NBC’s Saturday Night Live television show has seen its fortunes wax and wane at various times. I have been a loyal watcher of the show since the last year of the original comedy troupe. I am not one of those who think that the show never recovered from the the departure of the original cast but I do recognize when it was good and when it was bad.
Much of the quality of the show is dependent on who are the cast members at any given time. I think that the ensemble in the early 90’s with Phil Hartman, Dana Carvey, Mike Myers, Janice Hooks were at least as comparable to the original cast. This year’s ensemble is not too bad but lacks any real outstanding talent that people will recognize in a flash.
One thing though that always have kept the show relevant is its takes on the current political situation of the moment and this year’s election is no different. The dynamics of the race truly make it different in the approaches that can be taken on the show. Early this year, the ongoing campaign between Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama made the show skits topic of much commentary that spilled over into the news shows. The current presidential campaign would have its moments for satire but when Sarah Palin was picked as the vice presidential candidate for the Republicans, the show had a source of material that will keep on giving. Palin’s most recent interview with CBS which most discussion thereof have classified charitably as incoherent has proven to be fodder for numerous Youtube videos and parodies. But as always, the writers at Saturday Night Live managed to nail it perfectly.
It is now part of the accepted thinking that the selection of Sarah Palin has been a momentous game changer for this election. Where the crowds were small and lackluster for McCain, now they are out in number and enthusiasm.
Before despairing, we should also recognize that Obama has had his own fair share of game changing moments. The first one was the endorsement of Ted Kennedy back in January. Kennedy’s endorsement gave Obama’s the legitimacy of the establishment Democratic Party and made old time liberals more comfortable with Kennedy.
The next big game changer moment was the wins especially in the caucus states on Super Tuesday in early February. By staying close to Hilary Clinton in delegate but with a financial reserves she could not match, he was able to win the next set of primaries and caucuses without too much opposition providing momentum for the rest of the campaign.
A third game changing moment was the endorsement of John Edwards after the West Virgina primary. By coming out with that endorsement, whatever media coverage that Clinton hope to sustain after her victory was gone as the media talked nothing but the endorsement and what it meant for the Obama campaign.
So here we are just 8 weeks out from election day. The media is in a frenzy about the McCain-Palin ticket (or is it the Palin-McCain ticket?). All they talked about is that and Obama/Biden are lucky to get any attention at all. Whatever critical insight the media had in early part of last week, is pretty much gone now in terms of a more fawning approach akin to Extra or Entertainment Tonight.
The conversation needs to change and must be soon or there will not be enough time to move the media narrative of the campaign.
Question is though, what game changing opportunities exist for Obama? It has to be significant to get everyone’s attention so it has to meaningful. Getting the endorsement of a minor non-Democratic person will not do.
So what is the best game changing opportunity exists that Obama has control over?
There are four possible game changing events:
- Major endorsement by a non-Democratic figure like Colin Powell or Chuck Hagel. An endorsement like this especially from a Republican would definitely make people take notice but are there any one of any particular statuture who could make a dramatic difference. I do not think so. Powell or Hagel will definitely make the pundits talk about it for a day or two but essentially all it does is change the conversation for a day or two without any lasting effect. There is also the fact that such endorsements bring little in terms of any political base. Perhaps someone like Michael Huckabee would have a greater impact but such people are firmly in McCain’s camp now.
- Hillary Clinton replaces Joe Biden as Vice President nominee. Such an event would definitely will cause a stir for a long while but would it be a positive one? The selection of Palin seems to have galvanise many of Clinton’s supporters to go to Obama now as it is apparent that the choosing of Palin to bring Clinton supporters strictly on the basis of gender is failing. So it unlikely that choosing Clinton now will bring any more support to Obama. What a choice like that does is make the Obama camp look defensive and weak, that it needed Clinton to get them the presidency. It would reflect badly on the integrity of Obama in that he would thrown over his personal choice as VP for expedient’s sake. As it is though, there are no other VP picks now that would have an impact like Clinton.
- Obama announces a major policy initiative like Universal Healthcare. This election is about change and hope for the future. Healthcare is increasingly important in the lives of everyone these days and while healthcare is an important plank of the Obama campaign, it really never has gain a point of prominence. Many elections have been decided in the past based on simple slogans that distill the complexities of policy initiatives. A forty page document about healthcare on a website will not capture the hearts and minds of ordinary voters. But a slogan such as Healthcare for Everyone or All troops out of Iraq by 2010 reinforced constantly on the stump and in advertising may sway public opinion more than any policy document.
- Obama crushes McCain in the debates. From what I have heard fom media reports and on the interview Obama had with Keith Olbermann, it seems that the Obama camp is putting more emphasis on the upcoming debates to help build a lead and sustain a lead straight to the election day. It is a sound policy on the face of it. Three debates will have more viewers and decide more minds than any news event or advertising campaign. The problem, though, is that Obama has repeatedly shown himself in group debates and one on one debates with Hillary Clinton during the primary campaign as a fair debater at best. A haltingly delivery, the thinking before saying approach while getting the approval of pundits and commentators, comes across to the television audience as someone not sure of himself and perhaps indecisive. Against a man who made strength of character as the centerpiece of his personal history, it may not be the best approach regardless of how many errors, lies or gaffes McCain will commit in the course of the debate. Debate requires an ability to repartee quickly and to frame the answer to highlight your best qualities or your opponents worse ones. The second debate is in the town hall format, a supposed strength of McCain’s. If somehow, Obama does average in the debates then it makes his job harder to open a lead on McCain.
It has been several days of non-stop information flooding the news with new revelations of Sarah Palin’s past and her political philosophy. Yet, other than a statement released today by Robert Gibbs that focuses on her reformer credentials, the Obama camp has been quiet. Why?
Given her statements and decisions on things like the Bridge to Nowhere, pork barrel politics than even McCain would never countenance, her strong fundamentalist beliefs, goofy statements on being vice president and so forth, there are plenty of things that the Obama can launch advertising on without even bringing up her family and or anything related to gender.
It seems to me that the Obama is allowing the media to do all of the work so as to avoid getting caught in the fray. So far that is working out fairly well. All of the commentary talk is about her rather than him or even McCain and initially that has worked to his benefit.
Thing though is that the information is coming out scatter shot. There is no defined overall narrative about her. The only one that is going on is the lack of vetting by the McCain camp and the rush to decision. That may be a good thing but we would not know for sure until much later. But will it be enough to rely on that narrative to show how poorly McCain makes decisions?
Or should the narrative should be about her in one or two lines which are not so much about her but rather cast uncertainty about McCain and what he stands for and what kind of government he would run as a President?
For this is what the Obama camp should do. Give focus to the media to concentrate on one or two aspects of the Palin vice president candidacy and let that drive the narrative much in the way McCain created a narrative about Obama’s so called celebrity status with just one or two ads.
At some point, perhaps very soon, the well will be dry of any new revelations about Palin and the media will move on. If the Obama camp waits too long, an opportunity will be missed to define Sarah Palin and by inference a McCain presidency.
It’s time to take the initiative.