Words Do Matter

When Senator Joseph Biden (D-DE) referred to Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) last year as "clean and articulate" it turned into a major dust up inside the Beltway.  "It was patronizing," said Biden's critics, "to refer to the junior senator from Illinois in such fashion. Why would you expect anything less?" Now, apparently being articulate is also a reason not to support Obama's run for the White House. That is, if you listen to John McCain and Hillary Clinton.

In the lead up to the Wisconsin primary this past Tuesday, both Clinton and McCain used Obama's rhetorical ability and capacity to inspire to suggest that he is thin on substance. A buddy of mine put it best when he said, "Why does he have to be a lightweight just because he speaks well? Are being a master orator and a substantive policymaker mutually exclusive?" The mere premise is insulting. Although these are the sorts of attacks Mr. Obama should expect from McCain and the Republicans going forward, Hillary Clinton should know better. And if she doesn't, Bill should remind her.

The power of Bill Clinton's message during the 1992 election campaign arose from his ability to verbally capture voters' imaginations. Arguably, his biggest strength during his presidency was his ability to use words to paint pictures that real people could identify with. No one would ever accuse the "Man From Hope" of not being able to turn a phrase.  We all wanted to realize his vision and accompany him on the drive across that "bridge to the twenty-first century" he kept talking about.

In politics, being able to communicate to voters using both verbal and non-verbal cues is what separates the cream from the rest of the crop.  Lest we forget, the deity-like reverence with which so many Americans regard Ronald Reagan--also known as The Great Communicator.  If an actor from Hollywood can win the presidency and be taken seriously by Congress, the defense and military establishments, as well as the former Soviet Union, then certainly a U.S. Senator with 11 years of legislative experience at both the state and federal levels has at least a fighting chance of being able to navigate his way through political Washington and around a globe that is probably somewhat less dangerous than the nuclear world Reagan inherited.

It seems that Democratic primary voters agree. During Tuesday's primary in Wisconsin Democrats were asked which candidate they thought was most qualified to be commander in chief, and Obama was favored over Clinton 51-47 percent.  Further, they were asked to choose which candidate would be most likely to unite the country if elected, and again Obama was chosen but by a much larger 63-35 percent margin. Similarly, Barack was selected as the candidate who would be more likely to improve relations with the rest of the world. From this it seems clear that voters believe that you can have substance and inspire at the same time.

I admit that Wisconsin is a small and fairly homogeneous swath of the country. So let's take a look at Ohio and Texas, two diverse, delegate-rich primary states scheduled for March 4.  In two polls just conducted by ABC News and The Washington Post among likely Democratic primary voters in Ohio and Texas, majorities in both states (56 percent and 53 percent, respectively) say Barack Obama has the kind of experience it takes to serve effectively as president. (In January a national survey of likely Democratic primary voters yielded similar results--53 percent said Obama had the right kind of experience to be an effective president.) Moreover, almost half the likely voters in both states (48 percent in Ohio and 47 percent in Texas) say Obama has the best chance of getting elected president in November.

It doesn't appear that the voters in Texas and Ohio are buying Hillary's argument regarding Senator Obama's political and legislative prowess.  This is an important failure for her campaign because it could spell the end of Senator Clinton's presidential bid if you believe, as her husband does, that if she loses on March 4, she will have no real possibility of capturing the nomination.

In Wisconsin Hillary Clinton must have just been saying what any good political actor would have said in her place. Surely she knows that words do matter because of the hope that they can convey and represent. 

The fatal problem for Hillary is that her recent words represent desperation.