I found my interest in last night’s Super Tuesday coverage diminishing little by little as the electoral map became muddled in various shades of blue and red.
Still, I was drawn to one particular bit of exit polling data, showing that the leading quality sought by Obama voters is “can bring about needed change?”
Obama has rightly inspired voters across the country. For those who remain somewhat skeptical, however, the exit polls do little to quell reservations.
Before more of America is swept up by the freight train of change, it’s worth exploring how the term became a quality, rather than a hoped-for result.
Survey experts who throw the word into exit polls are doing little to clarify the situation. Neither are most reporters, who rarely turn down any type of polling data.
The focus on a generic brand of change threatens to marginalize this all-important election. After all, has any politician from an opposition party ever sought the status quo? And, for an election about change, the raise-and-spend 2008 race seems like more of the same.
Wouldn’t Obama’s brand of change be more compelling, for instance, if the candidate also revolutionized his campaign tactics?
In January, Obama’s campaign said it raised $32 million — $19 million more than Clinton’s. If Obama is serious about change, how about taking that difference and donating it to a serious cause?
The candidates are in a dead-heat, we hear, so let’s allow the rest of the primary to be about ideas, not cash. Meanwhile, those millions could go a long way in making health care affordable for many families TODAY, not sometime in 2010.
The plan might be deemed political suicide, but no one ever said change was pain-free.