Am I the only one irritated by the “royal we” of campaigns nowadays? How can “we” be “the nominee”? Alas, even Obama’s said it now and then.
FWIW, the AP and CNN.com both routinely describe Hillary’s campaign debt as $20 million. Ouch.
It amuses us.
Given the number of people (both here and writing diaries at Daily Kos) who’ve been shocked at the attitudes their parent(s) have expressed about Obama, I’d say it’s quite possible.
Obama says it, to my hearing, much more often than he says “I”. It’s one thing for a campaign staff member to say it, I think that’s fairly normal. It is a team sport, after all. I actually rather like it when the candidate says it, because it acknowledges the work being done by their staff. I am sure that there is some research or sense that it plays better as well.
My guess is that it is editorial, not royal. I suspect that since they are making multiple speeches every single day in which the candidate claims that “we” (all of us who share the same beliefs and desires) are going to triumph in the end, any statement addressed to a group that refers to the nomination or election process is going to come out in the plural.
If they are still speaking in the plural when they are having a one-to-one conversation in a formal interview, I would be much more concerned.
I think in Obama’s case, he’s including US, the citizenry, in his “we”. Which I like, a lot.
Yes, it’s a rhetorical attempt to define the candidate as an entire movement rather than as a single individual. It’s also a way to include “you” in that movement.
Yeah, I hadn’t noticed that before today. That actually lends a little credence to the theory that she’s trying to get Obama to cover her debt - I hadn’t believed that theory, but the denials from both sides made me wonder, and $20 million or $30 million is a lot to sink into a campaign. They won’t go broke, but I can understand even the Clintons being reluctant to do that.
In the early primaries, Obama’s speeches often contained language about what “we” would do, while Hillary’s were more like “vote for me and I will do this”.
That’s fine, and no objection. Of course a candidate will identify himself or herself as being at the head of a large group of concerned citizens. It’s when the plural clashes with the singular that I’m annoyed:
“We’re going to the White House!” - good
“We will be the nominee” - bad
“We will take back our country and turn the page on the Bush years” - good
“When we are President, things are gonna change” - bad
“We will clean up the mess in Washington” - good
“Once we take the oath of office, the sky’s the limit!” - bad
The campaign tic that bothers me even more is beginning a response to a question with:
“As I’ve said many times…”
“I have said…”
“Well, I have said before…”
Both Obama and Hillary have fallen into this habit. It’s grating because of the subtext, “You stupid git, haven’t you been listening?”
Just answer the damn question, and spare us the condescension.
I think that may be a bit of a delay tactic that allows you to locate the talking point without saying “um” or “uh”. I guess it has the added bonus of implying consistency or something.
I’m sure you’re right, but it’s still annoying.
As I’ve mentioned, I don’t disagree…
I usually take it as a preemptive counter to charges of flip-flopping. You start right off saying, “I have not changed my mind – I’ve been behind this stupidity all along. Changing one’s mind is for wussies.” But either way, still grating.
Hillary using “we”
You’re doing it wrong…
Seriously, it sounds like someone said, you use “I/me” too much, use “we/us” more. So she literally supplanted those words and the grammar sounds dumb because the rest of her sentence wasn’t inclusive to begin with.
Vote for me and I will change this country!!!
Vot for us and we will change this countrh!!! (What? My name isn’t on the ballot)
Where as Obama will talk about us as in,
" We can change this countery…"
" We have been fighting amongst ourselves for too long…"
Someone has hard-coded the us/we thing in the hillary supporter’s brains.
Three new endorsements today for Obama:
Obama also picked up endorsements today from three former chairmen of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission: Democratic appointee Arthur Levitt and Republican appointees William Donaldson and David Ruder. They said Obama is a leader who can "take us to a stronger and more secure economic future.''Bloomberg Politics - Bloomberg
Which was highlighted when the Clinton campaign first co-opted Obama’s “Yes we can!” into “Yes SHE can!” Geez, talk about not getting it.
I think I heard it in the later primaries as “Yes we WILL”. Better…but still, pretty weak.
“I am the one I’ve been waiting for!”
Actually I think it should be,
“I am the change you are waiting for.”