Anger Management

Among the guests at our debate party was a psychologist who specializes in leadership training. Her comments about both candidates' anger management skills are instructive.

Obama, as you recall, looked directly at McCain throughout the debate and acknowledged that McCain was correct in his analysis several times, probably more than his handlers wanted to count. Six, seven, maybe eight concessions. We imagined McCain’s people cutting and splicing a new Internet ad while the debates were still airing. According to Leslie, this was Obama’s way of managing his anger. In addition, he was trying to do before our eyes what McCain was claiming he wanted: bridging the gap between Republicans and Democrats.

McCain, however, could not look at Obama. He didn’t look at the camera either, so although he might have been looking at Jim Lehrer or at the Mississippi audience, it looked weird from our perspective.

“Anger management issues,” declared Leslie.

According to our expert, McCain couldn’t look at Obama because if he did he would have exploded.

Yesterday, John Marshall posted a possible reason why McCain was so angry, based on a Saturday story by Jonathan Weisman in the Washington Post, about that bi-partisan meeting at the White House on the bailout called by George W.:

Pelosi said Obama would speak for the Democrats. Though later he would pepper Paulson with questions, according to a Republican in the room, his initial point was brief: "We've got to get something done."

Bush turned to McCain, who joked, "The longer I am around here, the more I respect seniority."

McCain then turned to Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to speak first. Boehner was blunt. The plan Paulson laid out would not win the support of the vast majority of House Republicans. It had been improved on the edges, with an oversight board and caps on the compensation of participating executives. But it had to be changed at the core.

He did not mention the insurance alternative, but Democrats did. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, pressed Boehner hard, asking him if he really intended to scrap the deal and start again. No, Boehner replied, he just wanted his members to have a voice.

Obama then jumped in to turn the question on his rival: "What do you think of the [insurance] plan, John?" he asked repeatedly.

McCain did not answer. One Republican in the room said it was clear that the Democrats came into the meeting with a "game plan" aimed at forcing McCain to choose between the administration and House Republicans. "They had taken McCain's request for a meeting and trumped it," said this source.

McCain’s attitude towards Obama could easily be categorized as racist, or at least arrogant, in refusing to look at the younger man. He had better be careful, since this election requires that both parties pay attention to the increasing numbers of Latino and Asian voters. According to Professor Federico Subervi, who spoke this weekend at a fascinating conference at St John’s Law School about Race, Gender and the Media in the 2008 Election, there are now 10.4 million registered Latino voters, representing a 10% growth during this year’s primary season. Latinos are now 9% of the electorate, and their likely turnout on November 4th is the same as non-Latinos.

Asian Americans number over 14.4 million nationwide. 38.5% of all Asian Americans were born in the U.S., and 33.7% were foreign-born, naturalized citizens. In AALDEF’s November 2006 exit poll on the 2006 Congressional elections: Chinese American (38%), South Asian American (27%), Korean American (14%), Southeast Asian American (8%), and Filipino American (7%). Asian Americans are pretty evenly split between Republican and Democratic affiliations, and are important voters in several swing states.

Naturalized citizens have higher turnout than native born. They take their citizenship obligations very seriously.

Watch out McCain, your attitude could easily be misinterpreted.