Little Red Island in a Deep Blue Sea
Sep. 7th, 2008 08:12 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
saavedra77After work last Thursday, I headed down to J&M’s Cafe & Cardroom in Seattle's Pioneer Square observe and interview people watching John McCain’s acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention. The event was a convention-watching party organized by Peter Cowman of MoveRed.org, a King-County-based G.O.P. youth group. While folks at the bar were watching the Giants-Redskins game, about thirty-two others gathered at the tables in the back, where Fox News’ convention coverage ran continuously on four big flatscreen TVs. I counted 20 men and 12 women sitting sitting at the tables, I’d say ranging in age from twenty to fifty, all of them white, most of them conservative Republicans. Steve Beren, the G.O.P.’s 7th district congressional candidate, handed out campaign flyers. One independent sat sipping his beer in a corner. All of them were there to hear what McCain had to say.
Most of you reading this probably know me well enough to ask what in the hell I was doing there. The answer is, as I said, to observe and interview: I’d signed up to cover the event for OffTheBus, the Huffington Posts’s “citizen (i.e., volunteer) journalist” blogging site. This was my first OTB “assignment.” An extremely truncated summary of what I heard there can be found at the site. My full account is below:
Arriving about an hour before McCain was scheduled to speak, I managed to interview twelve convention-watchers about what they considered the most important issues in this campaign, what they thought of McCain and of Sarah Palin, and how they felt the race was going. After the speech, I asked the same people for their reactions, in particular whether McCain’s words or performance changed anything for them. Everyone I interviewed spoke for attribution.
Five of the dozen convention watchers I spoke to named money matters--the economy and taxes--as top issues in this presidential campaign. Four cited national security and terrorism concerns. Three stressed “leadership” or “character.” One named abortion, and one other (the independent) named education.
Candidate Beren characterized the most important issues as “defending liberty” and “reforming government.” He broke the defense of liberty down into “protecting the country from enemies” and “strengthening the economy.” And he made it clear that the desired government reforms included reducing taxes and spending.
John McCain had been the first choice candidate of only three of the twelve. But the other nine were all over the map: two had been for Rudy Giuliani, one had backed Mitt Romney, and another Fred Thompson. One other McCain supporter had for a time drifted into Mike Huckabee’s column, only to be won back by McCain, later.
One Guliani supporter described McCain as “more like [her] fourth” choice. Beren averred that “I wanted someone 500 times better than Obama, but we only got someone 200 times better.” (Beren considered virtually any Republican preferable to any Democrat, adding incredulously that the Democrats actually “want higher gas prices.”)
Regardless of who they supported in the past, everyone I spoke to admired John McCain’s wartime sacrifice and patriotism, although some wished he were more conservative. Apart from “non-partisan” voter Ryan Hendricks, all now wholeheartedly backed McCain’s presidential bid.
Personal feelings about McCain running mate Sarah Palin varied somewhat, but everyone in this group credited her with “energizing” conservatives and making the 2008 presidential race more competitive. Kelly West felt that McCain’s Vice Presidential pick “couldn’t have been more perfect.” Terra Mork said that Palin’s nomination made her “really excited” about the McCain campaign. Kyle Burleigh thought that Palin “brings a lot to the table” in terms of executive experience. On the other hand, Norman Printer thought that Palin was “woefully lacking in experience.” Nonetheless, Printer spoke appreciatively of Palin’s “charisma,” saying it had created “a dynamic that didn’t exist a week ago.” (Printer also complained of the “unfair” treatment of Palin by media commentators and outlets that were in some cases “very left,” citing Chris Matthews, Tom Brokaw, and the New York Times. Significantly, Printer added that he didn’t watch Fox News, either, due to its conservative “bias.”) Palin wouldn’t have been Donna Cox’s first choice for the V.P. slot, but she knew from personal experience “how strong” “Alaskan women” are, and she was now “completely behind” the ticket.
Most felt that the presidential race was now a “dead heat”--too competitive to confidently predict the outcome. But several ventured a cautious optimism, saying that the Republicans’ chances were “looking really good, now.”
Independent Ryan Hendricks of course came at these questions from a different perspective. He actually described Barack Obama as his first choice candidate, but said that he was “still weighing" both general election candidates' "pros and cons." He enjoyed the “fierce competition” that was emerging between McCain and Obama, the way that it had “energized both parties.” As a rule, Hendricks felt that this kind of hard-fought contest “brings out the best--and the worst” in people. As for Sarah Palin, Hendricks worried that “I don’t know enough about her." On the other hand, Hendricks also credited Palin with energizing the G.O.P., and enlivening the race. He argued that Palin was “really kind of the Obama for the Republicans.”
I asked Hendricks what he hoped to gain from watching McCain's acceptance speech, how it might influence his choice. He answered that he hoped McCain’s speech would provide more than just a lot of familiar partisan rhetoric.
When John McCain finally did appear onscreen, the back room hushed and everyone’s eyes drifted upward.
The respectful silence was first broken during McCain’s inelegant references to the “forty-third president.” Across the table from me, Norman Printer sarcastically muttered “Don’t mention his name!” Printer was one of several Republicans who had earlier admitted feeling buyers’ remorse about voting for George W. Bush. Printer had in fact gone so far as to vote for Kerry in 2004, which sounded like it had taken some nose-holding.
But reactions to the speech were mainly enthusiastic: the crowd loudly applauded and cheered at references to the Palin nomination, to “change,” to the Iraq surge, to jobs, and to oil drilling. Attendees also greeted the several key lines with sustained applause, such as McCain’s promise to take the party of “Lincoln, Roosevelt, and Reagan” “back to basics”; his account of his P.O.W. experiences, and how they taught him “the limits of selfish independence”; his credo that “Nothing brings greater happiness in life than to serve a cause greater than yourself”; and, of course, his closing promise to “make history.”
Everyone I spoke to after the speech praised McCain’s “genuineness,” “sincerity,” and "patriotism.” Norman Printer enthused that “McCain got back to the real McCain.” Donna Cox called it “the best speech I have heard McCain give,” adding that it “exceeded my expectations.” McCain’s speech served to remind her that “this country is special.... People fought in wars so we can have that.” And while some preferred Sarah Palin’s scathing remarks the night beforee, others praised McCain’s “unifying” tone.
For his part, Ryan Hendricks was impressed by “McCain’s love for his country.” Whereas Hendricks thought that Palin’s acceptance speech had been “too polarizing,” he felt that McCain’s speech sought to “bring people together,” saying that the U.S. really needs that.
X-posted to![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif)
ljdemocrats
Most of you reading this probably know me well enough to ask what in the hell I was doing there. The answer is, as I said, to observe and interview: I’d signed up to cover the event for OffTheBus, the Huffington Posts’s “citizen (i.e., volunteer) journalist” blogging site. This was my first OTB “assignment.” An extremely truncated summary of what I heard there can be found at the site. My full account is below:
Arriving about an hour before McCain was scheduled to speak, I managed to interview twelve convention-watchers about what they considered the most important issues in this campaign, what they thought of McCain and of Sarah Palin, and how they felt the race was going. After the speech, I asked the same people for their reactions, in particular whether McCain’s words or performance changed anything for them. Everyone I interviewed spoke for attribution.
Five of the dozen convention watchers I spoke to named money matters--the economy and taxes--as top issues in this presidential campaign. Four cited national security and terrorism concerns. Three stressed “leadership” or “character.” One named abortion, and one other (the independent) named education.
Candidate Beren characterized the most important issues as “defending liberty” and “reforming government.” He broke the defense of liberty down into “protecting the country from enemies” and “strengthening the economy.” And he made it clear that the desired government reforms included reducing taxes and spending.
John McCain had been the first choice candidate of only three of the twelve. But the other nine were all over the map: two had been for Rudy Giuliani, one had backed Mitt Romney, and another Fred Thompson. One other McCain supporter had for a time drifted into Mike Huckabee’s column, only to be won back by McCain, later.
One Guliani supporter described McCain as “more like [her] fourth” choice. Beren averred that “I wanted someone 500 times better than Obama, but we only got someone 200 times better.” (Beren considered virtually any Republican preferable to any Democrat, adding incredulously that the Democrats actually “want higher gas prices.”)
Regardless of who they supported in the past, everyone I spoke to admired John McCain’s wartime sacrifice and patriotism, although some wished he were more conservative. Apart from “non-partisan” voter Ryan Hendricks, all now wholeheartedly backed McCain’s presidential bid.
Personal feelings about McCain running mate Sarah Palin varied somewhat, but everyone in this group credited her with “energizing” conservatives and making the 2008 presidential race more competitive. Kelly West felt that McCain’s Vice Presidential pick “couldn’t have been more perfect.” Terra Mork said that Palin’s nomination made her “really excited” about the McCain campaign. Kyle Burleigh thought that Palin “brings a lot to the table” in terms of executive experience. On the other hand, Norman Printer thought that Palin was “woefully lacking in experience.” Nonetheless, Printer spoke appreciatively of Palin’s “charisma,” saying it had created “a dynamic that didn’t exist a week ago.” (Printer also complained of the “unfair” treatment of Palin by media commentators and outlets that were in some cases “very left,” citing Chris Matthews, Tom Brokaw, and the New York Times. Significantly, Printer added that he didn’t watch Fox News, either, due to its conservative “bias.”) Palin wouldn’t have been Donna Cox’s first choice for the V.P. slot, but she knew from personal experience “how strong” “Alaskan women” are, and she was now “completely behind” the ticket.
Most felt that the presidential race was now a “dead heat”--too competitive to confidently predict the outcome. But several ventured a cautious optimism, saying that the Republicans’ chances were “looking really good, now.”
Independent Ryan Hendricks of course came at these questions from a different perspective. He actually described Barack Obama as his first choice candidate, but said that he was “still weighing" both general election candidates' "pros and cons." He enjoyed the “fierce competition” that was emerging between McCain and Obama, the way that it had “energized both parties.” As a rule, Hendricks felt that this kind of hard-fought contest “brings out the best--and the worst” in people. As for Sarah Palin, Hendricks worried that “I don’t know enough about her." On the other hand, Hendricks also credited Palin with energizing the G.O.P., and enlivening the race. He argued that Palin was “really kind of the Obama for the Republicans.”
I asked Hendricks what he hoped to gain from watching McCain's acceptance speech, how it might influence his choice. He answered that he hoped McCain’s speech would provide more than just a lot of familiar partisan rhetoric.
When John McCain finally did appear onscreen, the back room hushed and everyone’s eyes drifted upward.
The respectful silence was first broken during McCain’s inelegant references to the “forty-third president.” Across the table from me, Norman Printer sarcastically muttered “Don’t mention his name!” Printer was one of several Republicans who had earlier admitted feeling buyers’ remorse about voting for George W. Bush. Printer had in fact gone so far as to vote for Kerry in 2004, which sounded like it had taken some nose-holding.
But reactions to the speech were mainly enthusiastic: the crowd loudly applauded and cheered at references to the Palin nomination, to “change,” to the Iraq surge, to jobs, and to oil drilling. Attendees also greeted the several key lines with sustained applause, such as McCain’s promise to take the party of “Lincoln, Roosevelt, and Reagan” “back to basics”; his account of his P.O.W. experiences, and how they taught him “the limits of selfish independence”; his credo that “Nothing brings greater happiness in life than to serve a cause greater than yourself”; and, of course, his closing promise to “make history.”
Everyone I spoke to after the speech praised McCain’s “genuineness,” “sincerity,” and "patriotism.” Norman Printer enthused that “McCain got back to the real McCain.” Donna Cox called it “the best speech I have heard McCain give,” adding that it “exceeded my expectations.” McCain’s speech served to remind her that “this country is special.... People fought in wars so we can have that.” And while some preferred Sarah Palin’s scathing remarks the night beforee, others praised McCain’s “unifying” tone.
For his part, Ryan Hendricks was impressed by “McCain’s love for his country.” Whereas Hendricks thought that Palin’s acceptance speech had been “too polarizing,” he felt that McCain’s speech sought to “bring people together,” saying that the U.S. really needs that.
X-posted to
ljdemocrats
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-09-07 06:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-08 03:57 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-08 04:34 am (UTC)I also got a lot of mileage out of my own puzzled fascination--the inner voice saying "You really think that?" It kept me asking questions (if not that one, precisely). Circumstances permitting, I could probably have gone on like that for hours.
To the extent that I got into people's heads, into their emotions, I found that I didn't really dislike anyone; we had radically different assumptions about the world, different loyalties, different emotional centers of gravity.
I have to admit, though, there was one exception: this rigidly ideological, essentially humorless, character. He wouldn't make eye contact, was cold as dead fish on ice, but demanded attention, responding to everything with a speech. That was the exception, though.
And the discovery that I could talk to these people was even kind of ... exhilarating.