That's completely true. Obama won because of two reasons:
- He's black, so he symbolises change or is the catalogue of change. (Which I agree, is a double standard.)
- He's not Bush.
I think it's unfair as well, seeing as the election should have been based on:
- experience
- leadership skills
- character
- policies
Obama excelled in none of these areas, he appealed, like Rudd, to the people's desire for a change, a new direction and his assocation of McCain with Bush was very effective. What's more he has charisma which helped, he is quite a talented politician and he's clever. His race did to a certain degree allow him to physically look like the change he promoted, whilst allowing American's to feel good about themselves for overcoming divides of the past. Let's hope similarities to Rudd stop there, because Rudd is a bumbling idiot.
But I guess one's ability to stir emotion and rouse hope is also an important factor. Obama will be one of the only presidents ever elected, who is completely unknown. He sounds like a good guy, but how much do we actually know about him and how he will act in office? Not much I would suggest.
He's not proven, and it's a shame, but he'll have to prove himself in office even though others in the past have had to do that beforehand.
Events meant that Obama plummeted to power, though his campaign was also very effectively run and he himself remained constant throughout the campaign. McCain was doomed against any candidate I think, because of the economic crisis which he never recovered from...
It's an incredibly complex thing. I'm not sure what the future holds, none of us are. We can hope for change, but to believe in it would be naive. Obama has not yet proven himself and to earn my trust, that's something he's going to have to do.
So bring on the first issue which will test his character - reveal it to the American people and the world once and for all. Personally I think, he was right on one thing, his term/s will be defined by:
- His action in Iraq/Afghanistan
- His other foreign policy decisions (Russia, China, Australia, Iran North Korea, Israel, Pakistan, his dealings with the United Nations)
- His attempt to fix the economic policies
- His attempt to bridge the political resentment towards Republicans (I think this and not a race divide is what he refered to in his speech.)
- Decisions regarding the environment
- Decisions regarding renewable resources
- Restoration of American prestige or an attempt at it and to restore diplomatic ties.
- Ability to promote democratic ideals and spread them.
- MORE, but I can't think of them at the moment.
What do you guys think?