John Merli
Published: May 8, 2008

You can learn a lot about the mettle of a presidential candidate by how well she (or he) panders to the masses. Pandering, of course, is a way of life in politics and everybody does it. The trick, I suppose, from a cynical point of view, is not to let on that you are pandering, even when it’s clear beyond any shadow of a doubt that you are.

Let’s take Clinton and McCain. (We’ll get to Obama later.) If you were searching for clues, it was quite telling when Clinton and McCain pandered to voters on that numbskull notion of eliminating the nearly miniscule gas tax for three months.

But here’s the difference between these two: Hillary simply has no shame and has demonstrated time and again she will say virtually anything at any time to any one, if it means securing more votes.
And what about the fact that not one known economist would endorse her gas tax plan, you ask? Not a problem. That just raised a second opportunity to pander some more — claiming that she doesn’t consult with economists on economic questions. Huh? (Neither, apparently, does she consult with the rest of her Senate colleagues on both sides of the aisle who also oppose the idea.)

McCain, on the other hand, at least appeared visibly chagrined when he called for a summer free of a gas tax. (In fact, he thought of it before Hillary copied him.) McCain knew it was blatant pandering along with everyone else, and although he admits that economics is not his strong suit, he knows enough about what the elder George H. W. Bush once called “voodoo economics” to be embarrassed by his proposal even as he was making it. (I actually felt sorry for him when he said it on TV, and I sure don’t say that very often about a politician.)

Yet Hillary keeps pretending that pandering is beneath her dignity, In fact, she’s a millionaire who leads a privileged life (albeit a lot of it due to hard work) and it’s unlikely she really feels anyone else’s pain. But she expediently continues to play the role of a political chameleon and we know it, as does she. And the scary part is there may be times when she actually convinces herself that popping up for a photo op at a gas pump and promising to bring down OPEC and fight the mean old oil companies for the little guy is not pandering.

Barack Obama doesn’t exactly get high marks for a lack of pandering, either, although at least he had the recent good sense to not make his fawning over frustrated vehicle drivers as obvious as his two opponents. True, since the junior senator from Illinois is playing a learn-as-you-go game, he has not yet perfected the art of pandering, but give him time. He rails against “Washington” and its evil ways, trying to take advantage of the fact that he hasn’t become a part of the traditional political establishment. But, of course, that’s exactly what he’s trying to accomplish in the November election.

And Obama does live and work in Washington and is a member of what’s often described as “the world’s most exclusive club,” the U.S. Senate. Like Hillary and John McCain, he lives a privileged life with more than its share of perks. Yet running for “change” and “against Washington” deploys the art of pandering at a more subtle level. It hits a target that is not easily identified and therefore cannot fight back. (Last time I checked, “Washington” was a city, not a person.)

Some pandering simply replaces what otherwise would be considered rudeness. Kissing babies is pandering, and no doubt wins over parent-voters. But the drive of some office seekers to pander shamelessly in order to tap some of our most basic and primal weaknesses in order to win at any cost only cheapens the process. The biggest offender is Hillary. Let’s hope someone tells her.

John Merli has been a Prince William County resident since 1984, and a Potomac News columnist since 1985. He has worked in the media for more than 30 years. E-mail him at .