Party Tail Wags Candidate Dog

On Sunday, former Secretary of State General Colin Powell went on Meet the Press and said that he was endorsing Barak Obama. This seems to have raised a lot of debate: Should liberals second guess Obama if Powell is for him? What does it say about Obama as a bringer of "change"? Is Powell a traitor to the Republican Party? Does he have an axe to grind with the current President Bush? Is it racially motivated? I watched the interview (a couple of times) and his statements afterward, and while I think that the questions already mentioned are interesting bits of psychological punditry, what I actually heard was a lot more interesting, understandable and closer to how I feel myself.

A lot of people out there hardly follow politics. Regardless, every four years we are all called upon to help fill the highest office in the land. For those of us who follow closely, this can be a scary proposition as political issues are rarely black and white; it's easy to spin complex issues and decisions so that good things sound bad and bad things sound good. Among the "swing" voters who don't swear blind allegiance to a political party (and who will ultimately cast the deciding vote), one of the top concerns is the candidate's ability to lead.

There's an old saying: a dog wags its tail because its smarter than the tail - if the tail were smarter, it would wag the dog. What Powell said on Sunday can be summed up in this analogy: The tail of the neocon wing of the Republican Party is wagging the candidate dog. In other words, a candidate's race for the Whitehouse is like a microcosm - a peek into the way they will govern.

Obama is the leader of his party, this much is clear. He took on the Clinton political machine which was the party, and won. He has amended the party platform, and made wildly successful decisions. Obama has stated that he will surround himself with smart and experienced people who will challenge his way of thinking - and he has practiced that from his first decision by choosing Joe Biden as his running mate. The fact that the man who drummed up support for the war and the man outspokenly against it can respectfully disagree and find common ground is a testament to how a good leader builds confidence and coalitions and gets things done.

What we've seen with McCain is an evolution over the past eight years - especially the last four (and to an even greater extent since he announced his candidacy), as he's moved ever farther to the right and away from the real "maverick" that we all liked: a leader unencumbered by party politics. It would seem that those who know McCain personally are generally unwilling to attribute the problems with his campaign directly to him. Probably true. I don't think that he is as bad as his campaign has been, but I think that what Powell was saying about McCain is that at some level this is an overview of what his leadership will probably be like; a presidency characterized by drumming up fear and division; utilizing misrepresentation and distortion; making rash decisions or perpetually changing advisers (leading to more choices like Palin), and generally trying "anything and everything" in an effort to hold on. But that's not really McCain - that's the party tail wagging the candidate dog.

You can hold out hope that once in power the old McCain will manifest, but like Powell, I see my leader and I'm ready to cast my vote - for the head and not the tail.