Errol Morris' "real people" ads for Obama
Errol Morris created a series of interviews of Republicans and independents who are voting for Obama. He also wrote about long history of "real people" political ads for the NYT.
If you’re not going to put words in people’s mouths, if you’re really listening to what they have to say, you’re going to learn something. Admittedly, the evidence is anecdotal. I haven’t selected these people through some kind of statistical sampling. These people are self-selected. They wrote in and said that they were registered Republicans, Independents or switch-voters who were planning to vote for Obama. People in the middle. And I was interested in talking to them on film about why they were making the switch from voting for a Republican to voting for a Democrat. Was it linked with policy? With the personality of the candidate?Republicans and independents who are voting for ObamaThis time — as opposed to 2004 — the content of the interviews has been qualitatively different. The people I interviewed have embraced Obama. They are voting for a candidate, not against a candidate. Lissa Lucas, for example, tells the story of voting for someone for the first time in her life. There is a feeling of hopefulness. There is this optimism, even though the situation in the country is arguably much worse than four years ago. A failing economy. The continuing war in Iraq. A crumbling infrastructure. But there is the core belief that if we pull together, we can save the country.
the latest
latest episodes
I'm ashamed to say it, but having been eligible to vote for 30 years, this will be my first time. I finally have a GOOD reason for doing so since I believe that we're dangerously balanced on the edge, so to speak. This is truly a scary time.
Before, it always seemed like the candidates were just clones of each other, but now, although one candidate might have a few faults, the other candidate is composed almost entirely of faults.
You can probably guess who I'm voting for.
i'm hoping your screen name is an indication...
So, if Boing Boing has become the "Obama cures cancer" group blog... do we get some kind of public apology the first time he bombs one of our allies, like Pakistan, or something? How about the next time he backs FISA, or a corporate bailout?
Starting November 5th, I'm really hoping for some scathing commentary, rather than tongue bathing the candidate's feet.
BDewhirst,
Are you doing a performance piece on nihilism?
It's interesting how both campaigns are showing their true colors in the final stretch.
McCain and Palin are both kicking up the divisive/guilt by association rhetoric, but Obama continues to speak to our hopes and dreams and still remains in check when speaking about McCain - consistently referring to McCain as a good man who he simply doesn't agree with and who he thinks isn't right for the job.
And now this, which is an unpretentious and moving look into the minds of Americans as they deal with subtle, but significant changes in their philosophies.
good stuff here.
As a Canadian I am glad to be a Canadian in all ways but this one. I wish I had the opportunity to be able to vote for Obama just so I could always be able to say to any and all around me in the future, in a Henry V St. Crispan's Day speech way, "I was there. I voted for him".
#2 posted by minTphresh
He he... yeah, it is in a sense. ;) Strictly coincidence, however, and minus the extraneous "C!"
Earlier in the campaign process, I was seriously considering McCain (being a Navy "airedale" vet myself didn't hurt), but over time I began to see him less as a maverick and more as a renegade.
BDEWHIRST, Let's hope Obama's fairly cool and collected demeanor remains when he's in office (assuming he's elected).
#6 posted by Randwulf
I'll vote twice if you want, once for myself and once for you. ; )
Dbarak, not being navy savvy myself, I am unfamiliar with your use of 'airedale'. Could you enlighten me, please?
#9 posted by Bob
Sure, anyone involved in aviation - flight deck crews, maintenance, aircrews, etc. Sometimes I forget not everyone was in the Navy. ; )
@BDEWHIRST,
I don't think this is necessarily the Obama Appreciation Society. It's just that compared to McCain, Obama shines pretty bright.
I in no way think Obama walks on water. I mean, he's a politician after all. He seems to have real ideas, which I think we've been sorely lacking over the last 8 years. Also he sounds willing to talk first instead of the typical "Me have big stick. Hit you with stick. Do what I say" we've been seeing.
To #8 by Dbarak:
Thanks for the offer but the Repubs are already doing what they can to disallow as many voters as they can without giving them more another vote to disallow. *grin* I'll just look wistfully across the border and wish I was a part of it all.
If you don't understand why someone might not be keen on "this generation's Ronald Reagan," that is not enough information for you to speculate on their philosophy of life.
There is plenty of room for non-nihilists to dislike another economic neoliberal foreign policy hawk ivy league millionaire lawyer.
MRSBUG, what ideas would those be?
Transparency and connectedness in government is one idea.
Actually bringing the executive branch into the twentieth century and uhm, following data preservation laws for another.
The pen is a powerful tool.
The keyboard far more so.
#12 posted by Randwulf
No problem! Actually, I'd rather see McCain win through a fair vote than to see Obama win through an unfair vote. Of course, Obama in by a fair vote is best... unless our electoral college causes problems again.
@BDEWHIRST,
Ideas like getting out of Iraq sooner rather than later, like talking with Iran, like trying to make our society a little more fiscally equitable.
Again, I don't think he walks on water, but I haven't heard anything from John McCain that has been anything different than what Bush has already given us. And seriously, as a woman, his nomination of Palin was just offensive. I'm a Christian and that woman and her smack-talk is seriously ignorant and narrow-minded.
MRSBUG:
Last time I checked, Barack Obama is -not- calling on getting all of our troops out of Iraq. His plan calls for 50,000 troops to remain behind to "combat terrorism," and so long as there are that many troops, he may well say "oh, well, we need more troops to protect them."
Further, those troops withdrawn from Iraq will be sent to Afghanistan, not home, and wants to expand the war into Pakistan.
Obama made it clear, whenever speaking about Iran, that he considers Iran to be our enemy. We overthrew their Democratic government and backed a brutal dictator for 50 years... all they wanted was to be left alone, but calling them "the enemy" is no way to begin Diplomacy.
As for making our society "a little more fiscally equitable," the real Socialists have had ideas on this front for a hundred years... hardly "new" ideas, simply re-packaged Clinton-speak.
BDEWHIRST:
Bitter much? Cumbersome strings of negative adjectives don't help your campaign. Ask your friend Palin.
I'm one of these people. I am not a democrat, and the GOP has gone astray from the ideals that made it attractive to me in the first place. I am voting for Obama because he is displaying a charisma and consistency of character that I believe will lead this country in the direction needed.
And from one airedale (Aviation Ordnance) to another, right on DBARAK!
BARDFINN, you know McCain was a co-signer of the same Transparency bill as Obama, right?
Both of us agree, I think, that McCain is insincere about his interest in genuine transparency.
Where we differ is... you believe Obama isn't another dissembling politician, and I believe he is.
This election is turning out to be a more powerful mega-ritual than 9-11. Congratulations to all Illuminists involved, I couldn´t have run a better ARG myself.
Arttoys, I'm over by Chomsky.
Vote for Obama if you like, but open your blasted eyes.
BDEWHIRST,
I never claimed he wanted all of our troops out. At least he's thinking about it, unlike John "100 Years in Iraq" McCain.
I can't disagree with you about Iran. We've had our fingers in their pot for way too long. And personally, I know the arguments for them not having nuclear technology, but they don't really fly with me. Maybe I'm naive or too optimistic, but nuclear weapons don't really scare me (probably like they should). If Iran wants to develop nuclear energy, I think they should be able to (let the shouting begin!)
Finally, the whole socialism thing doesn't scare me. Our country should be seasoned with a little more socialism. American-style democracy has seemed to devolved into more of a plutocracy.
MRSBUG:
To those troops, I'm sure it is cold comfort that they'll be sent to freeze in the mountains of Afghanistan rather than roast in the deserts of Iraq. Same ****, different shovel.
Yes, socialism would be a good idea. Unfortunately, Obama is no socialist, and he'll work to save the plutocracy from its own excesses rather than to eliminate it. (As I believe close inspection of his health care plan and GMs economic analysis shows.)
If you're living in a safe state (which is more than half of them, the last time I checked), I would strongly encourage you to consider other candidates, such as McKinney.
Even if Obama is a "dissembling politician," I can't possibly see how he could be seen as more so than McCain.
We only have two choices. We only ever have two choices. And an election campaign is never going to give you a particularly clear view of either the individuals running or the team they're attempting to bring to power.
But we know Senator Obama is eloquent, intelligent, thoughtful, and probably less likely to favor the "big stick and no talking" method that has dominated our recent approach to foreign relations.
And we *do* know what team McCain is attempting to bring in, because it's the same damn team that's been in power for the last eight years. And they have sucked on an absolutely stunning level.
So there. That's the choice. Carry on as we have been, or try something different. If that attempt fails, *at least the attempt was made.*
Of course, if you really hate them both so much, feel free to write-in your third candidate of choice. It won't matter, because it never does, but wtf.
Bdewhirst, thanks for eventually getting around to making a substantive comment (#18). You and I share some of the same doubts about an Obama presidency. (I'm voting for him anyway, since I think McCain would be even worse.)
There's a big difference between actually talking about policies, and accusing BoingBoing of being an "Obama cures cancer" blog.
Several weeks ago I made a series of videos with a friend and my partner, done in the style of Errol Morris's Mac Switch campaign.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_Fr2PAdY9k
Be sure to check out all 5. And watch the original Mac ad in case you forget: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2-UuIEOcss
Another Canadian here, I sure appreciate all of Errol Morris' work. Just saw S.O.P.
DJ Spooky points us to some other interesting filmwork for Obama by Lee Hirsch here:
http://www.realitysandwich.com/local_voices_obama
BDewhirst,
It will be important that all be vigilant in holding whoever is elected over the fire & let it be known that they represent all of us, work for all of us & can’t get away with what past elected officials have. Dissent & criticism (if it is constructive) is important, but so is optimism & hope for the future as well as a renewed vigor in participating in this tattered democracy & its restoration.
What will you do, BDewhirst to help improve this disastrous situation we all exist in? Continue to throw out hollow, snarky & nihilistic one liners that contributes nothing more than a further bloating of your narcissistic ego? Normally, I‘d ignore a post such as yours, but I’m really sick of hearing and reading bland critiques. Perhaps next time you might offer a bit of constructive criticism?
I am really not trying to be flamebait. I really want to know. Can somebody explain to me why socialism is a good idea for the US?
Avram @27:
That wouldn't have been appropriate as an initial comment.
My initial criticism was that there has been nothing but unqualified praise for Obama from Xeni (and now Mark) for a week now, and I'm really sick of it.
"I like Ike" is no basis for a system of government. Neither is "my opponent ought to be hung by the Hague."
TGJERUSALEM, I live in Massachusetts. It -never- matters who I vote for -no matter what.- Obama's team of advisers includes Clinton-era war criminals, and Bush is presently implementing Obama's hawkish policies regarding bombing our ally Pakistan... so color me unimpressed.
Consequently, I'm trying to move to Canada.
noelegy: Compare infant mortality rates in the US to any first world country with socialized medicine. Then compare life expectancies. Then normalize for differences in wealth by, say, comparing the health of the poorest in Britain to the health of the US's upper middle class (and remember that the UK is usually second on the list of overweight nations). They still come out ahead.
Now then... that isn't real "hard core" socialism, but if you want some evidence... there you go.
#30 posted by Noelegy
Socialism in its purest form isn't good, and neither is capitalism. The trick is to balance the two. From what I've seen, what happens is more like the swing of a pendulum, to the right for awhile and then to the left, ad infinitum.
as uncle Otto once`said: politics is the art of the possible. I think Obama is the first decompression stop on the way to a surface that is just a memory.
DBarak@33:
Speaking of socialism in its purest form... where have the workers owned the means of production, and why was it a bad idea?
#35 posted by BDewhirst
I don't know that they ever have... completely. Not that they should... completely.
Then how do you arrive at your conclusion that "socialism in its purest form isn't good"?
#37 posted by BDewhirst
I'll concede. I'm extrapolating based on what we've seen in past implementations.
Workers that own equally (pure socialism) "tend to" rely on other workers to fix problems, and workers that don't own and reap no tangible benefit from profitability (pure capitalism) "tend to" not care how the business does.
Again, those are hypothetical scenarios in pure cases.
You seem confused about "own equally" and "own in common."
Further, it is hardly the case that collective ownership implies it is impossible to remunerate based on effort.
Further, you are inferring a trend from a situation you claim has never existed and in which you've never lived. A situation on which you've never seen media coverage which wasn't biased in favor of a capitalist consensus.
Now, if you're interested in some first hand accounts of what collective ownership looks like in the real world... Orwell's Homage to Catalonia is out of copyright and available on the net, and he does a fine description in the first chapter.
I know tons of Republicans like this, lifelong R's that intend to vote for Obama, which is why i get so irritated when people start blathering on about how republicans are all evil and stupid. I mean, if that really is the case, then Obama must be courting the stupid vote pretty well, cuz lots of those supposed evil people sure believe in him.
As for me, im in the unusual position of having my vote kinda matter for the first time (Indiana could swing D for the first time sense like '64) in my life. Id vote for Obama in a second if it hadnt been for the whole bailout thing (and the FISA immunity bullshit too).
@#6 Randwulf.
Well, being Canadian, hopefully you can say you were a part of putting Kim Campbell in place as CA PM a few years ago. She's someone I've been extremely impressed with during her post-PM career and only wish we Americans had the chance to be led by someone so fantastic.
Kim Campbell
#39 posted by BDewhirst
I realize there are differences between equally owned and collectively owned, but to be honest, in the long run I don't see that the differences are all that great. I will admit to the need to be further educated on the subject. (Homage to Catalonia has been downloaded and is awaiting my attention.)
I'm not claiming that my examples are absolutely correct, but I do think the situations that lie between those extremes tend to point in the direction of my "thesis."
BDEWHIRST: Compare infant mortality rates in the US to any first world country with socialized medicine. Then compare life expectancies. Then normalize for differences in wealth by, say, comparing the health of the poorest in Britain to the health of the US's upper middle class (and remember that the UK is usually second on the list of overweight nations). They still come out ahead.
Life expectancy isn't consistently measured across borders. For example, in Germany a baby that dies after birth four months premature is considered an abortion. In the US, it is an infant death. Anywhere in Europe you absolutely will not receive the same herculean efforts to save such a child as you will in the US.
Whether Americans are overweight or not has nothing to do with government, socialized medicine, etc. It is purely a function of living in suburban settings with very little daily walking. Period. I hate these bogus health comparisons.
To #42 by Bbonyx:
Can't say I did. She was appointed PM upon Mulroney's stepping down as PM and her subsequently having won the PC leadership convention, she wasn't voted in by the populace at large. She did lead the PC party for 5 months though 'til defeated by Chretien's Liberals. I really don't remember who I voted for at that time though.
I just want to say, Hallelujah f*en lord, I am just so damn relieved the groundswell has materialized and we will soon be delivered of this Rovian nightmare we've had to live through. On purely a psychic level, this is like shedding a terribly toxic load of shit that has been pumping through each a one of us. And this video made me choke up, which is very rare for me. I say, take a moment to appreciate this merciful moment in our history. Amen (f*en lord.)
#46 posted by wolfiesma
Two things I'm afraid of...
First, that somehow the electoral college plays a trick on us (unlikely, according to what I've read).
Second, that if McCain does get elected and he continues things as they are, that "we the people" will reach a breaking point and do something rash.
"we the people" will reach a breaking point and do something rash.
Or at least develop one.
#48 posted by Antinous
Develop a breaking point or a rash? ;)
I believe we're getting closer to the former...
Is this really what you believe ?
Wow...
IAMINNOCENT,
The US's focus on building NICUs and investing in neonatal intensive care is out of proportion of the rest of the developed world. Socialized health systems have consciously decided that this type of spending would be put to better use in other ways. Whether that's true or not largely depends on your perspective. The American perspective has always been to do everything you can for the individual, and because of that, there is no better place to have a complicated childbirth than in the US. However, at $500,000+ per birth, you also have to think about how else you could spend that money.
My point to BDEWHIRST was simply that you can easily misinterpret this information if you don't fully understand it.
The thing that scares me the most about Obama is the same thing that has made him so popular; that being his near complete lack of a real history. The guy has not done enough to give people a really good idea of who he is, so we make it up. We want to believe the best of people, and that is a big part of the fervor that surrounds him. Yes, he is a celebrity, and the best loved celebrities are those who have carefully cultivated their public persona to reveal very little real information about themselves, and instead sell a myth. The Obama that most are voting for is a myth.
What is he really like? What are his real abilities? I don't know. Considering that he is running for the biggest job in our country, the fact that he's a junior Senator with a short voting history who has done little of any real import makes me nervous as heck. Reagan was Governor of California. Clinton was Governor of Arkansas. They had real experience. Obama reminds me of George "W", another guy with limited experience who aspires to be King.
#52 posted by Sparky005
"The guy has not done enough to give people a really good idea of who he is..."
True enough, but on the flip-side of the coin, McCain has done enough that I do have an idea of who he is. In this case, personally, I'd rather elect the devil I don't know than the one I do.
sorry Deviant, I know too many people living with social medicine that would be squatting in a tent in America because a family member got sick. If they can afford to kill a million Iraqis they can afford a few free clinics for the poor at home.
Okay, Sparky, did you see the 30 minute infomercial? Do you still think he doesn't have a history and you don't know what he'll do? I think he laid it out pretty clear.
There was an excellent piece on Jim Lehrer tonight about voter suppression. There is all kinds of messed up shit going on to try to squeak out another stinker, but I think a critical mass of rationality has finally conspired to deliver a victory for decency.
Just do what you have to do to vote. (Six hour waits in Florida for early voting and NO YOU CAN'T VOTE ON WEDNESDAY as some pernicious flyers imply.)
I know there is still a week to go, but I feel like one of the munchkins in Oz singing, "Ding Dong the Wicked Witch is Dead!"
There's also another group that has created a whole series of videos of real people and their choice over at http://www.independentwomenofamerica.org
They profile people in all walks of life.
Dress as Obama for Hallowe'en and show 'em who's ordinary:
http://pageslap.wordpress.com/2008/10/26/how-to-be-barack-obama-for-halloween/
No, let's dress like Rove and Cheney and all those f*heads then burn the masks at midnight! For some reason I just feel like I want to ritualize the end of this reign of terror. It seemed like these last eight years would never end. Sing with me now, "Ding dong, the witch is dead. Which old witch? (The Bush/Cheney) witch. The wicked witch is DEAD!"
@ DEVIANT
I cannot argue with you for the simple reason that I don't know what is the state of neo-natal care in every country ; I think that I can say with some confidence that the best health care on the planet is found in France. This is an interesting example because that level of proficiency is not due to any ideological stance, but to a long tradition of excellence, clinical as well as in research... and a lot of irratating French pride. LOL
Anyway, I think that you see yourself the intrinsic limit to the actual quality of the care given in a country when it is denied to most. I am always puzzled by the "individualism" argument: if this was any true wouldn't care be taken of every single individual ?
Actually, what I find interesting here is the communication technique. Morris is putting regular 'just folks' kind of people right up front surrounded by zero design white space. I'm just a little wordpress consultant, but I can clearly see a REAL effort to reach across the cultural divide. These people are clearly NOT the usual internet cool kids or ivory tower pundits. There's a powerful kind of truth and authenticity in those people speaking.
wolfiesma: It's not wise to put too much faith in what others say about themselves. We've had decades to observe McCain's actions. He's a politician, and we know it. He's not a maniac like W. I don't like Palin as his sidekick, but I think I like Biden even less. Now, that guy IS a maniac. Can you imagine him as President?
I have no expectations that I will sway anyone with this argument, but please just take off the glasses. You know, the ones that make Obama look like our mythologized JFK, and the ones that make McCain look just like George W.
Reagan was Governor of California. Clinton was Governor of Arkansas. They had real experience. Obama reminds me of George "W", another guy with limited experience who aspires to be King.
So why does being the Governor of California or Arkansas count as real experience, but being Governor of Texas doesn't?
Not defending Bush - just pointing out a rather large hole in your reasoning here.
> Compare infant mortality rates in the
> US to any first world country with socialized
> medicine.
Indeed: you can do that at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rate, and you will discover that America is very far from being the best in the world.
American's complaisance about the sad state of their health care system amazes me. I (a Canadian) lived there for several years and I could not believe the weird and totally unfounded misconceptions Americans had about their own health care system and how much better it was than other systems. Believe it or not, other countries have also mastered modern medical technology, and in many countries it is much more accessible than it is in the USA.
Maybe I didn't make myself clear. I wasn't talking about socialized medicine per se, but socialism. I heard a soundbite from Obama on the radio yesterday in which (paraphrasing) he was saying that people were saying "socialism" when what he believed it to be was everyone having an equal opportunity.
Equal opportunity, or equal outcome? Equally owned, or equally paid?
not surprising. She will be a drag show staple for years to come.
Joe MommaSan: You're right. I totally spaced that. I was thinking of Governor Jeb Bush, and had forgotten that W had also been a governor. Hmmm, maybe we should have known he would be a maniac before the first election. Then again, Al Gore, like McCain, had to deal with the stigma of an unpopular administration.
Joe MommaSan: You're right. I totally spaced that. I was thinking of Governor Jeb Bush, and had forgotten that W had also been a governor. Hmmm, maybe we should have known he would be a maniac before the first election. Then again, Al Gore, like McCain, had to deal with the stigma of an unpopular administration.