The Oprah Factor: This Time It's Personal

Cross-posted at the UK Guardian website

The Oprama wagon is stumping the early primary states and crowds are filling football stadiums. There’s no doubt about Oprah Winfrey’s popularity, but will it translate into votes for Sen. Barack Obama?

Pundits agree Ms. Winfrey’s role and goal is to lure in women voters, which comprise her primary audience. But can she trot out Obama like another one of her “Favorite Things” segments and entice her audience to go out and buy him?

Her “Favorite Things” items in her magazines (I used to subscribe) and TV shows sell because the quality generally stands on its own. There’s only so much promotion and advertising can do: Oprah’s efforts on the campaign trail can only lift Obama so far.

Few people probably actually saw Ms. Winfrey’s Iowa speech on C-SPAN like I did, but she offered little to distinguish Barack from the frontrunner Sen. Hillary Clinton. She made an attempt to list his positions on the issues, yet Sen. Clinton not only holds the same position on most but also has a superior track record in those same areas (health care, children’s issues, schools).

As much as I’ve always admired and defended Ms. Winfrey, she was clearly out of her realm. She showed her political naiveté by attempting to elevate a novice to a position he’s not yet ready for. His ill-formed desire for everyone to get along and a junior high-ish wish for “no more politics as usual” do not mean he has the experience or stature to lead the free world.

The only real difference Ms. Winfrey offered was a specious claim that Obama has a “moral authority.” Based on what, she didn’t share with us. In my book, Maya Angelou has far more “moral authority” than Oprah or Obama and she’s posted a beautiful message in support of Sen. Clinton carried on You Tube.

This is where a bad speech just got weird. It was personal; too personal – it made me wince a little and want to turn away from the television. Oprah started quoting - stream of consciousness style - from the Autobiography of Miss Jane Pittman. All I recall about the show from when I was little was that Cicely Tyson was mesmerizing in the lead. Apparently, Oprah recalled, Tyson’s character kept looking into the eyes of babies wondering, “Is he the one? Is he the one?” “He” is apparently a Messianic figure to lead the African-Americans to freedom. Oprah’s conclusion? “Barack Obama is The One.” Whoa, stop right there.

With this messiah/savior fantasy she’s projecting onto this inexperienced young man, she left rational debate behind in the dust. Obama’s already made his share of the same mistakes that make most politicians human. The Chicago Tribune has caught Obama taking campaign money from, and moving onto the adjacent property of, a shady guy now under indictment for contracting fraud. (see Jump in Barack; There’s room for everyone in the pool of humanity).

Oprah’s no doubt excited about the future of this promising young black man from Chicago. But where was she was when a more promising black woman from Chicago ran for President? I don’t recall Oprah getting out and stumping for former Senator Carol Moseley Braun when she ran in 2004.

By promoting the inexperienced Obama over the experienced Sen. Clinton with no rational reason offered, Ms. Winfrey’s buying into our culture’s penchant for projecting wisdom and leadership qualities onto men and minimizing them in women. Whatever she gains by supporting a lesser qualified black man over a white woman with Sen. Clinton’s stellar credentials, she sends a message of disrespect for women.

At this late date in the campaign, Oprah’s sole purpose is to implore women to stop supporting Sen. Clinton and vote for Obama. It saddens me to watch a powerful woman work so feverishly to drain votes from another powerful woman for a less experienced and seasoned young man. And to me, it’s personal. It’s emotional, not rational, and it’s a form of sexism that’s hard to put my finger on.

Oprah’s life choices and her message have been about empowerment – not just for women, but women are clearly her primary audience. Oprah’s decisions not to follow the conventional path of marriage, to control and expand her media empire, to build a leadership school for girls in Africa – all speak to empowerment. Her TV shows and her high quality magazine advise women on how to be their best selves in work, family and life.

She has earned tremendous personal power and people have often asked her to run for president. Instead, she stands up and nearly begs people to vote for a man who is dwarfed by her presence. What I saw and felt at the Iowa spectacle is that Ms. Winfrey’s appearance on the campaign trail completely overshadowed the young senator from Illinois, as it should have. I think most people were there just to be in her presence, and when Obama took the stage it was almost embarrassing that he couldn’t fill it and obviously wasn’t close to what she’d made him out to be.

As immensely popular as Oprah is, I think this move, at this late date, will go down as a misjudgment. At least with Bruce Springsteen’s valiant attempts to get out the vote for Kerry late in the 2004 general election, he had a mission to save our country from four more years of greed, corruption and favors for the rich. What, exactly, is Oprah saving women from by begging them to forego Sen. Clinton for Obama?

Yes, an endorsement from such a powerful person matters and there may be some who switch to Obama simply on the strength of Oprah’s support. But while Ms. Winfrey has been on her crusade for her male messiah, black women continue to favor Sen. Clinton by 68% to only 25% for Obama. (I don’t have the numbers on white women.) Even though the much respected Oprah is touting the unseasoned Obama as “The One,” I suspect when black and white women walk into the voting booth, they’ll vote on more practical issues. Like who has the track record, passion and stature to improve the economic bottom line in their lives and deliver better schools and health care for their kids. And that won’t be Barack Obama.

Comments

[Marie]

Thanks for the excellent, thoughtful commentary. I'm honestly torn between Obama or Clinton, and am leaning toward Clinton. I am dismayed that Oprah has taken sides, though, given the fact that we have the first woman candidate running for president in many, many years. I have to admire the fact that Donna Brazile, another prominent African-American woman, has not endorsed either candidate.

Without question, I will vote for whoever wins the Democratic primary. We are fortunate that we have so many excellent candidates to choose from, unlike the Republicans.

[Wyntre]

'By promoting the inexperienced Obama over the experienced Clinton with no rational reason offered, Winfrey is buying into our culture's penchant for projecting wisdom and leadership qualities onto men and minimising them in women. Whatever she gains by supporting a lesser qualified black man over a woman with Senator Clinton's stellar credentials, she sends a message of disrespect for women.

It's a form of sexism that's hard to put my finger on.'

You have expressed this perfectly! I am disgusted that the prospect of the first USA woman president is, apparently, far more terrifying than that of the first black man.

(That despite the fact that black men got the vote in the USA five decades or so before women, white, black or otherwise.)

I will not vote for Oprama. If the powers-that-be conspire to nominate him I will, for the first time in my life, switch parties and vote for anyone else.

Wyntre

[M.R. Field]

Here is the link to a post I wrote from the perspective of a person who has been covering the issues of women in the state of Iowa, the nation, and the presidential campaign: http://www.arounddesmoines.com/commentary-the-obama-winfrey-ticket/#comments