McCain's running mate

I wonder to what extent this is not misogynist to pick up a woman just because she is a woman?

Anyway I do not perfectly understand a pro-lif... anti-abortion woman, as I would not understand a pro-slavery black for instance... oups, sorry...


DNC : Day 4 : Obama's acceptance speech

Of course, the man must have become completely crazy before the bubble he represents in the eyes of others ; of course the man intends to get into a sleight of hand by confiscating the power of a people, whom the expression is reduced to moronic and compulsive applause, but it would be cynical and kill-buzzer for not enjoying this speech by Barack Obama, who embraces all oratorical technics with such a skill; calm his taste for lyricism, getting a little more precise, a little more concrete; brings together all the watchwords and other arguments heard these days (the patriotism of John Kerry, attacks against McCaine by Joe Biden and others, and so on.) And succeeds to give them more scale, more impact; uses anaphora to increase in strength his speech; and speaks from experience to sustain his motivation.

There is something completely insane to do exactly what you are expected to do, specially with so much talent, but it is also very beautiful.


DNC : Day 3 : Boring

There's something highly conservative in this endless succession of all these speeches, all built with the same pattern, respecting, with such a rigourous care, whith so little inventiveness, the same rules.
Those variations or stylistic composition, repeating over and over the same slogans, using the same old anaphora, and cynically scattering real stories of real lives of real people, are tiring.


DNC : Day 2 : Hillary Clinton's stylistic composition

Something enabled me to recognize a political meeting today, more easily than the day before. Something, which happens in every political meeting throughout the world, in democracies as well as in dictatorships : the compulsive repetition of watchwords.

Dozens of people came, thus, to say at some moment in their speeches, for instance : "McCain more of the same".

Those different slogans ("Unity", "Hillary", "Obama", etc.) were supported by thousands of signs raised in the public in a very well organized perfect timing.

So, Hillary Clinton's speech was a really talented moment of stylistic composition, as it happens to be a must-do in every political carreer.


Joe Biden's biography

On Saturday, I received, like everyone, this...

...wondering why nobody raised the question about who had organized the visit of Joe Biden in Georgia: Himself to get in the race for vice-presidency, which he refused 3 weeks ago? ; Obama's staff to launch the two weeks of hysterical speculation which followed? ; A coincidence due to his chair in the Foreign Relations Committee in the Senate?

In addition, I would be curious to know who provided the only biography of Joe Biden, which all American media air this weekend, which emphatically underlines the most relevant points to support the choice of Obama: the tragedy of his journey, which inevitably arouses empathy, his anchorage among blue-collar workers, which answers the will of his running mate to change Washington and could bring him their votes; his diplomatic experience, which compensates for the weaknesses of the Democratic nominee and his tough character to go after MacCaine...

Is this the man who is well chosen or his biography well written?


McCain/Obama : Example from the forum of "faith"

I'm very amused by the subtleties of political verbiage of the candidates in the forum of "faith", in which, even if one of them, McCaine, puts forward its opposition, and the other, Obama, tries to temper it somehow, as a matter-of-fact both come out against marriage between people of same sex and for letting each state legislate.


Does Hillary Clinton suffer from stammering?

It's not so much that we sneak around the hustle-bustle of Hillary Clinton Campaign's kitchen with those memos and e-mails provided by The Atlantic, because we don't give a... dime, but to see clearly this feeling we had so far taking shape : her inability to make decisions underlined by the newspaper:

"Above all, this irony emerges: Clinton has competed on the basis of its management skills, his ability, as she likes to put it, 'do the job from Day 1. In fact, it has never behaved in-chief and his own team has proved to be its Achilles heel. "

This careful analysis delivered by the journalist follows the contradictions, the power struggle in this divided team of advisers, never arbitrated, except once - about the airing of the famous 3:00pm call ad - and this is not Hillary but Bill who decides between the two camps.

But beyond this analysis after the fact, which talk sometimes about the notes informed by the defeat, proving that an "a posteriori" can also be an "a priori", it is quite another question that these stolen memos inspire me...

Whether this profusion of ideas in these notes are all deliciously circumventing Policy, to focus on communication, it is obviously the least marketing advisers can do. Policy is an entertainment like cinema or reality TV, and this is only to shock extremists purists, whose nostalgia makes them forget the immense boredom and the vanity of discussions which want to change the world. Purists will continue to die of boredom if they enjoy it, this is not our problem. What seems wonderful in this positioning crisis is how it reveals the collapse of the relationship of Hillary Clinton to her speech.

Because if this team argues over the best positioning to take, that means there is no clear, obvious, necessary positioning.

That's the confusion we felt, seeing Hillary Clinton hesitating between the emotion and the bossy cards, as she tore up in january or strongly attacked Barack Obama during their last debate, for instance.

What these few notes thus outline, since the sketch of a naive image that begins in 2006, when Mark Penn takes Margaret Thatcher as a fantasized reference point, to the invasion of doubts in the team about the choice of a single, clear message, is the krach, the complete sucking up of a speech by itself, its withdrawal and its insane tetany.

What we do not know, what we can not know is whether the speech of Hillary Clinton has been, during this campaign, a stammering, where the thought erupts and stumbles against the slowness and poverty of the communication, or a confused silence, vague or embarrassed, which gives back the floor she couldn't stand up on. Did she have too much to say or was she talking to say nothing?

Anyway, what is perfectly fine to see in these exchanges of notes, beyond a problem of management and beyond a deficit of communication strategy, is, suddenly, someone stumbling against completely arbitrary rules, as all standards, where at this times, the one who will be elected to the head of a country ought to be the best soap seller.