In this stretch of the presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have taken aim at who can connect with "real America," i.e., the blue collar worker. They've bowled, downed shots, and scarfed down hot dogs and apple pie, all in an effort to distance themselves from the " pointy headed intellectual types ". Sometimes, they've even affected a folksy rhetoric for town hall meetings.
But how many of us don't believe both Democratic frontrunners also pine for the occasional latt e and a copy of the Sunday New York Times?
Maybe the dichotomy of a wealthy poor man's advocate doesn't sit well because of the unsaid corollary of who foots the bill for the liberals' pet projects: government by way of taxpayers. It's not so bad when someone is telling others what worked for them personally. But when someone tells us what should be fixed at our expense for the benefit of others, it irks and galls the electorate.
Is there a way for Dems to get their message across without sounding like condescending, guilt-tripping nouveau hippies? The only way to reconcile their idealized message with a our mundane lives is to see the big picture and acknowledge that politicians inevitably sit on the hill (Washington, D.C. or otherwise). We either need to accept these politicians as our only hope for real change, or take the reins of power ourselves.
Voters are the ones yearning for commonality with our elected representatives. Maybe this will be the year voters resist the urge to have a beer with the president, and vote for the wisest pointy headed intellectual.
Where do you stand on image versus message in the presidential election?
-Citizen Voices blogger Alma Sove has spent most of her life in San Diego and is currently attending law school.
