Obama's speeches are genuinelly painful to listen to; theyre pretty much the epitome of tabloid-rhetoric and populist platitudes. I tried to listen to his
victory speech after Iowa but had to stop after about 5 minutes because I couldnt take any more. I realise the other mainstream candidates are probably just as bad, but the people who think that Obama is more sincere than typical politicians, or represents anything other than the latest movement in image-politics, strike me as delusional.
I see a lot of similarities between his campaign and the advertising campaigns that Apple have been running over the last 10 years; despite the fact that macs/iPods are the epitome of consumerist capitalism (in the sense that the product being sold is primarilly image/fashion rather than something functional), fanboys seem to view Apple products as being cool and an alternative to the multinational hegemony of Microsoft/Intel/whoever. Similarly, Obama's main appeal seems to be his image (hay guys its a well-spoken black man not some dumb Texan redneck) and in that sense hes pretty much an intensification/continuation of the last ~25 years of American politics since Reagan rather than the change of direction that his supporters are trying to make out.
I can understand the desire that Americans have to move away from the overly confrontational "my side vs your side" approach to politics that pollutes their country/media and stifles any non-superficial debate, but electing someone who seems to be running almost entirely on image rather than substance probably isnt the best idea. It's pointless to focus on the ending of partisan politics unless youre replacing it with genuine debate and will-to-understand rather than more soundbites and populism.
I would have voted Ron Paul
