The decline of my Obamamania?

In recent weeks, I find myself unable to follow the US presidential race with any enthusiasm. Partly, this is a result of such stunts as an Obama visit to Israel and a McCain visit to a supermarket- both of which strike me as equally empty, political tricks. This is in marked contrast to the first half of the year, where every primary day or Obama speech meant days if not weeks of anticipation for me. The times I waited for most expectantly were Obama speeches, rhetorical and oratorial feats decried (falsely) as substanceless by his detractors, but in truth, the most inspiring speeches delivered by any American politician in several generations. It isn't only that Senator Obama gives off a cleaner smell than any other politician of left or right. It was his unique commitment to unity and humanism that was so evident in his speeches, and so different from the politics of victimhood and enmity that have dominated Western elections for so many years. To my mind, his finest moment was not his speech on race in Philadelphia (although that was a magnificently reasoned and restrained oration) but rather his call for black fathers to pull up their socks; what a change from the blame-the-whites-for-everything approach of Jackson and Sharpton! That if anything proved that Barack Obama takes risks.

I'm not alone, however, in feeling less excited, and even somewhat bored, of Senator Obama these days. To many young people, especially those on the far left, Obama has lost some of his lustre because of his supposed "flip-flops", changes in ideological position while on the campaign trail. Apart from a principled opposition to dogmatism, the other reason I strongly disagree with this line of thinking is that Obama's ideological evolution has, on most issues, been a move from populist pandering to more logical, rational approaches. On Iraq, for instance, his refusal to commit to a very early withdrawal is certainly preferable to his earlier Clintonesque desire for a withdrawal possibly in 2009. Iraq is a mess the US had no business creating, but to withdraw now would be lunacy. On free trade, his flip-flops betray only the fact that he is a trade centrist posing as a protectionist, which I suppose is something he has to do. His "impeccably centrist" (to quote The Economist) team of economic advisers are a reassuring change from the anti-NAFTA rhetoric that both he and Senator Clinton were spouting a few months ago. Equally, he is less and less an opponent of India, whether on outsourcing or the nuclear deal.

I admit to being somewhat disappointed that Senator Obama is just as beholden to the Israel lobby as every other presidential candidate. I firmly believe that he is wrong, that the keys to the White House do not rest with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee- yet this appears to be the prevailing wisdom across party lines. But more generally, his much-criticized move to the centre, along with his increasingly faith-based rhetoric, can be accepted as legitimate political moves. An election win will mean that these small compromises were worth it.

Why then, am I no longer enthused by Senator Obama? Partly because Indian politics is suddenly so complex and unpredictable (more on this in the days to come) that Obama vs. McCain- where such non-stories as Phil Gramm now make the front pages- is sleepy by comparison. But more importantly, because the US election, so dependent on television, is suffering at last from overexposure. Gore Vidal remarked in deep gloom in the early 1980s that the only thing a President would have to be in the future was good for television- he was referring of course to President Reagan. Senator Obama is without question good for television, although one can't say the same for his opponent. And by and large, television has been good for Senator Obama. It has broadcast his oratorial skills, his charm and integrity to the world, and news channels other than those on the right have broadly covered him favourably. But now, almost four years after he first became a television star, in his Senate election against Alan Keyes, that Barack Obama appears just a little stale, just a little too familiar, a man who for the first time is ghar ki murgi, rather than a radical new force. If this feeling that I get is shared by many others, it will be something of a tragedy, because Senator Obama is potentially the greatest US president since FDR. Fortunately, Obama is still the comfortable favourite to win, and this tragedy is unlikely. But I suspect that I need a month without Obama in order to once again be truly enthused.