How to Write over 2000 Words and Say Nothing

Andrew Sullivan links to this article, by Ronald Brownstein, talking about "beer track" and "wine track" voters, and Andrew seems to think it useful. I'm not sure why. I was waiting for Brownstein to talk about how Hillarah wins with Haitian lesbians in the furniture business by 59%, but Obama wins with left-handed Tongan welders by 57%. In the end, Brownstein says nothing.

It's because the approach Brownstein takes is *exactly* what is wrong with American politics and even American political science. The most awful class I had to take in college was a mandatory 301 class that taught the magic of polls. Not only did the professor have to wear a necktie to keep the foreskin from going up over his head, he and the curriculum treated people as if we are static elements that can be near-perfectly counted if you did so in just such a way. It is exactly the wrong approach.

To guide one's politics by polls is to take a "tail-wagging-the-dog" approach wherein politicians are always reacting to the presumed past in a narrowly focused way. "Voters are concerned about the economy/environment/terrorism threat/etc., ergo, we should talk about X." No....you, the politician, need to talk about the economy and get the voters to talk about it. You need to talk about the environment and get voters to think about it. You need to talk about torture and civil liberties and get voters to respond to it. If they don't want to come along with your ideas, fine, that's the way it works. But this continued focus-group/polling approach is what creates small-minded, wonky, pedantic drivel instead of substantive legislation.

Obama doesn't win votes based on his 1,036,723-point plans. He wins on ideas and, yes, outstanding oratory skills. And just what is wrong with that? Why should we be afraid of ideas? What is wrong with inspired oratory? Of course it doesn't translate into action, but it sure as hell can inspire action and no president--no matter the skill or industry--can do anything alone. The absolute quickest way Obama can hand the nomination to Hillarah is to try to out-wonk her. Instead, all he has to do is say, to the effect, "All of my plans and ideas are up on my website, freely available, and if you don't want to download them off the net, we will be happy to mail them to you." Then continue to talk about his ideas, and inspire, and lead. Yes, lead.

I am certainly not saying that Obama doesn't need to avoid dirtying himself in details. When asked about his views and plans regarding the economy, answer--and do it directly. But don't pull a Hillarah and put forth a wonky plan as a panacea. And I'm not saying polls have no use--they can be very useful tools at times. But Bill Clinton's largest accomplishments--welfare reform, free-trade, and a budget surplus--happened despite opposition to the ideas in the country and/or his party. On those issues, for better or worse, he led. And that's what we need; not salami-slicing the population and calculating one's statements to win over the majority of those "groups."