Well, by Wednesday the United States will have a new President.

So today is a good time as any to take a look at how the two contenders conducted their respective campaigns.

Around three months ago, the McCain camp launched a series of what were described as “attack ads”. They started by mocking Obama for acting like a movie star travelling the world to promote his newly released film, comparing him to Britney Spears and Paris Hilton; someone who is out for fame rather than someone who is able to lead the nation.

Of course, African American pundits immediately pounced on this imagery – why use Britney and Paris, they asked, both of them spoilt white girls with a track record of unsavoury behaviour? Some of them pointed out that the main reason for juxtaposing images of the two girls with images of Obama was a subliminal message meant to trigger fear in those who are nervous about having a black man in the White House.

(Paris Hilton immediately hit back with a spoof ad of her own, in which she claimed she was ready to lead because she’s so “hot”. You’ve got to love Americans, they really know how not to take themselves too seriously).

Another McCain ad made fun of Obama’s anointing himself as “the One” and how people will “see the light” and “receive his blessings”. The tag line was “he may be the One but is he ready to lead?”

In yet another ad, Obama was criticised for making time to go to the gym after cancelling his visit to the wounded troops at a medical centre (“it seems the Pentagon didn’t allow cameras” intoned the sarcastic voiceover). It later turned out that this allegation was false and the edited footage shown was used in a deceitful way.

What I found most interesting in all this was the way Barack Obama handled the negative campaigning. Responding to the ads, Obama said, “McCain and his aides are gambling that he can distract you with smears rather than talk to you about substance. They’d rather try to tear our campaign down than lift this country up. It’s what you do when you’re out of touch, out of ideas, and running out of time.”

The Democrats, meanwhile, who as a party are not as adept at smear campaigns as the Republicans have always been, were holding back from using the negative campaigning strategy for another more crucial reason: Obama based his whole electoral platform on the concept of “a change in the way we do politics”. Clamouring for an end to the dirty politics used so easily in Washington, he could hardly turn around now and resort to the same tactics himself. So he has taken the high road and refused to be drawn into a “tit for tat” rebuttal of each attack made against him. Questioned by a reporter, he was his usual unperturbed self when he said, “I don’t really listen to the McCain ads… and anyway does John McCain ever really have anything positive to say, even about himself?”

It was a neat little swipe, just enough to jab at McCain without actually crossing the line into “attack” territory.

This all gave political observers on TV and radio shows plenty to talk about. Perhaps the best comment came from one veteran political analyst, who pointed out, “when you’re running ahead you don’t usually run negative campaigns about your opponent”.

Finally, one thing I noticed about the way election ads are done in the United States is that there is always a voiceover by McCain or Obama respectively, “I’m… and I approve this message”.

It seems to me that this is something, which should be emulated locally, because it puts the onus of responsibility on the two party leaders when ads containing questionable ethics (or downright lies) are used.

Cool cat

Granted, this might sound frivolous, but honestly I think the main reason Obama is so incredibly popular both in the States and the rest of the world (including Malta judging from a recent vox pop I saw on TV), is that the guy is just so cool.

He is tall, attractive, athletically fit and carries himself with a kind of elegant confidence which (much like style) you either have or you don’t.

We may try and kid ourselves that politics should be about substance and policies, but more often than not, voters vote on a hunch of “I just like him/her”. If you press them as to why they prefer this candidate to another they often cannot express it in words, and just end up shrugging helplessly – “I don’t know why, but I just like him/her”.

I tend to compare the Obama phenomenon to when we were at school and everyone wanted to be friends with the most popular guy/girl, who were usually not only good-looking, but genuinely nice people as well. It was not a matter of “kissing up” to them, but more of a desire to be in their circle because they simply radiated charisma. To be a part of their social group meant that you were “in”; perhaps a silly concept when you look back now, but a desperately important issue when you are a teenager.

The “coolest” people tended to be the leaders at school, the ones who could organise an event at the drop of a hat, and persuade everyone to attend. It is an intangible quality and only a very few people have it, but when I look back, these same people who were leaders in their teens already showed signs that they would be successful in their adult life, and they have been.

It has helped Obama’s campaign immeasurably that he has been embraced and promoted by some of the most influential celebrities in the States, such as Oprah Winfrey, the queen of the daytime talk show. This is not too surprising, as many Hollywood stars do tend to be Democrats, so the “cool factor” is reinforced once again. After all, in a country where everyone yearns to be a celebrity, who wouldn’t want to be associated with the political choices of the rich and famous? (Of course this has led critics to point out that by hobnobbing with Hollywood A-listers, who have raised millions for his campaign, Barack is an elitist and not a down-to-earth Democrat who can represent blue-collar workers at all).

Still, in comparison, McCain comes off looking like a hopelessly out of date fuddy-duddy, not so much because of his age, but because of his “gosh, darn” demeanour. McCain may be more experienced, but he definitely is not cool.

Give me hope

Anyone who has listened to Obama’s speeches will agree that he is an inspirational speaker, with an ability to give you goose bumps as he outlines his vision for an America that is no longer divided because of race, income or political allegiance. Some might deride it as just so much empty rhetoric, but if the man gives people hope to strive to be something better (rather than drag them down into muck-raking and insults), then that can only be a good thing.

Of course, there is another reason why Obama has caught the world’s imagination. His own mixed race heritage has come to symbolise what Martin Luther King always dreamt of but never saw happen – a black man on an equal footing with a white man competing for perhaps the most important position in the world. When you watch clips of elderly black people across America listening to Obama speak you can see the mixture of pride and incredulity on their faces, and you can almost read their minds “who would ever have thought that I would live to see this in my lifetime?”

Finally, there is the Obama message itself, which has permeated countries all over the globe; that he wants a United States of America that does not ride roughshod over foreign territory. Bush, who has done so much damage in the way the US and Americans are perceived internationally, has a lot to answer for, and McCain, because of his past track record is, in a lot of people’s minds, a Bush clone. More of the same, as the slogan goes.

It is more than obvious to most voters that the Republicans have outstayed their welcome in the White House. The latest financial crisis caused by greedy corporations, is simply another nail in the coffin of an administration that has driven the country to the brink.

In a country where 63 per cent is a considered a high voter turnout, Obama is probably going to be the reason that some Americans will vote for the first time. He appeals to the young vote, the ethnic minority vote and to the liberal vote. In contrast, McCain, and that ridiculously ignorant Sarah Palin (boy, was I wrong about her) epitomise everything that is parochial and insular about small town America.

What the US (and the world) needs is someone who encourages Americans to view the world with an open mind, to learn from other countries, rather than persist in disastrous domestic and foreign policies which have not solved anything.

The worth of a man’s life

Meanwhile, over here, the tragic story of Anthony Mifsud, a former prison officer, continues to be exploited for political expediency. It is bad enough he had to suffer at the hands of a despotic police corps in 1982; it’s bad enough that one of the men who beat him up continues to thrive financially thanks to lucrative government contracts, and it’s bad enough that he has never been able to pick up the pieces of his shattered life since then.

Just as bad (or perhaps even worse) is that it has taken this broken man 26 years to get some form of monetary compensation from those who beat him to a pulp and forced him to sign a ‘confession’ that he had helped a notorious prisoner to escape.

If the Nationalist government had any shred of decency and for all its wailing about human rights, this should have been one of its top priorities in 1987. Instead, they are more than 20 years too late. There is simply no excuse for this case to have dragged on for so long.

But as long as Xarabank can quickly change its schedule and magically produce a programme about it on a Friday evening so that we can all re-live the 1980s just one more time, then I guess everything is hunky dory.

[email protected]