Obama's two visits to Afghanistan nicely illustrate the difference between a challenger and an incumbent.In keeping with that difference, he noted the caustic, limited-liability tenor of Obama's statement of commitment to the Afghan government:
The highlight of Senator Obama's 2008 visit to Afghanistan was the three-point shot he hit and the high fives he got from the troops. Now, President Obama will sign a treaty, and note the anniversary of the shot heard round the world that took out Bin Laden.
Note that there were two references [in Obama's speech, which I have not yet heard -- JF] to strengthening democratic institutions and no mention of democracy or liberty. And a very clear emphasis, like an NPR pledge week. on matching grants: "as you stand up you will not stand alone." I took that to imply if you don't stand up you will be on your own.Fallows glosses: " If you think the Osama-killing, drone-strike-ordering, bank-rescuing, compromise-accepting Barack Obama of 2012 is different from the "Change We Can Believe In" / dreamy Hope-poster figure of 2008, you're right: that's how it always is, according to Popkin."
Popkin's core incumbent/challenger contrast is the fruit of decades of research and makes intuitive sense. At the same time, as someone who's been tracking Obama's rhetoric for five years, I'm attuned to continuity over that span, and there's a lot of that in this speech too. There have always been two Obamas, ultrapragmatist and long-view promiser of deep change, and the difference in the '08 and '12 campaigns is one of emphasis. I noted last night, in a quick response to Obama's speech prior to the availability of a transcript, echoes of Obama's major March 2008 foreign policy speech, mainly in his rationale back then for shifting resources from Iraq to Afghanistan. Here's what he said in '08:
