General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Is Hillary the rodeo clown of the Democratic Party? [View all]karynnj
(59,531 posts)Both Clinton and Biden are accomplished politicians, who speak in public a huge amount. The vast majority of what either says is so not controversial it stays in Senate hearings, articles on foreign policy, or in long detailed interviews.
What is extracted - above the noise - is any little soundbite that can be turned into its own circus. It doesn't matter what the context, if it makes them look bad, it will be played hundreds of times. Do they sometimes say things in ways they would like to take back, ... of course. I would hate to have a record of every word I have ever said that could be examined and the dumbest things extracted. This is what they - Obama, and all top politicians have to live with. Unfortunately, it is also not completely even -- the Republicans have the better echo chamber, but when Republicans make sufficiently bad comments (47%), they likely experience the same gut wrenching horror seeing things that will hurt repeated constantly.
The question is whether the comment really shows a problem in what they really think - as the 47% comment did - and which Romney doubled down on.
Another side of this "gaffe" risk is that politicians need to either have very polished rote answers to almost everything (think Edwards, who every speech almost used the same gestures and expressions - as well as words) or they need to filter everything and stay very serious and focused as they respond losing some of their natural spontaneity and conveying less of their good sense of humor (John Kerry - and consider the difference in Obama 2008 and President Obama ) It also leads to a campaign team 2 dimensional version of the candidate that simplifies who he/she is - cutting risks - but losing the full person who will be President. The sad thing is that the better the real person is, the worse it is that campaigns almost never allow us to see the candidates as they really are.