Nothing in this diary is "breaking" news, but the intention is provide a historical context for the fight we find ourselves in, and perhaps some comfort, and confidence in the idea that the Obama campaign is on the right side of both winning and history. All that, a Palin summary, and Medieval battle tactics, after the jump.
Now that both conventions are over, the presidential elections begin in earnest. As for the Republican convention itself, my views were best summed up by Joe Biden on the trail yesterday:
But let's talk a little more about Palin (because face it, everyone is). The evangelical elements of the right have fallen for her hard, while the left is infuriated, and it is for the same reasons: Palin is, in a way, everything George W. Bush claimed to be.
Born again Christian. Pro-life. Against taxes. No demonstrated intellectual curiosity. Believes global warming is not man-made. Enjoys being outdoors.
Unlike Bush, however, Palin is not a child of privilege pretending to be a real cowboy. As far as I can tell, she is who she says she is, an Alaskan hockey mom. And it is also true that she has no substantial public opinions on the great issues of our time: Iraq, the housing crisis, our bank problems, the list goes on. And this is probably the reason why she won't be available for questions for a while.
Which is precisely the problem: we know hardly anything about Sarah Palin and the McCain campaign will do their best to shape the portrait that is given. She certainly seems to be an adept politician: she didn't have any problem lying in her convention speech. Can anyone, on the left or the right, honestly tell me they have an idea of how Palin thinks, how she makes decisions, or how she might react in a crisis? Can someone tell me she won't bring her religion to bear in the process of state decisions? I don't think anyone's religious beliefs should be a qualification for public office in the United states, but when someone asks people to pray for a natural gas pipeline, and labels the Iraq War a "task that is from God," it makes me wonder how she interprets Jesus's command to "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and render unto God that which is God's." Frankly, I think her choice undercuts McCain's argument that the fight against terror is the existential challenge of the 21st century, though his aides assure that she will learn from the 'master' (seemingly McCain himself, though the master sometimes has trouble with Sunni and Shiia). But he has chosen Palin, and strengthened his support among the 30% who still believe W. is doing a heckuva job.
And now to the left, who don't know what to make of all of this. Many see in Palin everything they can't stand about Bush, but in better packaging, and are scared that Rove will break out the bag of tricks, and 2000 and 2004 are going to happen again. I agree that McCain has chosen the low road, and Palin will help him take that path. But I am also confident that the Obama campaign has what it takes to win the election.
For I am convinced that with the Obama campaign we are dealing with an entirely new political idea, a campaign that has fused the best of the old techniques of organizing with the power of the internet to reach people in a way that hasn't been done before. Outwardly, this manifests itself in the unprecedented fundraising numbers, the sheer volume of contributors, but inwardly, it is about making connections with people. As a volunteer in the campaign, I get at least a phone call a week about volunteer opportunities in my area. I also get emails that inform while asking for donations. Previous to this campaign, I had hardly been involved in politics, but for this election I took a week of vacation from work to help get out the vote in Ohio, worked 15 hour days, lost and still had an unforgettable time. And I am just one of thousands. The enthusiasm gap is real, and if nearly every young person I know is indicative, so is the youth movement.
So I think we are at a tipping point, where the old Rovian battle tactics, which still evoke fear and resonate in the ranks of the left, are going to be exposed as obsolete. This will be the year when "what's next" manifests itself. Polls aside, we've had 3 special congressional elections in Bush districts, and the Dems have won them all. Historically, this reminds me of the Battle of Crécy in 1346.
In this battle an army of 16,000 English troops faced 80,000 French troops, with of 70,000 of those heavily armored knights, the flower of French chivalry. It was inconceivable that the French would lose, for knights were the unstoppable weapon of their age. Knights didn't lose, so the conventional calculus was the more knights you had, the more likely you were to win. Every conventional pundit of their age would have predicted an overwhelming English defeat, much like these guys (starting at 4:00):
At Crécy, the knight was introduced to the English yew longbow. The results were 30,000 French casualties to 300 for the English and a revolution in medieval warfare. Today, the Republicans still have knights, culled from big money donors and culture wars. Palin is their Galahad, and McCain has joined their ranks. These knights still cause consternation in our ranks, because they have defeated us before, but in this election we should be confident that we possess the superior firepower and technology to fight the battle. I'll admit our message is more sophisticated, harder to argue, harder to demonstrate. It's easy to say government doesn't work, then break it. It's easy to say every man for themselves: that's universally understood. Talk of coming together to the table to solve problems is harder to define on the terms and leave room for confusion and suspicion on all sides. But I have confidence in Obama, his campaign, and his volunteers to make our case to the nation. On November 4th, Obama and the Democrats will show the nation what 2,000,000 longbowmen working together can do.
Crossposted from http://www.readingourpast.com/