What Obama’s Re-Election Tells us About America (Part 3)

Obama’s re-election tells us that image matters more than reality.

In the days leading up to his re-election, Obama announced to America that the federal deficit had gone down under him. “We tried our ideas. They worked. The economy grew. We created jobs. Deficits went down.” Well, the federal deficit actually expanded under Obama, and not even his supporters have tried to argue otherwise.

However, what has mattered more than the facts was the impression Obama gave of himself as an experienced statesman who halted the rising deficit through his policies of fiscal prudence. Most of America bought the lie, or Obama wouldn’t now be preparing to serve a second term.

In addition to portraying himself as a thrifty leader who had brought America out of its recession, Obama successfully portrayed Romney as an intolerant, right-wing plutocratic. The barrage of the withering television ads that the Obama campaign let loose in the swing states solidified this caricature of Romney, though it was about as accurate as Obama’s claim to have decreased the federal deficit.

What this tells us about America is that impression matters more than substance. As I pointed out in an article I wrote last summer, political speeches “are increasingly filled with vacuous statements that do not invite rational disputation. Speeches are designed to maximize applause lines, stroke the emotions and appeal to our intuitions, while being lean on substantive content.”

Obama embodies this image-based paradigm. He was able to appeal to the intuitions and emotions of most Americans, especially those living in urban areas, while being lean on factual content.

 

Further Resources

 

 

Find out how to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

5 COMMENTS

  5. Whilst an Obama victory means an accelerated de-construction of what remains of America’s Christian social order, a Romney victory would (at the bequest of AIPAC) have seen an acceleration of the endless so called “war on terror”. This war (whose final cost is currently estimated at $2.6 trillion) has not only set America on a trajectory for national bankruptcy but will see it lose its super-power status end by 2025.

    Why should any patriotic American Christian vote for either of these 2 options? What is needed is a major reform of the political system so that Washington reflects the national interest and not the interests of special interest groups which have brought the nation to the edge of the precipice.

    Only Ron Paul could have delivered on this.