The background
President Barack Obama made the case for a second term on the final night of the Democratic National Convention Thursday, explaining to the 20,000 assembled Democratic faithful and the voters at home they face the “clearest choice of any time in a generation” “between two different paths for America” this November.
His path, he said in accepting the Democratic nomination, offers more for more Americans than that of his rival, Republican candidate Mitt Romney; he attacked the Republicans for criticizing his policies and the current state of America, without offering any real solutions, a message that may play well with Americans frustrated with partisan Washington politics. At the same time, however, Obama declined to offer any specific policies he hopes to accomplish in his second term, a problem that man critics highlighted.
“You didn’t elect me to tell you what you wanted to hear,” he said. “You elected me to tell you the truth. And the truth is, it will take more than a few years for us to solve challenges that have built up over decades.”
But Obama wasn’t only battling the specter of Romney and the Republican Party in the Time Warner Arena – he was also battling the ghost of his transformative 2008 campaign. His first four years are being cast as a disappointment, both by the Republican Party and by frustrated observers and Democrats who expected more from the “hope and change” candidate. Though Obama has won several major legislative victories while in office, as well as accomplishing what his predecessor couldn’t – the killing of Osama bin Laden – voters remain preoccupied with the sluggish economy.
So, did he seal the deal? Yes, he did.
A ‘scaled-back’ pitch, but that might be enough
Obama’s message to the American people was a “scaled-back pitch”, Andy Sullivan wrote in apiece of analysis for Reuters, “steering clear of ambitious promises and warning voters that the next four years could hold disappointment even if he won.” Noting that Obama has offered up few new policies in the last year, Sullivan explained that the goals he offered on Thursday were “modest at best”. But while commentators and political observers may have wanted more specifics from him, “most watching on TV probably were just looking for Obama to convey authority and ease,” he wrote, a feat he managed.
A ‘cynicism erasing’ speech
Rachell Maddow, liberal MSNBC commentator, was enraptured by Obama’s speech, claiming that with it, he struck a blow against cynicism. “Since Obama has been elected, something you’re supposed to be embarrassed about is that you might be moved by politics,” she said, according to MSNBC’s Lean Forward blog. ”That the idea of hope and change are a punchline. And that the idea that you would think you would be able to expect anything, but also able to feel anything about politics is some sort of weakness, some sort of sign of naivete. And I was moved by this speech. I find it moving and I am happy to be moved. And I think it’s a sort of cynicism eraser.”
Obama ‘rose to the occasion’
In a leading editorial The New York Times, which rarely speaks a word against the president, was similarly pleased with his performance, declaring that he “rose to the occasion” and ably met the challenge offered by the Republican Party. The paper offered a rousing defence of Obama’s record and vision, claiming, “He has far better ideas about how to create jobs, make Americans’ tax burdens more equitable and improve ordinary Americans’ economic prospects than the tired, failed trickle-down fantasies served up by Mitt Romney and the Republican Party.”
More on the Democratic National Convention
- Twitter reacts to Obama’s speech
- Clinton makes case for Obama
- What Obama needs to say at the DNC
- Michelle Obama’s DNC speech a ‘triumph’
