I had seen notices that Edwards was going to be at a house party, and decided to go at the last minute, as I had never been to a house party before and this was only a couple of miles from my home. And was I glad I went! I liked him even more this time.
The meeting was in the backyard of a supporter’s home, with a couple of hundred people attending. Children were sitting on the swing set in the backyard and listening (engaging in the political process at an early age I am sure helps them be active participants in the democratic process as they grow older). A postman doing his rounds stopped and looked over the hedge a bit. Some passersby stopped on the sidewalk and listened over the hedge.
Edwards spoke with more details this time. He talked at some length about his plan for universal health care, and again pledged not to accept money from lobby groups. He said three things that won me over – one, that America has 4% of the population but is the world’s worst polluter (how many candidates are critical of the US?), two, buying local helps fight global warming because when goods are transported we are contributing to global warming (gosh, I thought only extreme environmentalists said that), and three, we need to make progress politically in Iraq. And oh, he also said in response to a question (on how to restore checks and balances in the government) that transparency was essential in every bit of the government and the governing process. For the immigration issue he said we should do what makes sense and what is moral and just. And he speaks with energy, with a touch of something that makes him look very credible.
I guess I still believe (!) that the world can really change, which is why I get fired up! I signed a supporter card this time.
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Fred enters the Race
Fred Thompson’s candidacy had excited considerable attention, with a lot of speculation and discussion in the weeks leading up to his formal announcement. He came to New Hampshire the day after he announced and after visiting Iowa, and the Nashua Peace group decided to go and stand there with our peace signs. I was also very curious to see and hear him, being a huge Law and Order fan, and because he seemed like a likely winner of the Republican nomination at that point.
His meeting was in front of the Nashua City Hall, and I was surprised by the small size of the crowd. There were about 50 press people, but only 25 or so attendees. It was a very rainy day, and we got pretty wet waiting for him to come - the event was scheduled to being at 4.00pm and he arrived almost an hour late, straight away failing my mother’s test (as she says – isn’t my time important too?). Maybe the rain contributed to lower attendance. But the people who did come seemed to ardently believe in him. It was the first time I was with the Nashua Peace Group at a Republican event – and our reception was very different. At Democratic events people usually come up and thank us for doing this. Here people either ignored us or came up and argued. One veteran, now an elected New Hampshire state representative, in particular began to argue with us, said we disgusted him, but also said that we had a right to be there because of the freedom of speech.
I had thought of Thompson as someone who believed in certain principles (based on his history as a lawyer during watergate where he seemed to stand by what he believed was right). That might be true, but the ideology he believes in is rather alarming – because he seems to really believe it. He talked complete privatization of healthcare, saying free market was the solution. He talked about security, which everyone talks about, he talked about military solutions and using might, which every Republican candidate talks about – but then he said this was a “war of civilizations” with the western civilization on one side! Jeez!! And what’s more, he actually seemed to believe it.
Anyway, it appears as though both his Iowa and New Hampshire events created barely any ripples. Apparently his South Carolina events were very different, with standing room only at some of them!
His meeting was in front of the Nashua City Hall, and I was surprised by the small size of the crowd. There were about 50 press people, but only 25 or so attendees. It was a very rainy day, and we got pretty wet waiting for him to come - the event was scheduled to being at 4.00pm and he arrived almost an hour late, straight away failing my mother’s test (as she says – isn’t my time important too?). Maybe the rain contributed to lower attendance. But the people who did come seemed to ardently believe in him. It was the first time I was with the Nashua Peace Group at a Republican event – and our reception was very different. At Democratic events people usually come up and thank us for doing this. Here people either ignored us or came up and argued. One veteran, now an elected New Hampshire state representative, in particular began to argue with us, said we disgusted him, but also said that we had a right to be there because of the freedom of speech.
I had thought of Thompson as someone who believed in certain principles (based on his history as a lawyer during watergate where he seemed to stand by what he believed was right). That might be true, but the ideology he believes in is rather alarming – because he seems to really believe it. He talked complete privatization of healthcare, saying free market was the solution. He talked about security, which everyone talks about, he talked about military solutions and using might, which every Republican candidate talks about – but then he said this was a “war of civilizations” with the western civilization on one side! Jeez!! And what’s more, he actually seemed to believe it.
Anyway, it appears as though both his Iowa and New Hampshire events created barely any ripples. Apparently his South Carolina events were very different, with standing room only at some of them!
Illegal Immigration is "illegal"
I am driving home, I am tired, and it has been a bit of a difficult day. What does a political junkie like me do? Drive to a presidential candidate town hall meeting for some potentially interesting entertainment :-)
Tom Tancredo was speaking at a town hall meeting in Merrimack. He is a fringe republican candidate, who has said he is running because of the illegal immigration issue. I had been intending to go listen to some republican candidates as well, and here was a good chance. (One of the things that makes the New Hampshire primary interesting is the fact that independents can vote. Generally only registered democrats vote in the democratic primary and only registered republicans vote in the republican primary, but in New Hampshire independents can vote in either one. Which is also why candidates like to focus on New Hampshire because it can somewhat reflect how the independents will vote, and that group is critical in the general election).
There were about 25-30 people in Merrimack town hall, making it a chatty living room type atmosphere. Tancredo started speaking, said he was a second-tier candidate, but stood a chance in New Hampshire because grassroots campaigning cost much less than TV campaigning (and a win or a good place in New Hampshire can give a candidate tremendous momentum in later primary states). He talked about his children and grand-children. So far, so good.
Then he began to speak about illegal immigration. I generally try to understand the other person’s point of view, but as time progressed, it got a bit scary (well, I was not really scared, but you get the idea, I did begin to feel that I was the only non-white in the room….hmmm…. maybe I was OK since I was born in the US ;-)). During the first part of his talk he focused on how illegal immigrants were involved in crime, and gave a couple of anecdotal incidents. Anecdotal incidents do not make up statistics, but I desisted from asking that question as I really did not want to take up time on a question, when I was not going to vote for him. Anyway, he continued, and began to come out strongly against sanctuary cities (which have decided to help illegal immigrants by giving then an identity card, making them feel welcome, helping them, and so on), at which point there was applause. He said that the illegal immigrants had broken the law, and so were the sanctuary cities by helping them. Well, I did not agree with him, but I have heard a sort of similar viewpoint from very sensible American friends - that illegal immigrants were “breaking the law”, and this is something Americans do not like at all, as they set a huge store on living according to the rule of law. He applauded the town of Merrimack for voting against bilingual language boards, and a local police chief for arresting an illegal immigrant (and I think in the process turning him over to the immigration authorities). Again I did not agree with these points of view, but I know they exist. What he then talked about was what made the whole thing become weird. He talked about being a nation-state, about the importance of the identify of a nation. He talked about clear political boundaries, and how they should be respected. He that Mexicans coming in was an “act of aggression” since they would soon come and make the US more like Mexico. He talked about how the President of Mexico was fully aware of this but would not do anything to change it, rather implied to Bush that Mexico had rights north of the Mexican border. He said Bush is an internationalist, who cares more about trade than a nation’s borders – that is, in Bush’s mind regions are demarcated by trade (which is probably true).
The audience agreed with him (I guess that is why they had come to listen to this candidate), and there were lots of nods as Tancredo touched upon various points. One person in the audience said “these people don’t care about our laws but just come into our country, they don’t care about us”, implying that because they “broke the law” by entering the country, they are all law-breakers, and do not respect the US laws and will continue to break the laws.…..Hmmm…..!! Tancredo himself seemed to connect “violent crime” by illegal immigrants to the fact that they were “law-breakers”.
At the end, I must say it was a bit unsettling to hear this point of view and to see that some people agreed with it. In contrast, when I got lost trying to get to the event, a Merrimack town official left his desk where he was in the middle of doing something and so courteously showed me the right way – I have almost never been made to feel that I do not belong in the US.
Being my first Republican event, I felt it was good that I could see the other side – instead of just going to Obama and Edwards events. We need to know what the other side is thinking! :-) And it is good that people have to a forum to share their thoughts, however much I might disagree with them.
All in all, it was interesting, and as recreational as a movie, without costing a dime!
Tom Tancredo was speaking at a town hall meeting in Merrimack. He is a fringe republican candidate, who has said he is running because of the illegal immigration issue. I had been intending to go listen to some republican candidates as well, and here was a good chance. (One of the things that makes the New Hampshire primary interesting is the fact that independents can vote. Generally only registered democrats vote in the democratic primary and only registered republicans vote in the republican primary, but in New Hampshire independents can vote in either one. Which is also why candidates like to focus on New Hampshire because it can somewhat reflect how the independents will vote, and that group is critical in the general election).
There were about 25-30 people in Merrimack town hall, making it a chatty living room type atmosphere. Tancredo started speaking, said he was a second-tier candidate, but stood a chance in New Hampshire because grassroots campaigning cost much less than TV campaigning (and a win or a good place in New Hampshire can give a candidate tremendous momentum in later primary states). He talked about his children and grand-children. So far, so good.
Then he began to speak about illegal immigration. I generally try to understand the other person’s point of view, but as time progressed, it got a bit scary (well, I was not really scared, but you get the idea, I did begin to feel that I was the only non-white in the room….hmmm…. maybe I was OK since I was born in the US ;-)). During the first part of his talk he focused on how illegal immigrants were involved in crime, and gave a couple of anecdotal incidents. Anecdotal incidents do not make up statistics, but I desisted from asking that question as I really did not want to take up time on a question, when I was not going to vote for him. Anyway, he continued, and began to come out strongly against sanctuary cities (which have decided to help illegal immigrants by giving then an identity card, making them feel welcome, helping them, and so on), at which point there was applause. He said that the illegal immigrants had broken the law, and so were the sanctuary cities by helping them. Well, I did not agree with him, but I have heard a sort of similar viewpoint from very sensible American friends - that illegal immigrants were “breaking the law”, and this is something Americans do not like at all, as they set a huge store on living according to the rule of law. He applauded the town of Merrimack for voting against bilingual language boards, and a local police chief for arresting an illegal immigrant (and I think in the process turning him over to the immigration authorities). Again I did not agree with these points of view, but I know they exist. What he then talked about was what made the whole thing become weird. He talked about being a nation-state, about the importance of the identify of a nation. He talked about clear political boundaries, and how they should be respected. He that Mexicans coming in was an “act of aggression” since they would soon come and make the US more like Mexico. He talked about how the President of Mexico was fully aware of this but would not do anything to change it, rather implied to Bush that Mexico had rights north of the Mexican border. He said Bush is an internationalist, who cares more about trade than a nation’s borders – that is, in Bush’s mind regions are demarcated by trade (which is probably true).
The audience agreed with him (I guess that is why they had come to listen to this candidate), and there were lots of nods as Tancredo touched upon various points. One person in the audience said “these people don’t care about our laws but just come into our country, they don’t care about us”, implying that because they “broke the law” by entering the country, they are all law-breakers, and do not respect the US laws and will continue to break the laws.…..Hmmm…..!! Tancredo himself seemed to connect “violent crime” by illegal immigrants to the fact that they were “law-breakers”.
At the end, I must say it was a bit unsettling to hear this point of view and to see that some people agreed with it. In contrast, when I got lost trying to get to the event, a Merrimack town official left his desk where he was in the middle of doing something and so courteously showed me the right way – I have almost never been made to feel that I do not belong in the US.
Being my first Republican event, I felt it was good that I could see the other side – instead of just going to Obama and Edwards events. We need to know what the other side is thinking! :-) And it is good that people have to a forum to share their thoughts, however much I might disagree with them.
All in all, it was interesting, and as recreational as a movie, without costing a dime!
Saturday, September 8, 2007
One America
Gosh. This was different.
The atmosphere was electric. People were expecting something, and feeling they would get it. We were led to some seats, all well organized (as it was outside – clear signs from off the highway). Volunteers and staff with sign up sheets were polite but not intrusive. The elderly couple sitting next to us was very friendly – the man introduced himself and shook my hand. I sat down and looked around – gosh, this was probably double the crowd at Obama’s events.
Edwards walked in shaking hands along the way. With him was Elizabeth Edwards, I had just shaken hands with both of them before they walked in (and thanked Edwards for saying his vote on the Iraq war was a mistake). And they were no more than 15 minutes late.
Edwards stood in the middle of a circle (as was the practice in 2004 as well), and began to speak. His speech was short, and to the point. He made the standard democratic points on universal health insurance, about getting the troops out of Iraq, and closing Guantanamo Bay – but with an intensity that made a difference. And he also said other things – about poverty in the world, about poverty in America, about telling the truth and not being afraid to do so. About the fact that just the troops pullout was not sufficient, steps towards a political solution were needed. As the people applauded, I felt my skin tingle. Oh my gosh. This really was different. It was so unexpected compared to the other meetings I had been at.
Then it was time for questions. It was also time for me to take a good look at the audience – I saw that people were from all walks of life, and all age groups, and the clear presence of the working class. Which was very similar to Dean’s audiences in 2004. And different from Obama’s audiences – they appeared to be more well off, and the staff and volunteers of that campaign are young and wealthy for the most part. Not so in Edwards’ staff and volunteer group.
The questions were more personal – rather than “what is your health insurance plan”, it was “I just came out of the hospital, I am on social security and I cannot afford this. What do I do?” Or “politician after politician comes here and says the same thing. Will you really be different? Who cares about the poor in the country?” At which point Elizabeth Edwards got up and described Edwards’ upbringing as the son of a mill worker, the first in his family to go to college. True, that was probably a scripted note they like to highlight at every meeting, but what came across was that the Edwardses campaigned as a team. She was not just someone who came out to show the candidate’s softer side – she was campaigning with her husband and they were a team. It was touching to see.
My mother – my one-should-never-adulate-anyone-mother got pumped up enough to go get his autograph after the event. As she said, “what he says seems to come from the heart”. As my friend from the Nashua Peace Group said the next day “Edwards seems to care about the poor”. He is the only one on the campaign trail so far who has some semblance of Dean. If I volunteer for a campaign this election season, it will be for him I think. And looking at the crowd at the event, and the applause, I simply do not understand why he is third in the polls!
The atmosphere was electric. People were expecting something, and feeling they would get it. We were led to some seats, all well organized (as it was outside – clear signs from off the highway). Volunteers and staff with sign up sheets were polite but not intrusive. The elderly couple sitting next to us was very friendly – the man introduced himself and shook my hand. I sat down and looked around – gosh, this was probably double the crowd at Obama’s events.
Edwards walked in shaking hands along the way. With him was Elizabeth Edwards, I had just shaken hands with both of them before they walked in (and thanked Edwards for saying his vote on the Iraq war was a mistake). And they were no more than 15 minutes late.
Edwards stood in the middle of a circle (as was the practice in 2004 as well), and began to speak. His speech was short, and to the point. He made the standard democratic points on universal health insurance, about getting the troops out of Iraq, and closing Guantanamo Bay – but with an intensity that made a difference. And he also said other things – about poverty in the world, about poverty in America, about telling the truth and not being afraid to do so. About the fact that just the troops pullout was not sufficient, steps towards a political solution were needed. As the people applauded, I felt my skin tingle. Oh my gosh. This really was different. It was so unexpected compared to the other meetings I had been at.
Then it was time for questions. It was also time for me to take a good look at the audience – I saw that people were from all walks of life, and all age groups, and the clear presence of the working class. Which was very similar to Dean’s audiences in 2004. And different from Obama’s audiences – they appeared to be more well off, and the staff and volunteers of that campaign are young and wealthy for the most part. Not so in Edwards’ staff and volunteer group.
The questions were more personal – rather than “what is your health insurance plan”, it was “I just came out of the hospital, I am on social security and I cannot afford this. What do I do?” Or “politician after politician comes here and says the same thing. Will you really be different? Who cares about the poor in the country?” At which point Elizabeth Edwards got up and described Edwards’ upbringing as the son of a mill worker, the first in his family to go to college. True, that was probably a scripted note they like to highlight at every meeting, but what came across was that the Edwardses campaigned as a team. She was not just someone who came out to show the candidate’s softer side – she was campaigning with her husband and they were a team. It was touching to see.
My mother – my one-should-never-adulate-anyone-mother got pumped up enough to go get his autograph after the event. As she said, “what he says seems to come from the heart”. As my friend from the Nashua Peace Group said the next day “Edwards seems to care about the poor”. He is the only one on the campaign trail so far who has some semblance of Dean. If I volunteer for a campaign this election season, it will be for him I think. And looking at the crowd at the event, and the applause, I simply do not understand why he is third in the polls!
A Peek at Hillary
Hillary Clinton has not been much in New Hampshire, probably because she is currently leading in the polls and is concentrating on the general elections (and hence is more focused nationally). The primary process is particularly helpful for lesser known candidates where they can have conversations with voters and really explain their stances. If a candidate does well in an early primary state he or she can be catapulted to a front runner position as the primary progresses. Clearly Hillary doesn’t feel she needs that catapult. The other candidates seem to be practically living here, but Hillary has not been here that much in recent weeks.
She has visited the state a few times over the last few months, and the local peace groups bird-dogged her in full force. Bird-dogging refers to asking a candidate questions on a specific issue, repeatedly and at multiple events, so that the candidate feels the issue is significant. Also the media is likely to pick up on it when a question is asked repeatedly. New Hampshire peace groups have been planning to fully exploit the fact that we get access to presidential candidates and have been training people in bird-dogging for months. The first bird-dogging of Hillary was hugely successful. The same question (on her vote for the war in Iraq) was asked in three different places, in Nashua by Dave from the Nashua Peace Group. The press picked it up and it was all over the national media!
She was here for a kick-off rally over the labor day weekend, along with Bill Clinton. I couldn’t go in person but saw it on C-SPAN. As my mother succintly put it, her campaign speech can be summarized as: “things were really bad for 12 years from 1980 to 1992, then they were great from 1992 to 2000, and now they are really bad for the last 8 years from 2000 to 2008. Elect me and things will be right again.”
She has visited the state a few times over the last few months, and the local peace groups bird-dogged her in full force. Bird-dogging refers to asking a candidate questions on a specific issue, repeatedly and at multiple events, so that the candidate feels the issue is significant. Also the media is likely to pick up on it when a question is asked repeatedly. New Hampshire peace groups have been planning to fully exploit the fact that we get access to presidential candidates and have been training people in bird-dogging for months. The first bird-dogging of Hillary was hugely successful. The same question (on her vote for the war in Iraq) was asked in three different places, in Nashua by Dave from the Nashua Peace Group. The press picked it up and it was all over the national media!
She was here for a kick-off rally over the labor day weekend, along with Bill Clinton. I couldn’t go in person but saw it on C-SPAN. As my mother succintly put it, her campaign speech can be summarized as: “things were really bad for 12 years from 1980 to 1992, then they were great from 1992 to 2000, and now they are really bad for the last 8 years from 2000 to 2008. Elect me and things will be right again.”
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
Stop Sununu. Stop the War.
In coordination with several events across the country, New Hampshire peace and justice groups organized a “TAKE A STAND AGAINST THE WAR IN IRAQ” by focusing on telling Sen. Sununu to stop supporting President Bush and to start supporting the troop. Sen. Sununu is up for re-election next year and has been identified as vulnerable, so progressive groups around the country and are focusing on him. The event on Tuesday was to assemble in front of Sen. Sununu’s office in Manchester, NH, and then march down to the Veterans Memorial Park on Elm St. for a rally from 5.00pm to 7.00pm.
I had decided to go along with the Nashua Peace Group contingent. I fully expected it to be like the Washington DC rally I had participated in on Jan 27th (some pictures are at http://www.flickr.com/gp/26012104@N00/f25503).
We arrived at the park at 4.45pm, to find it pretty much empty. We then joined in with the marchers coming down from Sen. Sununu’s office, all of 60 people. Atleast they were shouting slogans which was nice. After the march reached the park the crowd swelled a little – to a grand total of about 220 people. I was really disappointed and felt almost let-down. This was nothing – where were the people? Why weren’t all the people opposing the war out here? Out here were the usual suspects – people from nhpriorities.org, from nhpeaceaction.org, from code pink, Americans against Escalation of the War, folks we see at other similar events a handful of folks from each group. Where was the outrage from others ????
The only interesting event was the prescense of some presidential candidate campaign staff/volunteers. A girl on Obama’s staff (she has visited us at a Nashua Peace Group meeting) participated in the march and then worked on collecting signatures at the rally. Bill Richardson had several folks there, all of them clearly believing in peace, and also drumming up support for the Governer. Kucinich’s folks were there, no surprise there. And some Biden folks were there. At this stage of the campaign the less well-known candidates are trying to get as many people sign up on their lists as possible, so that they can be contacted and invited when the candidate is in the area. The goal is to get the voters to come to meet the candidate.
I had decided to go along with the Nashua Peace Group contingent. I fully expected it to be like the Washington DC rally I had participated in on Jan 27th (some pictures are at http://www.flickr.com/gp/26012104@N00/f25503).
We arrived at the park at 4.45pm, to find it pretty much empty. We then joined in with the marchers coming down from Sen. Sununu’s office, all of 60 people. Atleast they were shouting slogans which was nice. After the march reached the park the crowd swelled a little – to a grand total of about 220 people. I was really disappointed and felt almost let-down. This was nothing – where were the people? Why weren’t all the people opposing the war out here? Out here were the usual suspects – people from nhpriorities.org, from nhpeaceaction.org, from code pink, Americans against Escalation of the War, folks we see at other similar events a handful of folks from each group. Where was the outrage from others ????
The only interesting event was the prescense of some presidential candidate campaign staff/volunteers. A girl on Obama’s staff (she has visited us at a Nashua Peace Group meeting) participated in the march and then worked on collecting signatures at the rally. Bill Richardson had several folks there, all of them clearly believing in peace, and also drumming up support for the Governer. Kucinich’s folks were there, no surprise there. And some Biden folks were there. At this stage of the campaign the less well-known candidates are trying to get as many people sign up on their lists as possible, so that they can be contacted and invited when the candidate is in the area. The goal is to get the voters to come to meet the candidate.
Obama!
There has been a lot of hype about Obama, and I was really curious to see him. So when I heard he was going to have a town hall style meeting outside his Nashua office I was quite excited.
I was just back from India, so the significance of what these events mean in a democratic nation hit me with full force when I got there. In pictureque rural New Hampshire, with a day care center and a pizza place in the background, cars going by on the country road on one side of the green field, here we were, a couple of hundred people, listening to a potential US president. My third election season in New Hampshire and it still amazes me.
Obama came and spoke. It was a speech which talked about positive things, about optimism that change is possible, and about how we can and should come together to solve the nation’s problems. He made all the right comments about various issues that concern democratic primary voters – the war in Iraq, shutting down Guantanemo Bay (which brought applause), global warming, universal health insurance, etc. Questions from the audience covered pretty much similar topics, and as usual showed knowledgable voters – one person asked, “can you give us specifics of your healthcare plan”, and another asked him to comment on the palestinian situation. What struck me was the people, especially the staff and volunteers – they all seemed to be young and wealthy. Quite different from Howard Dean’s campaign (that I volunteered with in 2004). But they all clearly believe in Obama, and are quite keen on getting you to sign the “I am committed to Obama” card. I came away thinking that if it came down to Clinton vs. Obama, as seemed likely, I could vote for him.
My friend Nicole and I went to the next event in Dover, NH. Driving there on rural back roads, I was again struck – here voters don’t have to go somewhere to see the candidates, the candidates come to them. This is how it should be! The event in Dover was an ice-cream social and his wife and daughters were also there. The speech was very similar to the one in Nashua, and then he worked the crowd. Nicole shook hands with him and his wife and got pictures shaking hands with them both.
People in NH take their duty of vetting the presidential candidates very seriously. A mother brought her teenage sons and asked them what they thought and discussed some of the points with them. Two friends walking away discussed their impressions. An older woman volunteer said the last time she volunteered for a compaign was for John F. Kennedy’s campaign, and now Obama gave her hope.
I went to the third Obama event in Derry, NH and that was when it struck me why I was not getting that enthused. Obama was OK, but I was not enthused. It was because he was not self-critical of America at all. He talked only of the glorious values of America (I do believe America has some glorious values), and that the current regime was the bad one, and with change we can restore everything that is good. It is not a negative speech at all which is perhaps the goal, but it also meant that it had nothing of looking inward to see what was wrong. That bothered me, and that was different from Dean’s speeches. While talking about energy conservation Obama said we should all play a part, and as one example described energy saving bulbs. Later I asked him whether he had energy saving bulbs throughout his house. He chuckled and said, yes, except for the lamps on the roof that they had not been able to reach yet. He then patted my shoulder said he had a hybrid car.
I ran into Fern at the event. Fern and her husband Tim had been very active in the Howard Dean campaign. Fern had been bowled over by Obama, but now said she was having second thoughts. She said, “he doesn’t fire me up like Edwards does”. Obama talked to her son and asked him how many tests he took each year and when Noah (a fifth grader) said, “five”, Obama shook his head and said, “too many” (of course no democrat likes “No Child Left Behind”). Walking af
ter our group picture with Obama Fern and I talked about how we love living in New Hampshire in the primary season :-). Here we are, discussing which candidate interested us, with one of them standing not 10 feet from us :-). I could understand Fern’s comment about not getting fired up – it was odd, because his books are extremely well-written and do fire one up. And it was his speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention that led to his fame at the national level. But his speech now on the campaign trail somehow comes across as tame. Was he dumbing it down deliberately, as a strategy to appeal to the maximum number of people?
I was just back from India, so the significance of what these events mean in a democratic nation hit me with full force when I got there. In pictureque rural New Hampshire, with a day care center and a pizza place in the background, cars going by on the country road on one side of the green field, here we were, a couple of hundred people, listening to a potential US president. My third election season in New Hampshire and it still amazes me.
Obama came and spoke. It was a speech which talked about positive things, about optimism that change is possible, and about how we can and should come together to solve the nation’s problems. He made all the right comments about various issues that concern democratic primary voters – the war in Iraq, shutting down Guantanemo Bay (which brought applause), global warming, universal health insurance, etc. Questions from the audience covered pretty much similar topics, and as usual showed knowledgable voters – one person asked, “can you give us specifics of your healthcare plan”, and another asked him to comment on the palestinian situation. What struck me was the people, especially the staff and volunteers – they all seemed to be young and wealthy. Quite different from Howard Dean’s campaign (that I volunteered with in 2004). But they all clearly believe in Obama, and are quite keen on getting you to sign the “I am committed to Obama” card. I came away thinking that if it came down to Clinton vs. Obama, as seemed likely, I could vote for him.
My friend Nicole and I went to the next event in Dover, NH. Driving there on rural back roads, I was again struck – here voters don’t have to go somewhere to see the candidates, the candidates come to them. This is how it should be! The event in Dover was an ice-cream social and his wife and daughters were also there. The speech was very similar to the one in Nashua, and then he worked the crowd. Nicole shook hands with him and his wife and got pictures shaking hands with them both.
People in NH take their duty of vetting the presidential candidates very seriously. A mother brought her teenage sons and asked them what they thought and discussed some of the points with them. Two friends walking away discussed their impressions. An older woman volunteer said the last time she volunteered for a compaign was for John F. Kennedy’s campaign, and now Obama gave her hope.
I went to the third Obama event in Derry, NH and that was when it struck me why I was not getting that enthused. Obama was OK, but I was not enthused. It was because he was not self-critical of America at all. He talked only of the glorious values of America (I do believe America has some glorious values), and that the current regime was the bad one, and with change we can restore everything that is good. It is not a negative speech at all which is perhaps the goal, but it also meant that it had nothing of looking inward to see what was wrong. That bothered me, and that was different from Dean’s speeches. While talking about energy conservation Obama said we should all play a part, and as one example described energy saving bulbs. Later I asked him whether he had energy saving bulbs throughout his house. He chuckled and said, yes, except for the lamps on the roof that they had not been able to reach yet. He then patted my shoulder said he had a hybrid car.
I ran into Fern at the event. Fern and her husband Tim had been very active in the Howard Dean campaign. Fern had been bowled over by Obama, but now said she was having second thoughts. She said, “he doesn’t fire me up like Edwards does”. Obama talked to her son and asked him how many tests he took each year and when Noah (a fifth grader) said, “five”, Obama shook his head and said, “too many” (of course no democrat likes “No Child Left Behind”). Walking af
ter our group picture with Obama Fern and I talked about how we love living in New Hampshire in the primary season :-). Here we are, discussing which candidate interested us, with one of them standing not 10 feet from us :-). I could understand Fern’s comment about not getting fired up – it was odd, because his books are extremely well-written and do fire one up. And it was his speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention that led to his fame at the national level. But his speech now on the campaign trail somehow comes across as tame. Was he dumbing it down deliberately, as a strategy to appeal to the maximum number of people?Garnering Votes in New Hampshire
Today I was with my group (NashuaPeace.org) at Christopher Dodd's outdoor campaign stop on the steps of Nashua City Hall (town I live in). Dodd is polling in insignificant digits in NH so the crowd was not too large - about 50 people. But it reminded me of the flavor of the real NH presidential primary politics. Aides were literally begging people who came sort of the close to the venue to come and sit down and see Dodd "up close" which they told them "was the real way to see and hear Dodd". And NH voters being NH voters they politely declined, and from where they were seriously listened to and evaluated the candidate. NH voters really take the job of whetting the candidates seriously. On the busy main streets cars and trucks whizzed by, life went on as usual, and Dodd spoke, sometimes raising his voice to be heard above the traffic. It is humbling and exhilarating to see a candidate really beholden to the voters. Which is typically the case during the primaries in NH, its just that during this election the star value of Clinton and Obama (not to mention the secret service armour around the former) sometimes make one think times of changed. Generally at this stage of the primary season people get 50-100 people at most at campaign stops, giving the real feel of trying to win every vote. And boy, do candidates appear different compared to how they come across on TV! Voting without personally interacting with the candidates seems almost meaningless :-) Dodd apparently is focusing his campaign on the notion of "National Service", where everyone, especially youngsters, take time to volunteer - in everything ranging from the peace corp to spending time at the local hospice. He talked about making it a mandatory part of high school, like it apparently is in Maryland. He presented it as the way to unite America, etc. etc. Interestingly, it is the "Asha view", though personally I think it is naive to think that volunteering will change the world's or a nation's problems. The whole event revolved around this theme - he was presented to the audience by a local youth who had started a non-profit to give access to Arts education for disadvantaged children, and in general there were lots of youngsters amongst his aides.After his talk he worked his way through the crowd, and we (the Nashua Peace group) wondered whether he would come up to us. It appeared as though he would skip us, so I and another member decided to walk up to him. I asked him, "if elected President would you look at peaceful solutions or be hawkish", to which he answered, "always peaceful solutions first", and then I said "I vote for peace", and he assured me he did too. :-) He then decided to walk over to the Nashua Peace group and of course the media followed him which was nice, because it gave us exposure.
First in the Nation
Every four years it gets exciting in New Hampshire. New Hampshire holds the “first-in-the-nation” presidential primary, which means that it is the first state to hold the primary elections for selecting a presidential candidate from the democratic and republican parties. Being the “first” gives New Hampshire an extraordinary significance – winning or losing here can make an impact on the candidate’s chances. History is replete with instances of a win or even a second place propelling a candidate towards victory. New Hampshire’s small number of delegates does not really have numerical significance in the final conventions which choose the candidates; it is its status as “first-in-the-nation” that gives it so much importance in the primaries. And it is a status which New Hampshire guards zealously.
Campaigning starts early in the state; candidates make themselves known, visit homes, diners, and schools, they participate in local parades, town hall meetings, and host socials with free pizza, ice-cream, hot dogs. It is a very grassroots style of campaigning, where the candidate does not have the protection of a large staff and is not speaking to a television or screen. He or she is shaking people’s hands and literally working for each vote. And it is a mode of operation where the sheer strength of funds for expensive ad campaigns and spin campaigns will be no use. A less well-known candidate has a good chance if he or she can convince voters. It is democracy at its best.
New Hampshire residents are very aware of the critical role they play in selecting a presidential candidate. And they take their role very seriously. They “shop” for candidates, listen carefully to what they say, ask informed questions, and pride themselves on making utmost use of the fact that the candidates are right here in front of them, talking to them. And I agree with them when they feel that they are experienced in the process and can vet a candidate much better than one can through TV advertisements and sound bites and news articles. And best of all we enjoy doing it, and being in New Hampshire season can be tremendously exciting.
So I thought I would write down my experiences of meeting with candidates and attending town hall meetings during the primary season.
Campaigning starts early in the state; candidates make themselves known, visit homes, diners, and schools, they participate in local parades, town hall meetings, and host socials with free pizza, ice-cream, hot dogs. It is a very grassroots style of campaigning, where the candidate does not have the protection of a large staff and is not speaking to a television or screen. He or she is shaking people’s hands and literally working for each vote. And it is a mode of operation where the sheer strength of funds for expensive ad campaigns and spin campaigns will be no use. A less well-known candidate has a good chance if he or she can convince voters. It is democracy at its best.
New Hampshire residents are very aware of the critical role they play in selecting a presidential candidate. And they take their role very seriously. They “shop” for candidates, listen carefully to what they say, ask informed questions, and pride themselves on making utmost use of the fact that the candidates are right here in front of them, talking to them. And I agree with them when they feel that they are experienced in the process and can vet a candidate much better than one can through TV advertisements and sound bites and news articles. And best of all we enjoy doing it, and being in New Hampshire season can be tremendously exciting.
So I thought I would write down my experiences of meeting with candidates and attending town hall meetings during the primary season.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)