Identity politics ... under the surface

Charlie Gibson, the moderator of the New Hampshire debates on Saturday commented how historic the Democratic party debates were with the individuals on stage. What he may have been hinting at was the fact that there was a woman, a hispanic, a black man and lastly, a white man on stage. Just a few short decades ago, the entire stage would have been filled with that last demographic. But, there has been little overt mentioning of the diversity that has taken the campaign trail this year; people just barely acknowledge it, like the way people simply stopped talking about the number of black coaches in the NBA after a while. (Admittedly, some people still talk about the appointment of a new black coach, but it certainly doesn't raise as many eyebrows or chatter as it may have once.)

Yet, under the surface, there is excitement about the Democratic debate not only because of the star power of the individuals, but because they just look different. And that of course creates discussion and some political weighing that goes on to take advantage of this.

As an interesting note, Obama's background isn't necessarily even "African-American." His heritage is a mixed one, like so many people's truly are. His mother is from Kansas and his father is Kenyan. So, is he African American, or African-American, mixed, or black, or something else? What has been interesting and appealing is that Obama has not directly addressed this except for maybe a few times in interviews, making himself not the black candidate, but the candidate that happens to be black. Oprah's presence as well as his claims of "historic moments" are below-the-surface tugs at his identity though. Some discomfit has arisen over this tension.

Hillary Clinton on the other hand has had the identity of becoming the first woman president. She effectively pointed that out, as a point of her being an agent of change, by simply being elected. She has only recently started to utilize this in her efforts, crying today at a small roundtable to show her human, and maybe her feminine side?

And where does this leave John Edwards, the white male from the South that does not have any special identity politics to tap in his campaign. It unfortunately creates a subconscious casting of Edwards as not as exciting as the rest of the diverse crowd. Why should this be a liability?

EDIT: My friend Dan sent me this link to Chris Hitchen's article on this topic on Slate.