Obama, Romney: The Words to Say It

For one night, they substituted boxing gloves with the point of a sword. The debate was parried with the edge of the sword and with irony, and was not based on hits below the belt. Sitting next to each other, divided only by the imposing figure of the Archbishop of New York, Timothy Dolan, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney participated in one of the most anticipated world political events of the year in Manhattan: The Alfred E. Smith Foundation dinner, where funds were collected for the most important diocese in the U.S.

Dressed in impeccable morning suits, the two contenders for the White House took the floor. Those speeches that were not supposed to be official, in fact, were not. It was a sort of mini-show, ironically. The first to take the floor – and to launch his jibes – was the Republican candidate. An uncertain opening for a “famed” rich man: “We — blue jeans in the morning perhaps, a suit for a lunch fundraiser, sport coat for dinner, but it’s nice to finally relax and to wear what Ann and I wear around the house,” he said, demonstrating his very elegant dress code. Then, a joke in favor of the press: “And I have already seen early reports from tonight’s dinner. Headline, Obama embraced by Catholics. Romney dines with rich people.” Finally, a gibe directly against his rival: “President Obama and I are each very lucky to have one person who is always in our corner, someone who we can lean on and someone who is a comforting presence…I have my beautiful wife, Ann. He has Bill Clinton.” A clear reference to the president’s true (not so secret) resource: His predecessor, the man who enabled a positive turn of fortune in Obama’s electoral campaign in Charlotte, before the negative one which occurred after the debate in Denver.

Even Barack Obama gave a display of having a discrete sense of humor. “Everyone please take your seats otherwise Clint Eastwood will yell at them,” began the president, referring to the show by the actor-director at the Republican convention in Tampa – the now infamous interview to the empty seat, to the invisible Obama. For several minutes, the 44th president directed his wit against himself. “As some of you may have noticed, I had a lot more energy in our second debate. I felt really well rested after the nice long nap I had in the first debate. And finally, let me say that I’ve been doing some thinking, and I’ve decided that for our final debate, I’m going to go back to the strategy that I used to prepare for the first debate.” After a skillful scenic pause, he smiled and said: “I’m just kidding. I’m trying to make Axelrod sweat a little bit.” His main advisor did not have the happiest of expressions.

Lastly, for him as well, a very ironic joke on the millionaire Mitt Romney: “Earlier today I went shopping at some stores in Midtown. I understand Governor Romney went shopping for some stores in Midtown.” The play of words on “for shopping” and “four shops” was appreciated by Romney.*

Both gave proof of lexical fantasy. The language that they use in this last part of the electoral campaign is one of the fundamental instruments employed to reach the objective. Expert System, an Italian company specializing in the production of semantic software, calculated which words the two candidates used the most in the debate on Long Island. Barack Obama strongly reclaimed the verb “can” (“yes, we can”) while Mitt Romney used two particular words: work and America. The president used “we” the most, while his challenger used “I.” They are playing the race to the White House with personal pronouns.

It is through the “we” that Barack Obama seeks to mobilize his base: Early voting, fundraising, door to door propaganda, and important testimonials, like Bruce Springsteen. He held a concert in Ohio to promote the president’s cause with Bill Clinton next to him. Obama is still at an advantage in that strategic state, as he is in Iowa and Wisconsin. Mitt Romney, on the other hand, should win Florida.

In the geographic and political game of the states and their great electors, according to Real Clear Politics, Obama has the advantage: he should have 294 votes (24 more than the necessary 270 to win), but the final outcome of the confrontation remains very uncertain. According to some calculations, Mitt Romney could win by three points if he won a series of swing states, including the small New Hampshire, with four great electors. A little win, but one that can be indispensable for the final victory.

*Editor’s note: Although this is correctly translated from the original Italian, the actual play on words was, of course, the subtlety between “shopping at stores” and “shopping for stores.”