The ‘paper gap’ in the presidential campaign
In February, in an observation that seemed truly ridiculous, even at the time, Mark Halperin argued that Barack Obama benefits from an electorate that “seems oddly indifferent” to Obama’s alleged failure to offer “detailed policy prescriptions despite the grave problems confronting the nation.” Soon after, John McCain said of Obama, “I respect him and the campaign that he has run, but there’s going to come a time when we have to get into specifics.”
It’s breathtaking how completely backwards this criticism has been.
While campaigns typically snow reporters with white papers and policy minutiae, many of the domestic policy plans of John McCain have been notably short on details.
Analysts caution that both McCain and Barack Obama have produced policy pronouncements that are just as much election documents as workable proposals; after all, that is what presidential candidates do. But when it comes to the metric of paper produced, McCain trails Obama in spelling out the nitty-gritty.
“The Obama people are much more detailed,” said Robert Bixby, executive director of the Concord Coalition, a bipartisan advocacy group dedicated to balancing the budget.
It’s getting increasingly difficult to note that McCain is either unwilling or unable to offer any kind of specifics about what he’d want to do as president. The AP’s Charles Babington, in an otherwise forgiving piece, conceded this week, “At times McCain can appear to be short on details.”
As it turns out, the same campaign that was foolishly (and falsely) criticizing Obama for lacking policy details a few months ago now argues that McCain’s lack of details is a good quality to have.
Consider McCain campaign senior adviser Taylor Griffin’s description of his candidate’s plan for fixing Social Security:
“The history of the Social Security debate has taught that too many specifics, especially during a presidential campaign, has polarized the debate,” he said of the program that McCain called “an absolute disgrace [that’s] got to be fixed.”
Will he contrast his plan to that of his opponent? “Sen. McCain believes this is so important that we do not politicize this debate during an election season.”
This would be hilarious if it weren’t so obviously pathetic. First, McCain is politicizing everything he possibly can — NASA’s 50th Anniversary, Obama’s remembrance of the Nazi Holocaust, etc. But even putting this aside, he’s promising voters he can help “fix” an enormous government program that represents about a fifth of the federal budget. Asked how, McCain not only can’t tell us, he argues that he shouldn’t tell us.
It’s obviously not just Social Security. There’s a half-trillion dollar budget deficit, which McCain will eliminate in his first term. How? He just will. He wants to cut taxes by about a trillion dollars. How can we afford it? We just can. McCain realizes the value of the dollar is down, and he’s committed to reversing this. How? He just will. McCain wants to lower gas prices though a gas-tax holiday? How can this work, given that it’s inconsistent with Economics 101? It just can.
When pressed on his position on Iraq last year, McCain told an audience, “One of the things I would do if I were President would be to sit the Shiites and the Sunnis down and say, ‘Stop the bullshit.'” Asked about how he would shape the nation’s surveillance laws, McCain said, “[P]eople that are patriotic Americans need to sit down together and work this out.”
And McCain has accused Obama of failing to “get into specifics.”
Why is it, exactly, that McCain can get away with offering no substantive details on any subject? The Politico’s Avi Zenilman argues, persuasively, that there’s a partisan difference.
In part because the leading Democrats’ policy proposals were largely similar and the details were much considered by key constituencies, the candidates were compelled to offer fine-grained plans to draw differences.
It made for debates in which Clinton keyed in on nuanced and sometimes difficult-to-explain differences between her plan and Obama’s to vastly increase the federal government’s role in providing health care. […]
The more dominant interest groups in the Republican Party — social conservatives, hawks and tax-cutters — had less wonky primary goals that didn’t need extreme specificity to be articulated clearly, which was also true for women’s groups on the left.
When McCain has focused on domestic policy, it has generally been to offer headline-grabbing plans, such as his proposal for a gas tax holiday and his claim that allowing offshore drilling could have an immediate effect on gas prices, both of which were almost universally derided by economists across the ideological spectrum.
“There’s a lot more happening in the Obama budget. There’s a lot more moving parts, and I think that probably calls for more specificity,” Bixby said. “It’s a much more ambitious agenda than McCain’s.”
As Josh Patashnik added, “There’s just no huge upside to being a policy wonk, if you’re a Republican presidential candidate.”
Something to keep in mind the next time conservative activists and/or media personalities complain about Obama’s lack of specificity.
Jim Hamilton
says:Yet another flip-flop?
Walt
says:Kinda reminds me last Sunday when Stephanopoulos asked McCain how he would stop the oil companies from getting richer if we allow more offshore drilling and he replied: “We’ll shame them…”
Oh, okay. Good plan.
Danp
says:This is another damned if you do, damned if you don’t scenario. Remember how Kerry and Gore were accused of being too wonky. I would argue that Obama does it right by putting most of his details in his web page and in a few select speeches. But the Republicans and their free media need their storyline, don’t they?
Former Dan
says:The way the McCain Mutiny is spinning stuff, one day McCain is going to attempt to spin the earth in the opposite direction to reverse time a la Superman.
thorin-1
says:The ‘lack of specifics’ meme is one of the more frustrating ones pushed by the MSM. I realize that for a reporter to go to a web page a send time reading policy papers requires an enormous physical and mental effort on their part (pushing a mouse around is HARD damn it).
It just proves that average reporter/pundit in this country is far more comfortable just reading off the script of the current meme (kindly provided by Rove) then do any kind of actual WORK.
There is a reason Journalism majors were generally considered the lowest rung on intelectual scale back in college. Lazy idoits.
jen
says:Hello!?! McCain doesn’t need specifics. He will simply continue the policies of Bush.
And McCain doesn’t lie. He simply FORGETS what he said two weeks ago. Don’t make fun of this side effect of being tortured.
Davis X. Machina
says:It’s The Narrative.
Obama is an empty suit that gives good speech, and no 90-odd page PDF full of occasionally mind-numbing detail is going to change their minds.
If they ever do find it on his website, it’ll just show Obama’s an egghead-wonk-perfessor type without real-world can-doeyness, like St BBQ.
Mathew
says:Two points –
1) The reason why McCain, Republicans, conservatives, and the right-wing is so vague on policy detail I think is simple – the majority of voters wouldn’t really go for them if they really knew. This is why McCain’s views are constantly changing – it all depends on which voter bloc he’s speaking front of. If the GOP were to win again and gain control, I’m pretty sure they’d revert back to the same policies of the last 8 years.
Look at what happens when McCain goes into detail about anything (Iraq war, Afghanistan, Housing, oil prices, Social Security, etc). His policies are laughed at.
2) The corporate media is largely projecting McCain lack of policy detail towards Obama.
People who read CB should know by now that outlets like Disney/ABC, Paramount/CBS, GE/NBC, Time-Warner, Politico, WSJ, WaPo, NYTimes, NPR, AP, are all slanted towards McCain. They will do their best to only present a filtered, positive view of McCain to their customers, because they think it’s in their best interests.
As a result, we as voters need to be very wary of anything that comes from them, and be vigilant about challenging/confronting any falsehoods with facts.
As I’ve stated before, the real key for Obama at this point is focusing on the debates with McCain. Don’t give an inch to the GOP or the networks on the format.
Once they are on the stage together, there really won’t be anywhere for McCain and his ideas to hide. The American public will each candidate for what they really are and what and how they represent.
zeitgeist
says:if McCain lacks enough of a grasp to offer specifics, then a lack of specifics is good.
if they had nominated Gingrich, who had a bizarre, irrational 47-point Rube Goldberg device for everything, then having specifics would be a good thing.
the critiera is dynamic: whatever matches the characteristics of the Republican candidate.
this should surprise no one.
Racer X
says:Yet another example of the press telling us that stupid voters don’t like smart candidates, because they make them feel… dumb. McCain’s goofball “policies” are just soundbits aimed at the rubes who still haven’t figured out that McCain is just Bush III. Everyone else has already taken a side and is ready to vote.
Shalimar
says:There’s a half-trillion dollar budget deficit, which McCain will eliminate in his first term. How? He just will.
Where have I heard that before? Oh right, Bush has been feeding us the same line for years now, budget balanced by the end of his term, blah, blah, blah. How has that worked out?
beep52
says:“1) The reason why McCain, Republicans, conservatives, and the right-wing is so vague on policy detail I think is simple – the majority of voters wouldn’t really go for them if they really knew.” — Matthew @ 8
Bingo. It’s been going on for decades.
Molly Weasley
says:Regarding journalism student comment by thorin-1: Don’t forget that many TV “reporters” never even had any journalism classes. That’s why so many Miss America contestants want to go into broadcast — it would be so cool to be on TV.
Pat Knif
says:Obama’s campaign is largely based on vague and often contradictory statements. On those few occasions when he has indicated a position on an issue, he has just as often as not either voted just the opposite of his stated position or else made a speech or issued a release, sometimes the day immediately following that stated position, that completely contradicts what he stated a day or two earlier. He flip-flops more often than John Kerry ever thought of doing, and his promises and statements are meaningless, as he’s entirely likely to reverse himself tomorrow or the next day. Further, without exception, expert analysts have repeatedly proven that numbers contained in his rare papers purporting to document an Obama plan never add up to what Obama claims they do. Sadly, the three things Barack Obama has proven is that his claims and promises are meaningless, he cannot be trusted, and his reluctance and/or complete failure to talk specifics is because of the aforesaid reasons.
paul bullard
says:W was watching Mc Cain speaking before The National Urban league, an astute group of mostly black leaders whose lofty aims are to be praised. These are people who have heard a lot of beatle stuff over the years and are easy to pull the wool over. On two issues he made plain how little regard he has for the intellignece of all American people. First of all he spent several minutes expounding on the failed education policy of the current administration; going into much detail how miserable todays schools are at educating our children and not only the education policies, but all the policies of this current administration! My question is isn’t John McCain wholw campaign based on continuning the policies of the Bush administration? Give me a break! He seems to be counting on the ignorance and stupidity of the electorate! What a jerk!
On top of that he is pushing for school vouchers which, everybody knows is nothing but another perk in disguise for the wealthy. Wealthy people who send their kids to these elite private schools already have the top teachers and the top schools wrapped up and the waiting lists for the best schools are already several years long. So who really benefits from school vouchers? The parents who already send their kids to thes elite schools, that’s who! If school vouchers are implemented it will mean that the demand for private school admission to privite will sky rocket! But don’t think for a minute that these elite schools will be open to ordinary low income families. Thes families will have to go to new private schools that will be operated by corporations that creat them just to take advantage of the school voucher program. These new schools will be filled by teachers from the same low quality teacher pool that is now teaching at public schools! The school voucher program will not help the overwhelming number of needy families, but it will help families that are having to pay for private schools now, the wealthy that now have to pay for private school after tax will now be able to get money for their kids for private that they used to have to pay for out of pocket. School vouchers are nothing but another Republican smoke and mirror scam, designed to benefit the rich and only the rich!
nerpzilla
says:if he tells of the specifics of his social security plan, the terrorists, who watch american media, will know our plans. why do you hate america and want to see its social security system attacked?
libra
says:Obama’s campaign is largely based on vague and often contradictory statements. — Pat Knif @14
It’s really sad that people who can’t even spell their candidate’s name correctly (McCain) are still allowed to vote.
Hannah
says:I am constantly befuddled by some whom I know who say “but Obama hasn’t done anything in the Senate”, or “he’s an empty suit who gives a nice speech but has no solutions”. And these are intelligent people with internet access who have failed to use its power and instead rely on the bumbleheads… uh, media, to tell them what they should think.
Hey, here’s an idea! You could use John McCain’s favorite, “the google”, and type in “Obama legislation”. (An hour later I had assembled over 20 pages of summaries as well as articles, and it could have been much longer, for the person who asked.) Of course one could also go to Obama’s website and read his policy papers.
But it’s just so much easier to accept the standard meme as the truth, or ask others for information (and I don’t mind responding, but have made it clear to these people they could do a little research themselves). How lazy a people we’ve become!
Jed had an interesting article linked on his website that you should all check out:
http://blog.aapss.org/index.cfm?commentID=66
Bruno
says:Mathew @ 8 said: They will do their best to only present a filtered, positive view of McCain to their customers, because they think it’s in their best interests.
That may be true, but what about their best interest, not being that McCain is their best bet, but….
That McCain is doing so bad, that he needs a boost to keep the horse race going. If they were to tell the truth, McCain would bomb now, and where would that leave them (the media)?
Rupert has held a fundraiser for Hillary as well as other Democrats. The big dogs don’t really care ‘who’ is in charge, because they’ll play with whoever is running the show and gives them access.
libra @ 17 said: It’s really sad that people who can’t even spell their candidate’s name correctly (McCain) are still allowed to vote
about a genuinely concerned, honest to goodness Republican ‘low information’ drinking-the-cool-aid, watching Fox News, listening to Rush, voter aka pat knif
That was a great line libra…. so much more eloquent than I could hope for. 🙂
toowearyforoutrage
says:Past the primary, I put it to you there may be no upside to wonkishness for the Dems either.
Fortunately, obama seems to have found the balance of details If you want them, airy elevating puffy speeches if you don’t.
It annoys me that Americans don’t like to think, but it’s hard to explain 2004 any other way.