A lot about the candidate’s personalities, outlooks and political opinions can be inferred by their speeches and narratives. Each candidate maintains a personal style that separates them from their counterpart. For example Obama approaches his speeches with a more intimate and honest perspective. While Hillary Clinton’s speeches appear to be more politically calculated. This is evident in Obama “free spirited” and discussion based appearances. He rarely stands still behind a podium while delivering a speech as a result his unrestricted motion lightens the atmosphere. His dialogue is also often filled with pauses and “uhh’s,” which shows his free spirit, as he appears to be speaking from the heart rather than a political playbook. On the other hand, Clinton’s speeches are hidden behind the podium and her responses often seem calculated and old school. This style makes her political approach appear “spun.” I believe this fundamental difference between Obama and Clinton is the reason Obama is able to mobilize and motivate large numbers of new voters. This difference in talking style is also the reason Obama is perceived as more honest and straight foreword than Hillary Clinton.

Narratives of the candidates are an important aspect of the image that is presented to the American audience. They are crucial, because that image can be a selling point for voters and supporters. Obama’s campaign relies on that narrative, as it is a core concept which drives the message that he is like the American people, and is concerned and aware of the hurtles on various sides of important issues. Hillary has used narrative in a less forward manner, but is becoming more deliberate in exposing her story. This is understandable given that her position on experience speaks to competence, but not reliability in going the same direction that the American audience wants to go. She needs to convey that she is an American as well to touch that audience that uses narrative image as a means to determine who can help them make changes that they have been waiting for.

I feel that each Democratic candidate pulls from different types of experiences, Senator Clinton leans more to her political experiences and Senator Obama pulls from his multicultural linage. Both of these approaches are used to strengthen their validities as competent presidential candidates. Senator Obama life story is the center of attention in a country where race has a historical context and is still a rigid dividing factor for the haves and have nots. One can simply look at the population and income levels of those in the inner cities and urban settings to find lower income Black families. A cynical view of Senator Obama can argue that his biracial identity is a key element to his success and opportunities allotted to him. I feel his negotiation of racial identity is representative of America’s attempt to equally allocate social resources and capital between the socioeconomic and racial groups; he makes sure to represent his Black identity, which serves as a connection to the Black community at large. Although he is not “Black” (which can be argued by his experiences living in predominately Black environments) because of his white mother’s linage, he inspires many in the Black community that mainstream America is growing more inclusive of Blacks.

Enjoyed the new radio program, The Takeaway. The hosts were smooth sounding and enjoyable to listen to.
i enjoyed hearing the insightful " between the lines" commentary of Hillary and Barack's comments. Your guest, the professor from Morehouse, had immediate responses that make me want to listen more carefully to the speeches of the candidates.