barack Obama’s vice presidential candidate. The headline was uncompromising: “The Ticket?” placed just below a picture of the two celebrating together.
West Virginia is old news. From now on, everyone’s talking about one thing and one thing only: the real Democratic dream ticket.
Watching Edwards deliver his speech last tonight, one that has been given by Obama for months, it dawned on me that he could use Obama’s “hope” narrative just as effectively as the Chicago native himself. Edwards, the perennial lone white man of the election, always struggled to solidify his own base. But on Wednesday night, in front of droves of frantic Obama supporters, he seemed natural, if not a bit overwhelmed by the power of his own words.
The secret is that the power of Obama’s narrative is that it’s not totally about Obama. While he’s the most effective embodiment of it, a young mixed-race first-generation American multimedia communicator, the power of this message goes far beyond Barack the man. This thing is a movement and from what we saw last tonight, Edwards can be just as much a steward of it as Obama.
In typical old-school political thinking, candidates want to pick a running mate that balances them out. A liberal must pick a centrist or a Yankee must pick a Southerner. It’s the logical way to shore up as many segments of the population as possible.
But what red-faced talking heads like Buchanan are raving about is that, like Obama, Edwards is unabashedly liberal. By their conventional wisdom, this is an immediate red flag, destined only to doom a fledgling Democratic campaign. Why not expand the coalition with a centrist dedicated to more conservative issues? Why pick more of the same? In short, Edwards is the other poverty, equality, hope and social-justice guy.
This, just like the old-school thinking of other campaigns, just wouldn’t do the Obama movement justice. The entire candidacy, from its focus on a 50-state solution to its refusal to play dirty politics, has been rooted in the concept of something different. In this it has registered millions of new Democrats and energized several previously marginalized voting blocs in the process. The real foolishness would be to listen to the establishment’s conventional wisdom.
Edwards’ endorsement was a brilliant, politically calculated move that really does show the new brand of politics Obama claims his campaign is about. It was something that we rarely see in politics: a brutally planned and flawlessly executed move to make a lot of people look good. Unlike the recent Rev. Wright parade, this move exacerbated the theme of hope instead of an elaborate political character assassination as is all too common in politics.
Obama is playing the primary game in a deceivingly calculated way, with the masterwork of a seasoned politician. The difference this time is that he’s doing it not out of a malicious need to smear an opponent, but to reinforce an overwhelmingly positive narrative. Right now, with so many things gone wrong in our great nation, this strategy is working.
By utilizing Edwards, a charismatic, well-spoken and nationally respected figure, Obama has an opportunity to energize his constituency - one he should not let slip to the wayside. The chance simply may not present itself again. And after all, the only thing more cherished in politics than the approval of superdelegates is something all-too-rare to pass by: perfect timing.
—
(email this article or post to social network)
—
May 18th, 2008 at 1:41 am
I’m really happy Edwards is back in the public eye. The very mention of him seems to steer campaigns toward the issues.
I’ve been speculating an Obama/Edwards ticket ever since the New Hampshire debate. Clinton attacked Obama in Edwards’ name, Edwards jumped to Obama’s defense. They were high-fiving and smiling like actors from a commercial for allergy medication. Obama seemed to have a new campaign slogan that night: “I agree with John.”
Each candidate may have his own weaknesses in electability, but they go together so well, they could be unstoppable.
May 21st, 2008 at 12:19 am
you two honestly think that because obama and edwards give a good speech, they’re fit to run the nation? i assume then that you would have voted for reagan. i hope that ticket comes to life. it’ll get smashed when it comes to issues.
May 30th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
You may want to reread my comment. The first point I made was that Edwards’ mere presence steers political dialog toward important issues that actually make a difference, rather than the political mudslinging that occurred after he dropped out of the race. He comes out in support of Obama, and once again people stopped talking about lapel pins and sermons and started talking the responsibility of government for the working class.
Do you honestly thinking this is a handicap? I assume then that you whould have voted for Stalin.