| 23.04.2008 |
|
||||||||
| A couple days ago, I wrote about the powerful message of anti-globalization and why it's easy for some workers who have lost jobs because of it to be leery of more. Both candidates in the Democratic primary catered to those fears repeatedly in Pennsylvania, although both had appeared to support free trade before; ultimately, it appears voters believed Hillary Clinton had more of an animus against it than Barrack Obama. John McCain, meanwhile, took the harder way. On the day of the Pennsylvania primary vote for Democrats, McCain stood in front of a run-down factory in Ohio to talk about the need for free trade. He proposed more job training and alternative energy investment as a solution. Later, at another meeting in Youngstown, he told voters that while he believed free trade had cost some of them their jobs, they had no choice: "I've met too many people who've been displaced as a result of free trade to say, 'Aww, it's all been good for our economy, don't worry about it,' " McCain said. "But I think the adjustment is not to erect barriers and protectionism. I think the answer is to understand that free trade or not, we are in an information technology revolution. ... We've got to be part of that new economy rather than trying to cling to an old economy." The exchange came with a former local labor leader named Jack O'Connell, according to McClatchy: "McCain told O'Connell that he understood his 'answer is not good enough for you.' O'Connell, however, thanked McCain for 'your straight talk on NAFTA,' and indicated that although he was a longtime Democrat, he'd vote for the Arizona senator." So, it seems, that pitch worked on O'Connell. But that may have more to do with McCain's unique communication skills than it does with the broader appeal of the message. When McCain told Michigan primary voters that "some of the jobs that have left Michigan are not coming back," Mitt Romney jumped all over him and observers said it helped contribute to McCain's loss there. What's more, McClatchy's piece indicates that Clinton's and Obama's anti-free trade rhetoric will likely play out better in key general election states like Ohio and Pennsylvania than would McCain's. The question is whether there are enough O'Connells whom McCain can win over in states where Democrats have proven they can win votes by seeing who can be more opposed to free trade agreements. It's a tough sell. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
| 0 Comments |