Today's Musical Selection: "Hell's Bells" by AC/DC
Hello, all. As you can surmise, I did not wind up posting yesterday. Too much else going on. Today I was going to regale you all with tales of my Pittsburgh weekend, but John Kerry decided to go ahead and upstage me with a dispatch of his own from Pittsburgh, tapping John Edwards as his running mate. I'm not bitter about Kerry stealing the spotlight from me, although it's worth noting that I've never upstaged him. But never mind that.
So, it's Mr. Sunshine again, is it? The people's choice, allegedly. I'm not going to pretend I'm thrilled by this choice; I'm already on record, repeatedly, deriding Edwards as a pretty-boy lightweight who's not particularly bright, and it would be pointless for me to try to wish all that away, given the relative ease with which you, The Reader, can click on the archive link to the right over there and quote me back to myself. The most positive thing I can think of to say about Edwards is that at least he's not Dick Gephardt.
Moreover, I'm surprised at Kerry for making the choice. I believed him when he said that he wanted a vice-presidential candidate who could step in as president if the need arose. I was looking forward to the "We Are Serious Men" theme that might have gone along with an experienced choice. Instead, we've got Edwards, who's been in politics for all of six years. What gives?
In raw political terms, it probably makes sense to pick someone who might provide the campaign with a warm, upbeat tone, since that's more likely to attract your typical swing voter than someone else as sober and dour as Kerry. Still, I thought Senator Kerry sincerely believed that having a vice-president who was ready to step in was important. Some might think that abandoning such an important belief is a sign of desperation. Or perhaps the campaign people prevailed on him to make some concessions to the realities of modern campaigning. Either way, I don't like it.
But this isn't about me. Kerry doesn't have to convince me to vote for him. So will the choice of Edwards help Kerry win those swing voters out there? Possibly so. Let's take a look.
A lot of people seem to think that Edwards will help Kerry in the South, but I'll believe it when I see it. During his run in the primaries, let us recall, Edwards won exactly two states: North Carolina and South Carolina. Edwards might help Kerry win North Carolina. Emphasis on "might." But the Democrats couldn't win South Carolina against Saddam Hussein if Saddam ran as a Republican. So what, precisely, is Edwards going to help Kerry win? Possibly Virginia. Possibly Florida (although I have my doubts). Just because Edwards speaks with an accent, that doesn't mean that Southern voters are going to flock to him. Regionalism just ain't what it used to be.
I do think that Edwards' upbeat tone might be helpful. Optimism is winning in a presidential campaign. People like it. They're willing to overlook a great many flaws in a candidate if he can inspire them. And optimism is not Kerry's natural mode. He's a serious-minded person by nature. Having Edwards around to lighten him up can only help. It's dangerous for a presidential candidate to be perpetually down, particularly a challenger. It leaves voters with the impression that the the challenger's entire appeal is based on the undesirability of the incumbent. Voters want a reason to vote for the challenger, and in this day and age, that takes a little sunshine. Enter Edwards.
Moreover, an optimistic Kerry-Edwards campaign almost forces the Bush-Cheney ticket to run on seriousness, which we all know was a big hit for George Bush the elder in 1992. And the more the Bush campaign tries to impress voters with its seriousness, the more Dick Cheney is going to be an issue. Cheney is a serious man, but he's serious to the point of looking sinister at times. Kerry may come off like a guy who'd be boring to hang out with at parties, but his seriousness isn't as dark as Cheney's. (I still worry about Cheney dismantling Edwards in debate, unless Edwards is willing to show the mettle that Joe Lieberman didn't in 2000.)
Slate's William Saletan likes the pick of Edwards for a related reason: He think Edwards is a better campaigner, while Kerry is a more qualified choice for president. There's definitely something to this... people like me (and Saletan's wife, apparently) who distrust Edwards' credentials can feel comforrtable with Kerry in charge, while people who don't like Kerry's style may connect better with Edwards. It has the potential to be a dynamic duo, if the chemistry works right. If picking Edwards means that disenchanted Democrats have a reason to feel enthusiastic about the campaign again, this can only help.
Also, to Edwards' credit, he brought more to his campaign than just a nice tone. He had some creative ideas about tax credits for things like education that the Kerry campaign would do well to entertain. And Edwards also managed to sound the "people vs. the powerful" theme more effectively than Al Gore did. (Though I doubt Kerry's going to try that tack.) One of Edwards' strrengths is that he seems like a man of ideas, which voters tend to like in a candidate. Kerry, like Bob Dole, seem like a guy who gets things done, but he doesn't necessarily come off as an idea guy. This is an area where Edwards might help.
But the most important advantage to having Edwards on the ticket occurred to me while reading Howard Kurtz's column this morning. Kurtz muttered a bit about "the media-industrial complex" pushing Kerry to take Edwards, which I believe to be true. He quoted Jonah Goldberg, who had a devastatingly accurate take on Edwards: "No serious person I know thinks Edwards would have ever gotten into politics if he'd been burnt by acid as a teenager." By the time I finished, I was confirmed in my opinion that Edwards is a creature of media hype, the Britney Spears of the political universe.
But wait a minute. Haven't the media been disenchanted as all hell with Kerry for a while now? Hasn't he been getting pretty tough reviews in the press? The media do not like John Kerry, at least as a candidate, and it seems unlikely that they're going to start liking him in the near future. Given that, why not pick a running mate that the media appear to have a collective crush on? It could only improve Kerry's press. And given that a lot of the public's perception of how well or poorly a candidate is doing is filtered through the media, the better the coverage, the stronger Kerry looks. So perhaps by courting the media, consciously or unconsciously, by picking someone they like, Kerry's demonstrating a shrewd understanding of the political process. (John McCain also fits in this category.) I wish I'd thought of it earlier, but you know me and my meritocratic hangups.
We've heard from Edwards-backer Saletan, but Slate's leading Kerry-basher, Mickey Kaus, has thus far been silent. Perhaps the contrast of seeing his least favorite candidate and his favorite candidate on the same ticket was just too much for Mickey, and his head exploded. Here's hoping that when he comes to, he'll be a new convert to the cause.
I can't leave you without sharing a couple highlights of the Pittsburgh tour. My visit to the Steel City has made me quite fond of it, its unpretentious, unabashedly industrial feel and surprising architectural beauty. PNC Park, home of the Pirates, is a gem. Although Wrigley Field remains my favorite park, the total experience of PNC is hard to beat. For starters, the park looks over downtown Pittsburgh, a lovely view, but it's unobtrusive. Unlike a lot of modern parks, PNC doesn't beat you over he head with the skyline. The focus is on the game. But the city is there, in the background, pretty as a painting. And on game days the Roberto Clemente Bridge is closed to cars, and fans walk over from downtown to the park on the bridge. I really loved that feeling, walking toward the game, feeling the buzz and excitement of the Pirates fans around me.
Of course, since the Brewers were the opponent, I came decked out in Milwaukee garb. And no one booed me, cursed at me or tried to jump me, which I appreciate. I saw a small scattering of fellow Brewer fans in the stands, but unsurprisingly the crowd was very pro-Pirate. And it was a good night for the home team, as the Pirates notched their eighth straight win, 5-2. As we were preparing to leave, I was passed by a Pirate rooter. He took one look at me and my Brewers outfit, patted me sympathetically on the shoulder and passed on. I appreciated that.
I also enjoyed the walk back across the bridge after the game. A fellow was sitting there blowing his sax, and I tossed a quarter in his case. As I was walking away, though, he shouted, "Hey, Brewer fan!"
I could only presume he meant me. "What?"
"I got a song just for you!" And he blew out "Taps" on his saxophone. I bowed to him and waved my cap to the laughing crowd on the bridge, and started to walk away.
"Hang on, I got another one for you!" And he play "Na-Na Hey Hey Kiss Him Goodbye," which actually sounds really good on the sax. I laughed, waved my cap again and danced off toward downtown.
The next day, Papa Shaft and I paid a visit to what remains of Forbes Field, where the Pirates played up until 1970. All that now remains is a stretch of the center-field wall, which is made of brick with cement pillars, and the old flagpole, which was on the field in center. What used to be the field is now the University of Pittsburgh law school. The remaining chunk of the wall is surrounded by trees, so that it's not immediately obvious from the road. We approached the wall reverently, taking it all in, imagining what it must have been like to chase flies there in the old days. We threw ourselves up against the wall (of course), and quickly realized that the brick is far less forgiving than today's padding. I tried to imagine Brooklyn's Pete Reiser, the outfielder with a love of the game and a complete disrespect for fences, running over and over into walls like these. (No over-the-wall snatch catches here; the wall must have been 20 feet high.) I jogged down to right field, now the pavilion of some glassed-in building. I shouted to Papa, "Clemente played right here." He smiled and nodded.
As we were leaving, I said, "It's a shame that Clemente's ghost has to be floating around the law school like that." Papa replied, "Yeah. But better than than Three Rivers." Which was a good point. Incidentally, neither Papa nor I are big into the supernatural. And yet our discussion of Clemente's ghost, pawing the concrete in right field and waiting for a game, seemed appropriate. Something about being in contact with history like that puts you in mind of the ghosts. Especially Clemente, dying young as he did... you think he has to be there, somewhere, still chasing long-forgotten fly balls and lighting up the vanished field, just like he used to. If he is, I hope he's had a chance to check out PNC. I think he'd like it.
Enough for today. Something else tomorrow!
Posted by Fred at July 6, 2004 05:31 PM