Tom Wolf
11 October 2008
analysis
Nairobi — The considerable interest in the US presidential election around the world may partly reflect just its entertainment value.
But it is also true that however much of its "single superpower" status America has lost since the early 1990s (and this even before the current financial crisis that serves in part to confirm this), the outcomes of such elections have major global implications.
Indeed, some (such as Emmanuel Todd, in After the Empire: The Breakdown of the American Order) have argued that it is the very decline of the US' economic might, in large part a result of its energy dependence, rampant consumerism and the resultant burgeoning indebtedness, financed primarily by foreigners, that promotes ultimately futile military adventurism, designed more to show fire-power "hardware" than to rationally address threats to the US national security.
But whatever one's view of the evolving US position in the world, the importance of its national leadership to people outside its own borders is obvious, and has been, at least since World War II.
And with one of the two major candidates in this year's election having Kenyan roots, the heightened interest here and indeed in much of the rest of the world, even outside Africa, is to be expected.
Over such roots, however, it is misleading to describe Barack Obama as an African-American, as his wife Michelle for example, should be.
More accurate, perhaps would be "American-African", at least in terms of his origin, since being a "point 5" (in local parlance), he is at least genetically much more of a "mixture" than are African-Americans, as the term is generally used.
Yet especially given the fact that his father featured so briefly/distantly in his actual upbringing, he may be viewed, especially by many African-Americans, with some disdain as far more "white" than a 50-50 mixture.
In this sense, too, it is suggested that while certainly being the first major presidential candidate of colour, his rather unique mixed identity actually constitutes much less of a barrier to high office than to those in his wife's racial category, which is a sad commentary on American race relations, even after all the recent progress.
But the unusual, if not rather unique, aspects of this election go beyond Obama's DNA.
For each of the candidates are outsiders in a number of other ways.
Having yet to complete his first term in the US Senate and having had no previous executive experience, besides having been trounced in an earlier election for one of Illinois' seats in the House of Representatives by over 30 per cent while serving in the Senate of that state, one wonders just how Obama was able to even get close to capturing the Democratic Party's presidential nomination.
As The Economist noted recently, Obama "has the thinnest resume of any (presidential) nominee in living memory."
The same bewilderment may be applied to John McCain's success in getting himself onto the Republican ticket.
After all, here is a long-serving senator who some years ago considered becoming a Democrat, an option that seems less bizarre when one examines the ranking he earned a few years ago from the conservative National Journal.
Among some 50 Republican senators, he ranked 46th in terms of backing his own party's position on legislative initiatives. Such a ranking fits in with his "maverick" reputation generally.
For example, when Bob Dole was running for president in 1988, his campaign staff is said to have suffered near-nervous break-downs whenever McCain accompanied him as he could make statements to the Press that were completely at odds with the Dole/Republican party policy.
Said one aide: "We didn't even want him on the airplane with Dole..."
Within Republican circles, McCain claims that his voting record proves he was a "foot solider in the (President Ronald) Reagan revolution."
But when asked if McCain "could be trusted as a conservative", fellow Republican, Utah Senator Robert Bennett, coyly replied: "I'm going to dodge that question."
Thus, even if his lifetime voting rating by the American Conservative magazine is 82 per cent, it dropped to 65 per cent in 2006 when five other Republican senators had a perfect score -- 100 per cent.
For example, even while he has backed conservative positions on gun control and abortion, he opposed the massive 2001 Bush tax cuts, being one of only two Republican senators to do so, arguing that they would, as indeed they did, produce huge federal budget deficits, and gave disproportionate benefits to the wealthy.
Later, he earned the wrath of many fellow Republicans for jointly supporting an Immigration Bill with Democratic Senator Edward Kennedy that would have granted amnesty to the current illegal immigrants. Opposed by President Bush, it was eventually defeated.
Some would also consider his age, at 72 the oldest presidential candidate in history, an aspect of his "outsider" status. Obama, while at 47 not by any means the youngest to have sought the presidency, is certainly on the junior side of the ledger in this regard.
The US constitution requires that one be at least 35; there is no upper age limit.
So what explains how these two outsiders and mavericks managed to capture their party flags?
Among a number of complex factors, two quite different, if complementary, ones seem to have been especially salient.
One is more permanent and structural, and relates to the primary election process itself. The other stems from the current circumstances the US finds itself in, starting with the highly unpopular Bush presidency.
Regarding the primaries, a key factor is that participation is low, with turnout figures rarely reaching even half of those who vote in actual elections, but which was the case this time, the highest level since 1972.
They are also generally restricted to registered members of political parties, or at least require a pledge not to participate in the primary contest of any other party; the specific rule varies from state to state.
This means that a relatively small number of highly energised party activists, including newcomers associated with the campaigns of particular candidates, can have a major impact on the outcome.
And this is especially so given the psychological knock-on effect of "momentum" of those candidates who do well as the primary calendar plays itself out.
As was summarised by an article on the ABC News website a few months ago, "the question is whether the more organically grown game plans that carried Mr Obama to victory in Democratic primaries and caucuses can match the well oiled organisations Republicans have put together..."
Obama has moved in recent days to transform his primary organisation into a general election machine, hiring staff, sending organisers into important states and preparing a TV advertisement campaign to present his views and biography to millions of Americans who followed the primaries from a distance."
Underlying these dynamics that link the parties' nomination contests to the election itself is the fact that the American electorate has become increasingly fluid in recent decades, as cultural issues such as gun control, abortion, religion in schools and, earlier, the racially charged issue of affirmative action along with such global issues as terrorism and the appropriate use of military power abroad dilute some of the traditional dividing lines between Democrats and Republicans, starting with the role of government in the economy and addressing socio-economic inequality generally, with the former generally backing more and the latter less state intervention.
Independents
Be the first to Write a Comment!
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
