Reading the motions of politics

Click here to watch Karen Bradley analyze Friday's debate

For Karen Bradley, the director of graduate studies in dance, it doesn't matter what the candidates said in Friday night's debate so much as how they said it.

As a certified movement analyst, Bradley has been watching the race for the White House intently, focusing on gestures, pacing, expressions and shifts in weight, to determine whether the candidates' movements support or contradict what they are saying. Bradley has been featured in a variety of media, from Hardball with Chris Matthews to The Washington Post to a book by Malcolm Gladwell.

Speeches are written by a team of experts and even motions like the hand chop or the fist pump are carefully rehearsed, she said, but body language never lies. For politicians, who are seen in a variety of contexts over time, relating to the public and communicating effectively can make the difference between victory and defeat.

"We all read body language and in that sense, we're all movement analysts," Bradley said. "It's important in determining if someone is telling the truth, if we're getting accurate information, if we should seek more. It's useful daily in getting to know each other. You don't just hear the words."

Bradley became a CMA in 1984 at the Laban/Bartenieff Institute of Movement Studies and traveled the country teaching and choreographing performers before coming to the university in 1999. For dancers, actors and musicians, movement analysis is useful for developing a character in a play or relating with the audience, she said, and movement analysis is a required class for dance undergraduates here. Bradley is also the founder of a consulting firm, Move to Win, where she coaches communication in corporate and political settings.

Leading up to the first debate, both Sen. John McCain, (R-Ariz)., and Sen. Barack Obama, (D-Ill.), have recently amended their styles, which could point to coaching, she said. She noted how Obama used to wander around the stage, pause and stare into the distance, often equivocating on the issues.

"I think for a long time, he was trying to not be the scary man, you know, the scary black man," she said. Of late, he has become more resolute, in an attempt to prove that he can take a stance, she said.

McCain, on the other hand, persisted through the primaries by being the tough guy who wouldn't budge his views, she said. He would stand still, grip the podium and stare straight at the audience. When support for Obama began to increase, he adopted messages of reform and change, although there was nothing in his style up until that point suggestive that he was capable of moving in any direction, she said.

"I don't see a real commitment," she said. "When he does these shifts, like moving around the stage during a speech, he looks uneasy, and I don't think that's good."

In Friday night's debate, Obama continued to develop by taking strong positions while McCain shifted back to his former, dogged method, she said. At the beginning, it was a draw, as both came into the debate with their facts and statistics at the ready.

McCain frequently brought his hands together in the same way, she said, as he focuses on the same points and the same message; this reflects his natural tendency toward determination, and also points to the fact that he is less mobile, due to injuries suffered in the Vietnam War. In contrast, Obama tends to stretch his arms and open up, expounding on his points generously, which makes it harder for him to stick to them, she said.

McCain refused to look at Obama or the audience, while Obama had no qualms with turning directly to McCain, she noted. But after the subject turned to the war in Iraq, it was downhill for McCain, Bradley said.

"He had a moment of extreme discomfort, looking like he was coming off his heels almost, like his knees buckled," she said. "When Obama turned to him and said, 'You were wrong on this, you were wrong on this,' you could see McCain shrink, he looked small, old and angry. I feel that will be a resonant image."

Afterward, McCain kept repeating the same points, while Obama gave a more balanced performance.

"Just the fact that he did hit back a little bit, told McCain he was wrong, enumerated a number of very specific number of things he would do, people were waiting to hear that, and he did it with a lot of conviction," Bradley said.

In Bradley's opinion, the most important thing to take away from the debate is how each candidate makes decisions.

"In terms of the candidates, the style of leadership, especially in these difficult and challenging times, matters particularly when we're dealing with the world, with the planet - who is listening, who is willing to pay attention, who will respond with strength," she said. "These things really matter. I'm not saying to vote with one candidate or another. Do you want somebody who is reactive or responsive? Someone who is thoughtful or quick at making decisions? What matters to you as a voter? What do you want in a leader?"

sticedbk@gmail.com