July 03, 2008
exciting, modern, and a little vague
A couple years ago, GQ asked John Kerry if he preferred the Beatles or the Rolling Stones. Kerry, never one to let an opportunity to appear human or interesting go unblown, refused to express a preference. "I can tell you the truth," he said, "and the truth is I love both." It took him a couple more months to lose the election. But right there, in that interview, he lost the rock-geek vote. Or at least, he ensured that if anybody who actually cared about music voted for him that November, they'd be doing so reluctantly. There's no wrong answer to the Beatles-vs.-Stones question. And you're certainly allowed to like both. But you can't be agnostic. Kerry came off like he'd somehow failed to have a definitive emotional response to the two most important rock bands of his generation--or like he was afraid of articulating one during an election year, which is even worse.In an interview to be published this Friday in Rolling Stone, Barack Obama doesn't come right out and declare himself to be a Stones person. But when quizzed about the contents of his iPod by cub reporter Jann Wenner, he references the Stones twice, cites the awesomely apocalyptic "Gimme Shelter" specifically, and doesn't give the Fab Four so much as a name-check. Also on the oPod: "[A] lot of Coltrane, a lot of Miles Davis, a lot of Charlie Parker"; "everything from Howlin' Wolf to Yo-Yo Ma to Sheryl Crow to Jay-Z"; and music from Barack's '70s youth, including Stevie Wonder, Earth, Wind & Fire, and Elton John.
more from TNR here.
Posted by Morgan Meis at 10:08 AM | Permalink










Comments
Beatles or the Stones?
The Kinks.
Posted by: Anon | Jul 3, 2008 10:18:26 AM
I personally don't think music preferences have a play in an election. Do you think Bush got elected because of the music he listens to? I think not.<
img src="http://reviewsblog.pcriot.com/img/spacer.jpg">
Posted by: Brian Gar | Jul 3, 2008 10:37:43 AM
Do you think Bush got elected because of the music he listens to?
I think Bush got elected by making people think he's the sort of guy we'd like to have a beer with despite being a raging alcoholic.
Kerry's limp wristed answer to the question belies some deeper slipperiness to his psyche which I think came through in other ways and ultimatly doomed him in the eyes of some of the electorate.
Hey could have just as easily said, "Look, I'd love to talk music sometime, but I'm running for president, not interviewing for a desk job at Rolling Stone. Don't you have an substantive question you'd like to ask?" And such a response would have gone a lot further with myself and many other reluctant Kerry supporters.
Does it matter if he's a Sgt. Peppers or Pet Sounds man? No. At least it shouldn't. But maddeningly it does matter to people who make emotional decisions on who to vote for.
I recall listening to a person who was in near-hysterics because of some poor appearance Kerry and his wife Teressa Henize put in at a Wendy's fast food restaurant. They apparently had trouble ordering from the menu, you know, because they aren't the type to schlub around looking for a value menu like the rest of us...
This person was literally opposed to Kerry on this and this alone. "You expect him to keep us safe? He and his wife can't even order at a Wendy's!"
For some reason we feel the emotional need for a candidate to connect with us.
Personally I think this a terrible idea. I don't want a president who I can drink a beer with. Let me worry about the beer, you worry about running the country, bozo.
Posted by: mrgoodbar | Jul 3, 2008 8:32:39 PM
I know the Stones are cooler, but... Beatles.
But, you know, Obama was about eight when the Beatles broke up. There's been an awful lot of good music since then.
Posted by: Sagredo | Jul 4, 2008 3:55:13 AM
Post a comment