19th
Obama’s speech was profound, one of the most remarkable by a major public figure in decades. One question — perhaps the question —is whether its sheer audacity makes for good political strategy. By confronting the Wright controversy head-on, Obama ensured that it would drive the narrative about his campaign, and his race against Hillary Clinton, for days and perhaps weeks to come. He and his advisers no doubt calculated that nothing they could do would change that fact. But if one of the appeals of Obama’s candidacy has been the promise of a post-racial politics, how will voters respond to a speech acknowledging that the future is not now, that race still divides us? Obama is taking a substantial risk. He is counting on voters to hear and accept nuance in an arena that almost always seems to reward simplicity over complexity. He is asking something from Americans rather than just promising things to them — another formulation long out of vogue. “For we have a choice in this country,” he said. “We can accept a politics that breeds division, and conflict, and cynicism. We can tackle race only as spectacle — as we did in the O.J. trial — or in the wake of tragedy, as we did in the aftermath of Katrina, or as fodder for the nightly news … We can do that,” he goes on to say. “But if we do, I can tell you that in the next election, we’ll be talking about some other distraction … And nothing will change. That is one option. Or, at this moment, in this election, we can come together and say, ‘Not this time.’” (via Obama’s Bold Gamble on Race - TIME)
