FT for Obama

This will do nothing for the attempts by the Barack Obama presidential campaign to knock back the charges of “elitism” raised – only by the media and the Clinton and McCain campaigns, admittedly – in the recent storm over his “bitter small town” remarks at what was supposed to be a private fund-raiser in San Francisco. But anyway: yesterday the leading world business newspaper the Financial Times endorsed him for the Democratic Party nomination (Democrats must choose Obama). Of course, who in Pennsylvania reads the FT anyway, outside of some universities and financial houses in Philadelphia – or do I sound bitter?

As you might expect, the decision of the FT’s editorial board to come down in favor of Obama seems largely to be based on considerations of relative management prowess. “How much the way that a campaign is run tells you about a candidate’s fitness to be president is debatable,” it writes, “but it does tell you something, especially if the candidate with the misfiring strategy is running on a claim of management expertise.” That would be Hillary Clinton, whose campaign the FT’s board characterizes as “a shambles,” while Obama’s has been “brilliant.” He is a “spell-binding orator”; her speaking style is “pedestrian, when it is not actually grating.” And anyway, Obama has “coolness,” while “Mrs Clinton’s hyperactive advisers [dress] her in a new personality each day, sometimes several in the course of an interview.”

“The Democratic party has waited an awfully long time for a politician like Barack Obama,” the piece concludes. “Enough already.”

Digg This
Reddit This
Stumble Now!
Buzz This
Vote on DZone
Share on Facebook
Bookmark this on Delicious
Kick It on DotNetKicks.com
Shout it
Share on LinkedIn
Bookmark this on Technorati
Post on Twitter
Google Buzz (aka. Google Reader)

Comments are closed.