Dennis Haysbert stole my thunder as I was preparing an essay analysis on the Obama campaign being aided by Pop Culture. I was going to specifically mention his role in 24 as David Palmer as a catalyst for the mass support his candidacy has received thus far.

Since Mr. Haysbert rushed me into this I will say that I obviously agree with his premise. I also believe that the same forces who created pop cultural images in the past of caricature's like Stepin Fetchit, and other derogatory imagery, may have previously contributed to the global and national racial divide which marginalized talented individuals like an Obama until now.
Perhaps 24 help desensitized perceptions that an African American could have the capacity to govern and lead a nation like America. Has now life begun to imitate life? There are a few drawbacks with the life aspect to this phenomena.
I
n pop culture, fandom drives the masses. In life bread and butter issues drive the electorate. So Obama has to be able to deliver a do-able agenda which can be manifested if he were to be elected. In pop culture, the writer(s) can manipulate circumstances which can jade the viewers perceptions about the character.
In life, the candidate cannot rely on fandom. He has to deliver on policy and actual leadership. In this scenario, Obama has his work cut out for him as he, unlike the David Palmer character, is in a war time political environment.
Social issues are real, though not as much of a wedge issue as they would have been if this were peace time. This could help Obama stave off a greater degree of bigoted opposition he would have faced otherwise. Now, the war and the economy are the binding issues which could put him over the top.
So Mr. Haysbert, thank you for stealing my thunder. You motivated me to push this posting forward. Although I would have liked to have provided more contrasting analysis to support the role between David Palmer and Barack Obama.