Does a ‘new’ kind of politics preclude attack-style politics?

July 31, 2008

Late yesterday, after a series of false attack ads from the McCain campaign, the Obama campaign unveiled a pretty good response ad.

In 30 seconds, the spot hits most of the high notes: McCain’s attacks are objectively false, but just as importantly, McCain is “practicing the politics of the past.” He offers the “same old politics” and the “same failed policies.” At that point, the ad pivots to Obama’s policies on the economy and energy policy. (You’ll note, of course, that McCain’s ads rarely actually talk about McCain’s actual ideas.)

And while I think this is a pretty solid response ad, it is, fundamentally, a defensive response. McCain is attacking, and Obama is responding. Jonathan Chait argues today that the equation should be turned around.

If you’ve heard anything at all about John McCain during the last few weeks, what you’ve probably heard is that he’s losing. His advisors hate each other, the media are ignoring him, and he’s getting photographed in golf carts and supermarket cheese aisles while his opponent strikes Kennedyesque poses.

But here’s the weird thing: It’s kind of working for McCain. He’s only trailing by, on average, a few points in the polls…. McCain may be committing lots of blunders, but the blunders aren’t hurting him because the spotlight is on Obama. McCain is getting attention for his attacks on Obama, especially his frequent insinuations that Obama lacks patriotism. The attacks are usually based on lies. […]

Obama has barely hit back. His weak-tea replies express “disappointment” with McCain and reject the “same old politics.”

Is there room in the “new” style of politics for going on the attack?

It’s worth remembering that it’s still July. The conventions haven’t started, neither candidate has picked a running mate, and the public is not yet fully engaged in the race. You and I think of this as the heat of the campaign season, but our perspective is skewed by our interest in current events.

I mention this, of course, because while McCain’s general election strategy now appears clear — do and/or say anything to win, no matter what — Obama’s team’s strategy is less obvious. It’s certainly possible Obama is trying to stay above the fray now, and will get more aggressive in the home stretch. Maybe he’ll want his running mate to be the aggressive part of the team. Obama has been a substantive, positive, issue-driven candidate, but that doesn’t mean he won’t go negative at some point.

And if he does decide to take the offensive, Chait offers a helpful roadmap.

To go on the attack, Obama doesn’t need to engage in character assassination and baseless charges, as his opponent has done. All he needs to do is stop letting McCain paint a wildly distorted self-portrait. […]

McCain has de-emphasized or reversed nearly every position that set him apart from Bush, most notably the tax cuts for the rich that are the heart of Bush’s economic program. To prove his partisan bona fides during the primary, he boasted that “I did everything I could to get [Bush] elected and reelected.” And when an interviewer suggested that McCain was different from Bush, the senator replied, “No. No. I — the fact is that I’m different, but the fact is that I have agreed with President Bush far more than I have disagreed. And on the transcendent issues, the most important issues of our day, I’ve been totally in agreement and support of President Bush.” Why haven’t we seen these words in television ads?

Obama’s strategy seems predicated on convincing voters that they really, really like the inexperienced black guy with the foreign-sounding name. Convincing them not to vote for the other guy, the one who embraces the least popular president in modern history, sounds like a better bet to me.

The bigger problem to me is trying to pick which angle to go with. Does Obama attack McCain’s ridiculous economic record? Or McCain getting the war in Iraq completely wrong? Or his constant confusion about world events? Or him running on Bush’s policy agenda? Or his opposition to Social Security? Or his flip-flops? Or his dishonesty problem?

Barack is going to lose this election if he doesn’t return to the rapid response he used in primaries. The negatives are starting to pile up, and a lie is as easy to beleive as the truth if you don’t know the difference. The Republicans are counting on that.

  • Democrats are so used to bending over and spreading for Republicans that I doubt there’s one on the national scene with any campaign experience with the cojones to just get up and bitch-slap the Republicans and call them out like they should be called out.

    This is not a problem for regular Democrats – if we let the people I talk to during the day have some real role in this besides writing checks and attending rallies, the Republican would be on the ropes. It’s the “professionals” – even the ones who work for Obama – who need the kick in the pants. If it doesn’t happen, the polls show how easy it’s going to be to go from Obama to Obummah.

  • as to your last question, Steve, there is still time for most of the above. I agree with Chait that Obama has to start setting the agenda, and break through the McCain-loving media to tell the voters exactly what their other option really is – a flip-flopping, war-mongering, ignorant-on-economics, cynical old man who has sold his soul to Karl Rove.

    to harken back to last evenings threads, anyone who thinks we can trust the voting public to sensibly conclude that without some serious help shuld consider this:

    More problematic for Obama, the Rasmussen poll showed that crucial swing independent voters reacted negatively to the news of his hyped trip – 30 percent said it made them less likely to vote for him while 23 percent said it made them more likely.

    Yes, that’s right: a successful trip that results in good meetings with the military and leaders in the MIddle East and with allies in Europe is a negative for more independents than it is a positive. Simply doing the affirmative, sensible, positive things and doing them very well is not cutting it. For whatever reason it is not what the voters appear to want. Not only is it not closing the sale, it is pushing them away.

    Fine. Give ’em a reason to not like the other guy. I trust Team Obama can do that better than McSame can, too. As I said yesterday, Obama has to get out in front of the narratives, he can’t just react to them once they are in place – by that time they are too ingrained and the MSM is too invested to give them up. Not to mention it looks weak in a Gore/Kerry sort of way.

  • The bigger problem to me is trying to pick which angle to go with. Does Obama attack McCain’s ridiculous economic record? Or McCain getting the war in Iraq completely wrong? Or his constant confusion about world events? Or him running on Bush’s policy agenda? Or his opposition to Social Security? Or his flip-flops? Or his dishonesty problem?

    All of the above.

  • Ideal ad:

    (1) 15 seconds of actual footage of McCain flipping and flopping. There’s so much material out there as we all know.

    (2) 5 seconds of suggesting we end the tired old politics.

    (3) 10 seconds of Obama, outlining his real policies and getting applause.

    Obama has 2 and 3 down, but 1 is absolutely critical.

    Also there should be an ad for every angle – if McCain is running ads on energy during a partucular time, run the same subject in the same states at the same time.

  • McCain has a minimum 12 point headstart by just being white. He gets more for being a vet. Perhaps he’d like to be swiftboated by a rogue 527 for the 32 propaganda films he made for N Vietnam, or for the wet start “problem” that caused him to be bounced out of his squadron, and because he was an Admiral’s kid, assigned to another carrier instead of being tried for murder. Maybe some other 527 would like to run a tour of all his homes, and remind women of his opinion of his “trollop” wife, the “cunt” who keeps him as a trophy. I know there are damn few testicles in the Democratic party, but I’d like to see a more gutsy campaign. You’ll sure see one from the other side. Their balls are big and brass.

  • Both analyses highlighted in this post are themselves the product of “old” political paradigms. The Obama ad is mutli-layered, and the least important layer is the “response” aspect. Look at the overall production (especially black-and-white to color transition). This spot is a response to McCain’s attacks, but that is the starting point, not the focal point. The overall spot is itself representative of Obama’s politics just as the attack ads have revealed McCain for the opportunist that he is.

    All of us need to step out of our preconceptions about Presidential campaigns, because it seems that for all those covering this campaign, as the Firesign Theatre reminds us, “everything you know is wrong.” How many of us/you thought Obama would be the Dem candidate one year ago?

  • But here’s the weird thing: It’s kind of working for McCain.

    Of course it’s working for him. He’s running against the media. He’s running as the guy the swells hate. He’s running as Nixon, and we still live in Nixonland.

  • I don’t consider Obama’s ad to be anywhere near equivalent to McCain’s sludge of sleaze and slurs, but it is not entirely a mild and innocent response: without actually calling McCain “old”, the ad sure does does a fine job of putting the word “old” into close proximity to him. I doubt that that is any more accidental than the subtle, skillfully disguised, and almost deniable racist undertones in McCain’s recent attacks (the uppity/presuptuous attack, and the juxtaposition of a black guy and blonde white girls).

  • McCain has a minimum 12 point headstart by just being white.

    McCain has a minimum 12 point headstart by just being Republican. That’s been true every four years for at least the past quarter-century.

  • I’m only worried that going on the attack leaves Obama completely open to cries of hypocrisy. While there is a clear difference between the two styles, it’s no kind of stretch at all to believe that the right will fail to split hairs here – I could see the spun story becoming a massive counterattack.

    The win would be so much sweeter if Obama could stick to the high road throughout the campaign, keep the spotlight on himself and beat McCain at his own game. That said, it’s not worth losing the lead over.

    What worries me is that, due to the nature of the negative campaign game, playing into it even a little brings you down a notch. You say “look, they’re just being negative.” They say “you’re a hypocrite!” You say “No, look what I’m doing is totally different – my claims aren’t baseless and I’m also offering you information about myself, which he doesn’t do.” They say “you made a negative ad about John making negative ads. how is that not hypocritical?”

    And suddenly, you’re not talking about your policies any longer. At some point you have the choice to play their game, and risk being called a hypocrite – the stronger the response, the louder the outcry. Or you let all the attacks slide, as he’s done, and accept the negative toll they take.

    If only people weren’t such sheep. If more people were remotely capable of thinking for themselves, we wouldn’t have to worry about all this bull$h!t McCain is spouting – we could simply sit back and watch Barack win in a landslide on the relevant issues.

  • Or his dishonesty problem?

    I think that should read, “Or his honesty problem?” Because, obviously, he has no problem being dishonest.

  • the one sad thing to remember is that, with so much of the media n the GOP’s pocket, any anti-McCain attack ads, no matter how honest, will be slammed on tv by “fair & balanced” pundits again and again and again. How sad, they’ll say, that Obama is desperate enough to go negative (without mentioning the charges are true). How typical, they’ll say, of desperate Dems engaging in this sort of gutter politics (never mind that gutter politics is ALL the GOP does, PLUS they always accuse the Dems of beig weak, inefectual pussies – which is it? Are Dems bottom-feeders or effete cowards who won’t fight back & therefore can’t be trusted on nat’l defense? MAKE UP YOUR MIND!!!) And of course, it allows the McCain Rove-fueled machine the luxury of amping up the attacks even more.

    Believe me, *I* want Obama to hit back and hit back hard. He deserves vindication, plus I suspect a lotof undecideds would like to see some fire in his belly. But that kind of wrath needs to be orchestrated caefully, and like a good attorney, he needs to anticipate the response he will get, call out that response in advance, and answer that response BEFORE it’s made, negating its impact.

    Oh, and he’s gotta do it all in 30 seconds.

    No easy feat.

    I’d recommend to just focusing on attacking McCain, and forget about defense against the smears, except for maybe ading the fight the smears website along with the official Obama website at the end of each ad. Just keep showing MCCain being MCCain. 100 years in Iraq. Payroll tax increases are on the table. Torture is hunky-dory. The surge is a success. He doesn’t know economics. Bombombom-bom bomb Iran. Bragging about helping Bush get elected & re-elected. Etc.

    But if they’re going to on the defense overthe smears, call the lies what they are: Lies. Be that direct with the same people Rove’s minions are trying to seduce. McCain is lieing to you, because he’s got nothing else. His planned dmestic policy will bankrupt you, his proposed foreign policy will paint a target on every American’s head, and the only thing he can do is lie about Obama because if you knew the truth abot Obama, you’d probably decide to vote for him.

    No matter what, it’ll be tricky for Obama to get his point across in a media landscape poisoned against him. For all our sakes, I wish him luck.

  • Obama should piece together an ad with a series of time/date-stamped flip-flops – preferably ones where McSame has pulled double and triple reverses. Then ask whether McSame is confused, or just willing to say anything. As we know, some of McSame’s about faces have come at a dizzying pace, so the time/date stamp is important. Put it in heavy rotation for 2 weeks.

    He can’t just come out and say McSame is too old, but confused is close enough. When McSame’s supporters squawk about ‘ageism’, concede it’s possible that he’s merely pandering.

  • The Republicans continue to be able to define the conversation – Obama will be in trouble if this continues. Somehow, after 8 years of terrible policies that McCain was a part of, this election so far has been a referendum on Obama! That needs to change.

  • Obama still needs to distill his vision into a clear, single essence that integrates the major issues confronting the nation and the world — the energy crisis, dependence on oil, world population crisis (yes admit it dammit), global warming, the rapid growth of China and India and the emergence of significant developing nations, global economic problems including the scant ability to create new jobs, major demographic imbalances among nations (too young, too old), growing disparities in wealth within the US and among nations, the threat of pandemics, the rapid growth of mega urban areas, continuing terrorist threats, immigration, etc. etc.

    In short, give me a vision to give me any kind of reason for not giving up. All this other stuff is just pissing in the wind.

  • If only Obama would respond with humor as a campaign tactic. Humor cuts right through the crap and lays naked all the lies.

    Bring Jon Stewert in as a consultant. The results would be extraordinary.

  • i am in london in st thomas’ hospital with a broken hip after being hit by a van last friday. i had surgery on saturday and will be returning to the states for rehab on saturday.

    the hospital has a primative email and internet system which can only get non-pictoral websites so this and drudge and msnbc are all i’m able to get. you guys have kept me up to date w/what’s going on back home.

    i’ve received excellent care from ambulance to er to surgery to after care and rehab. plus a great view of the thames – we’re on the south bank at westminster bidge.

  • I have faith they will address this stuff in force come September. No need to waste your best material when people arent really paying atention.

    My problem is there are not enough Obama surrogates dispatched on cable TV to knock down this nonsense in force. This is where Hillary’s/DNC attack dogs could really help Obama but they are more content collecting a paycheck to bash Dems on FNC. (Howard Wolfson and Lame Davis this means YOU!!!!).

    If we learned one thing about the Obama campaign its that they learn from others mistakes. They refined Howard Dean’s internet operation into a smooth operating political winner and they will take the lessons of Kerry 2004 and not allow themselves to be bullied into submission.

    A little more patience will be required we are still 90+ days away from the election…lets see what Obama camp plans for the Olympics run

  • McCain has to attack them all!!!!!! You can get at least four great commercials attacking McCain on issues such as:

    1) “What do we really know about John McCain?
    (cut to Keating 5 image) Assisted criminals in defrauding US taxpayers of millions of dollars.
    (show headlines) Has taken millions of dollars from oil lobbyists and changed his position on offshore drilling.
    (show headlines) Failed to pay taxes on his home in Arizona.

    John McCain. He’s not who you think he is.”

    2) “What do we know about John McCain?

    He has changed his position on 72 different issues in order to win this election.
    Opposed Bush’s tax cuts,(show film) then supported them in order to win the GOP nomination.
    Proposed immigration reform, then said he would oppose his own bill. Then spoke to immigrant groups and reversed his position again.
    (Put any two of his numerous flip-flops here.)

    John McCain. What does he believe?”

    3) “What does John McCain believe?
    (cut to an addled McCain trying to think of his position on Viagra and health insurance)
    (cut to the three other times that McCain said he had to look up his own position)
    (cut to his economic adviser’s statement that the campaign has McCain’s REAL economic position and that McCain’s public statements don’t always jibe with them.)

    John McCain. What does he really believe?”

    4) “John McCain. What did he really believe about Iraq?

    (cut to his comment about being greeted as liberators.)
    (cut to his initial comments about Iraq being a short war.)
    (cut to his comment about how he always believed Iraq would be a long, tough war.)
    (cut to his comment about supporting Bush’s transcendent positions.)
    (cut to his comment about how he always opposed Rumsfeld’s/Bush’s strategy.)

    John McCain. Where would he lead us?”

    This could be fun. I think we should have a John McCain advertisement contest. Winner gets an Obama t-shirt.

  • Does Obama attack McCain’s ridiculous economic record? Or McCain getting the war in Iraq completely wrong? Or his constant confusion about world events? Or him running on Bush’s policy agenda? Or his opposition to Social Security? Or his flip-flops? Or his dishonesty problem?

    I think they should first go after the memes which are already held by the largest number of people, and then slowly ramp up emphasis on the less widely held ones, in this order:

    1) Tie McCain to Bush – this is already a widely held belief, that “McSame” was hugging all over Bush for eight years, despite any claims to the contrary. This sets McCain up for charges of dishonesty, which is not yet a widely held opinion.

    2) Remind people of McCain’s support for the Iraq war – McCain’s is not a popular position, but is still widely held. We can’t let the smug anti-war sentiment of our side alienate the folks on the fence. This is where a (militarily) strong VP pick like Clark would come in handy. All the scare tactics need to be framed in terms of the people selling them – They were wrong before, and they are wrong now.

    3) Give examples of his confusion – The media has hidden this fact, but it’s becoming more apparent as McCain gets more scrutiny. Let McCain hang himself, be patient but don’t fail to gently remind people that competence is important and that we can’t afford another bumbler-in-chief.

    4) Highlight the Republican economic agenda – Generally this topic is not well understood, nor will it ever be by the average Joe, and that’s the guy whose vote we don’t have yet. IOW, don’t preach to the choir. Obama needs to send out his competent surrogates to flood the media zones and just remind Joe how badly Republican economics have worked out for Joe, and how well they have served McCain’s buddies at ExxonMobil (who have flooded him with cash since he flipflopped their way, cash from their record-breaking profits).

  • Why not let MoveOn and other like groups attack McCain? Let BO stay clean and above the fray. The swiftboaters provided this service for Bush. Let’s do the same.

  • It’s never too early to make Republicans howl.
    527’s, take it away.

    Bush McCain. Same damn thing.
    Bush McCain. Same damn thing.
    Bush McCain. Same damn thing.

    It’s so complicated.

  • jen – that would normally be the solution except that Obama (a) asked them not to do that and (b) asked donors to give to him not to 527s.

    i happen to disagree with those requests, strategically.

    phoebes, sorry to hear about the injury and wishing you all the best. glad to hear you seem to have good spirits about it and a good experience with your care. when you are back up to full speed i’ll look forward to a great compare-and-contrast piece on UK health care versus US health care 🙂 be well!

  • The bigger problem to me is trying to pick which angle to go with. Does Obama attack McCain’s ridiculous economic record? Or McCain getting the war in Iraq completely wrong? Or his constant confusion about world events? Or him running on Bush’s policy agenda? Or his opposition to Social Security? Or his flip-flops? Or his dishonesty problem?

    One question here. Just one simple question: Why not go with all the angles at the same time? Unlike the “Kitchen Sink Strategies” employed by Clinton, each and every one of the italicized issues above is 100% legitimate. Each is a primary target of opportunity. Going after them all at the same time is called “going nuclear.” So like I’ve been saying, to the dismay of some, is “Nuke ’em ’til they glow.”

    McCain “is” using the politics of old; he’s lining up all his tin soldiers and firing volley after volley from outdated muzzle-loaders. He’s using Maginot tactics—fixed-emplacement artillery (the GOP machine), outdated rifles (the mainstream media that’s too stupid to do their jobs properly), and rickety old biplanes (FOX and their ilk)—while with Obama, we’ve got modern dive-bombers (millions of donors), Panzers (the ‘tubes), and even a really nice thermonuclear device or two (Dean’s 50-state strategy and a top-of-the-ticket candidate who knows how to play offense).

    McCain and his precious GOP are sitting ducks for a good, new-fashioned version of old-style politics called Blitzkrieg. Hit fast, hit hard, hit from every conceivable, justifiable direction, and continue without letting up until utter, irrevocable victory is achieved.

    Hit them. Blitz them. Nuke ’em ’til they glow….

  • Damn, gang, this is pretty easy.
    Picture of McCain hugging Bush. Appropriate voiceover.
    And while Katrina devastated New Orleans — birthday cake pic, McCain and Bush.
    Different picture of McCain hugging Bush. Appropriate voiceover.
    Still another picture of McCain hugging Bush.
    A few billboard buys of these images would probably be good too.

  • Here’s an angle I haven’t seen raised: Right now, the campaign
    is clearly about Senator Obama. All of Senator McCain’s ads are attack
    ads that say nothing about McCain. All of the media attention
    is on Obama. The McCain campaign is starving for oxygen and,
    like a candle deprived of oxygen, it’s flickering and sputtering
    and in danger of going out. The reason for the negative ads
    isn’t because McCain believes them, or even that they’ll
    change peoples’ minds. The ads will generate newsplay
     — people will start paying attention to John McCain
    again.

    If Obama swings back — even with the truth — then he gives
    oxygen to the McCain campaign. He gives legitimacy to his
    opponent. Obviously it’s a thin hole to thread. You don’t want
    to end up with Kerry-esque paralysis. But a low-key,
    judicious response that keeps the spotlight on Obama
    and his issues is a smart way to go.

  • That’s the tactic. Keep it up with the mud until you drag your opponent down into it.
    Best to let McCain keep up his diatribes until he realizes the ineffectiveness and the Public tires. Just make certain the the lies are addressed forcefully and are fully exposed. After all, that’s what McCain’s whole campaign is based on.

  • I really, really hope some folks from the Obama camp are reading this thread — some fantastic ideas presented so far.

    So fantastic, I really have nothing to add. Except the McCain hugging Bush pictures has GOT to be used at some point. It’s simply too great not to be.

  • Phoebes, I’m sorry to hear about your accident. Glad you are able to keep your spirits up and to sign on some. Be well.

    Barry @21, I LOVE your idea! Email it to moveon and the Obama campaign.

    Steve @26, Now that’s change I can believe in. Great plan hit them, blitz them, nuke em.

    And I learned to trust the Obama campaign during the primaries. And yea, there were times during them I was pulling my hair out wanting harder, quicker faster more cutting responses. I need to mantain my trust, they’ve certainly earned it.

    And remember Obama dies this jijitsu campaign thing that in retrospect is breathtaking. He also tends to play 3 dimensional chess while the other guys are playing checkers. He and Plaouffe and Axelrod know what they are doing. They think many steps ahead and seem to plan for everything.

  • Didn’t we already have this argument when it was Clinotn v. Obama? That turned out OK.

    Perhpas the same video-centric media that allowed Hon. Sen. McCain’s recent tiny media buys to be amplified by the MSM, presents a sort of cloak of invisibility to other media such as direct mail and radio. One can have a sort of two-tier campaign. If I’m not mistaken, this is how Hon. Sen. Obama was able to forcefully refute Hon. Sen. Clinton, while preserving an equanimity on TV.

  • Has Paris or Brittany actually been paid for using their likeness in the McCain ad? -Cleo

    They weren’t even asked.

    phoebes in santa fe,

    Ouch! I hope you’re okay! Get well soon! (Was Bob Novak driving?)

  • That the media and pundit noisemakers are the focus of McSame’s “celebrity ad” is clear in this article:
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080731/pl_politico/12205
    GOP’s celeb-Obama message gains traction

    So who is claiming this “cooly arrogant”message is gaining traction? McSame’s advisors, and… wait for it… the media. The writer points to Letterman’s “Top 10 Signs Barack Obama is Overconfident” and Jon Stewart’s line about Bethlehem being Obama’s birthplace (both satire) as further reasons to make her claim. The writer gave no examples of John Q Public (ie voters) agreeing with her. No polls, no quotes.

    Heck of a job, “journalist”. So darned easy to play.

  • phoebes,
    Ouch! Good luck with the recovery. Follow your doctor’s and PT’s advice!

    Hannah, still recovering from knee surgery and sympathizing with phoebes…

  • The best ad: “John McCain in his own words”, followed by whatever you want to emphasize. Above all, play his quote on social security (a “disgrace” that we finance it the way it was always meant to be financed) over and over again in Florida.

  • Excellent suggestions but consider this. The MSM has an agenda to get McCain elected though they deny it one only has to look at the word “presumtuous” and Obama. When you google it there are 119,000 hits. The press moved lock step with their Rove like marching orders to paint Obama (just as they did Edwards and Kerry) as elitist, arrogant and presumptuous.

    Many of you claim…hit them now and hit them hard, but consider what happened when Clark made reference to anything perceived as negative toward McCain. It was attack him and Obama 24/7. The press is hoping Obama will go negative so they can launch a justified full scale national attack. They do so now but at the risk of looking petty and dirty.

    A bully can push you and taunt you into a fight over and over but a good rule of thumb is to never let them pick the time and place when you knock them on their ass.

    My god there is a truckload of crap to use on McCain. One couldn’t pick a more compromised opponent and for this very reason he is self destructive. Right now he is self destructing regardless of how the press and his own campaign try to cover for him. I suspect the Obama campaign will work on the theme “you don’t know McCain” and expose him even more than he is exposing himself. What is observable is McCain has a nasty irritating personality and the more you let him talk the more he hangs himself by substance and by personality.

    To sum up…McCain is irritating and substance free and the more he talks the bigger the hole he puts himself in. Obama is smart in just letting him self destruct for now. Obama should avoid the”old ways” because it is one of the reasons he is so attractive to a public sick to death of neocon secret authoritarian dirty tricks gutter politics. After McCain builds himself up with enough attack ads to look like a nasty little bully, then Obama will be supported in taking him down a notch or two.

    But I guarantee you that Obama will win in a landslide victory, supported by those who pay no more attention to politics beyond knowing that they are sick of this ‘shit’ and McCain is just more of this ‘shit’. If it even looks close it will be because the republicans and the corporate media polls are getting better at stealing and cheating the vote count.

    So many voters I know of don’t know and aren’t interested in the campaigns or politics. They already made up their minds based solely on what I previously mentioned.

    Giving Obama ‘rock star celebrity’ may upset thinking political minded people but it gave Obama the youth vote enthusiastically. Most of us hate republican gutter politics and the people engaged in them. We’d like nothing more than to beat them with their own ugly stick but the press would fall on the ground and moan like they’d been beat, that the beating was so cruel and unjustified. How could we be so mean?

    Obama’s war is not with McCain but with the corporate owned and operated press. To quote the “Godfather”,…”McCain?… McCain (DeTallia) is a pimp. He never could have outfought (Kerry) Santino . But it wasn’t until this very day that I figured out… it was the press(Bozzinni) all along.” Just keep in mind what happened when Clark made his insightfully true comments.

  • Really important and salient post.

    Obama vs Hillary was very much a tortoise vs hare race. However, the tortoise in the primaries cut it kinda close. We can’t afford too much of that continued strategy in elections; what Democrats need, for better or worse, is a candidate who can win by a fairly wide margin, leaving no space for the Republican to squeeze in, as Bush did in Gore’s small win and Kerry’s small loss. Besides, in the primaries Obama consistently did better in the polls than he did in the voting booths. We don’t know for sure if that pattern will hold in the national election, but it’s a strong possibility. These close polls should be a big concern. The tortoise needs to work more slow and steady acceleration into his slow and steady pace. It’s time for some substantial, well-designed criticism of McCain, time to alter the perception of him.

    At this point Obama seems like he may be teflon coated, but he’s also low on batteries. To mix in another metaphor.

  • Chait is a tool. This editorial carries the distinct stench with it of a bitter Hillary dead-ender, a Liebermann defender, and a faux progressive who loved Bush Jr.’s war as long as he could sound like one of the cool kids by supporting it.

    Obama should chuck any “helpful advice” from this poser into the trash without reading it.

    I think the NR is still occasionally readable for laughs, but as a place for serious commentary it ranks with its deformed sister, the other NR, the one presided over by the moldering dead body of the odious Bill Buckley.

  • “And on the transcendent issues, the most important issues of our day, I’ve been totally in agreement and support of President Bush.”

    I’ll be so frustrated if that quote doesn’t make it into at least one ad during this campaign. That’s just toxic for McCain. It’s not an attack ad, it’s just pointing out that McCain has courted the right. That kind of message, if conveyed with enough tact so as not to harm Obama’s post-partisan message, would win Obama the presidency without trouble.

  • Sorry if someone already came up with the following idea, as I’m rather late in reading the post.

    I think it would be brilliant to make an Obama support ad ONLY using McCains OWN words.

    show footage of the following:

    -McCain saying how bad it is to use American forces for other countries’ problems (Balkans during Clinton years – but not mention that part)

    -McCain saying we should cut off funding immediately and bring the troops home (Somalia during Clinton years- but not mention that part)

    -McCain opposing the Bush tax cuts.

    McCain on the Senate floor talking about his OWN immigration bill

    McCain saying that the withdrawal is a good idea

    McCain saying that Obama is running an effective campaign.

    McCain saying that Obama is very popular

    etc… you get the point and NOT, I repeat NOT point out the flip flops.

    Just state that the end that Obama agrees with those policies and approves the message.

    The right wing nuts will go beserk, especially when that ad runs on FOX news multiple times during the day for several weeks. It will at least make some of the dead-enders vote for Bob Barr. Sure some of the ‘independents’ might believe the ad and vote for McCain but then again, those independents are brain dead as well, and only claim to be independent in public.

    I can only imagine how they’d have to disclaim all that , and wonder how they’d do it.

    • Comments are closed.