Campaign Update
The Republican post-convention bounce is falling back and the Palin appeal is diminishing as people learn more about her. Since she first appeared with her unique but canned biography, the only news to come out about Palin has been negative. She used all her good shots at the beginning and now some of them have turned out be blanks and some are ricocheting and some people who she shot in the back are taking shots at her. After first saying she welcomed the troopergate inquiry, Palin now has been given a huge team of top Republican lawyers doing everything they can to stop the investigation or at least delay it until after the election. It appears they will win this battle and block the inquiry, but the cost may be that they lose the election war, partly because voters see that in stonewalling the inquiry Palin is as big a fraud as George W. Bush.
Obama and Biden are making twice as many appearances as McCain and Palin, since the GOP handlers are nervous about separating the Republicans - Palin being an untested neophyte and McCain being too boring alone to draw crowds. This advantage could pay dividends for the Democrats in working the close Counties in the crucial States. Let's look at four battleground States to see how Obama and McCain did there in the primaries. In the New Hampshire election in January, Both Clinton and Obama got more votes than McCain. In the Colorado caucuses on Super Tuesday, February 5, Romney beat McCain 3 to 1, while Obama beat Clinton 2 to 1 and Obama got eight times as many votes as McCain. On February 12, in the Virginia election, McCain got 50% of the Republican vote and Obama got 64% of the Democratic, out polling McCain by 380,000. In Ohio on March 4, McCain topped Republicans with 60% while Obama finished as the second Democrat with 44%, but Obama still got almost 1,000,000 votes compared to 636,000 for McCain.
McCain better be careful of Palin, as she seems to know how to take advantage of older men. She has had a brief political career as Mayor and as Governor, and she got both those jobs by turning against the man who helped her climb the political ladder. When a position came open on the Wasilla City Council, the Mayor helped recruit Palin for the job. She thanked him a few years later by blitzing him at the polls. The Governor put her in charge of a State Commission as a rising Republican star and she thanked him by piling on as his troubles came to a head and she knocked him off in the primary. Yesterday she made a Freudian slip at a campaign speech, saying the Republican ticket, when elected, will be the Palin-McCain Administration.
Palin plays her capably coy act by saying she is working to change McCain to her point of view on issues on which they disagree- most notably on drilling in ANWR. She does not defer to him or even consider that he might change her to his point of view. Of course nowadays McCain seems to have two kinds of positions, those which have changed to more Bushian, and those which were always Bushian and which he now claims have always been different. I am sure Palin sees the Cheney model as ideal for a VP, even one as obviously unqualified as she is.
The campaign advertising has turned quite negative. McCain's has also turned quite false. Obama seems to be making up for the McCain falsehood advantage by running a greater volume of negative ads. This is not the campaign voters say they want, but the experts tell us negative ads work. Obama probably does not have to worry about having been pulled down from the clean pedestal, since voters now seem to be more concerned whether he is tough enough to fight back, and negative ads are seen as being tough.
The terrible financial events of this week should be a Democratic campaign advantage. Despite portraying themselves as the fiscal conservative pro-business party, Republicans have a knack for screwing up the economy in a big way. Voters seem to figure that out, once the bottom has fallen out, but then the Republicans come along later with their same shams, and too many voters fall for it again. There is a simplistic appeal in the Republican blaming the government for screwing everything up while robbing you with taxes. Never mind that the government has been run by Republicans who work to make government a failure in order to prove their point, or that Republicans actually make the middle class pay a disproportionate share of taxes, while tax breaks for the rich throw the country into record levels of debt. Democrat Jimmy Carter inherited financial troubles from Nixon and unsuccessfully tried a Republican idea, de-regulation, as part of a fix. Bill Clinton presided over eight years of apparent successful growth, though in the long term that may be found to have been somewhat of an overrated bubble. LBJ was the last true Democrat President and his economic legacy regarding the War on Poverty and the Medicare program has been admirable.
I would like to see the Obamas and the Bidens appear at events together a couple times. I think seeing the two couples together shows how the Obamas really are not that different from the classic idea of a male politician and his wife. Also, as recommended by Democratic pundit Mark Shields, I think Obama needs to start making his appeal to the voters more personal, especially to new young ones, by including a specific request for their vote. People need to be asked and to feel personally important and empowered. A candidate needs to let the people know, not only that he cares about their needs, but that he needs them to care about voting for him. Young people failed to turn out in sufficient numbers to vote for Kerry. Admittedly, Kerry was much older than Obama, but young voter turnout will still be a key this time around.
Pundits seem to agree the debates will be crucial determiners this year, but I have doubts about that. The polls show the contest is close, so I think the candidates will play debate defense. Biden could be good on offense, but having a woman opponent might make him ease up. McCain likes to ad lib, but his new trainers have been keeping a tight rein on him. Obama could gain strength points by going on the offense, but he has to be careful not to appear as an "angry black man", though his image is so easy going and congenial, it is hard to imagine any intelligent voter being turned off by Obama adding a touch of strength.
The VP debate and two of the Presidential matches will consist of eight ten minute issue segments, supervised by a moderator, with give and take between the candidates. The first Presidential debate will cover domestic issues and the last will cover foreign policy. The VP debate, scheduled second, will cover both. The third debate, a Presidential town hall with questions from the audience, has the most potential for surprise. The short amount of time for each candidate on each issue means Obama has to avoid giving too scholarly and all considerate answers. He needs to start on each issue with a short statement to grab audience attention and make them prone to agree, then follow with a quick enumeration of major policy points and how they differ from McCain, and then close with a return to the opening grabber.
Barring a major gaffe or an absolute zinger, I think the debates will only move a few swing or undecided voters, and the only ones of those voters that really matter are the ones in the battleground Counties, which are already being targeted with lots of ads and appearances. I suppose if there is a consensus debate winner, that buzz can be part of a sense of momentum shift that could have some bandwagon effect, but we are so overloaded with campaign media by this point that people are glutted. Ironically, elections are a high point of democracy, but campaigns seem to be a low point.
posted by Tom Blake | 8:03 AM
4 Comments:
Tom,
You covered a lot of ground in this entry. I'll make a couple of comments.
1. I am very unhappy with McCain's lies about Obama in his ads. I used to think he was above such political methods. The Republican religious right seems to ignore God's basic commandment, "Thou shalt not lie". Certainly McCain has ignored or forgotten his previous pledge not to use lies as campaign techniques.
2. Time mag wrote a feature about "maxed out Moms" about white women with no college ages 45-64. Apparently they are sometimes called Wal-mart Moms. The message of "change" does not resonate with them because the changes in their lives have been more than they can deal with. They also are "sensitive to the racial factor". Do you think putting the Obama's and the Biden's on the stage together will get this class of voters over their racial phobia?
3. I also read in Time or somewhere else that the election will be decided by the debates, because the race is so close. You don't seem to agree with that. I think that a consensus on a clear winner will move many people whether they watch the debates or not. The feeling will be in the air. I think Palin has only to stand up to Biden to be declared the winner. I think Obama will have to knock McCain out of the park to be declared the winner.
4. The effects of the historic economic events that you briefly mention will probably have an effect far greater than anything else you mention. It is too early to say what those effects will be on the election, because we are only at the beginning of seeing the depth of the catastrophe.
John from Phoenix
1. When McCain started sucking up to Bush in preparation for this Presidential run, that was when he sold his soul, and now the Bush team owns him. Religion substitutes faith for truth in matters of dogma, and from that it is easy to expand dogma to any area desired for political purposes.
2. Wal-Mart Moms are from a generation in which persons of color and women were considered inferior to the white privilege male power holders. They identify with women as victims and rooted for Hillary for her gender, age and color, overlooking her education, and now cheer for Palin for her gender and color, overlooking her age and education. They strongly dislike Michelle Obama because of her color, education and age, overlooking her gender. Though they are resistant to change, they will vote for another old white man, just as women victims of spousal abuse often return to their husband. They would vote for McCain, even without Palin. Seeing the Obamas and Bidens together probably would not overcome their prejudice, but might make them feel a little out of touch with where America is today. Time will eliminate these women from the political scene; they will all be deceased by 2040, around the time the country becomes majority non-white.
3. I think you are right on both points you make about the debate. Consensus on the winner may move some undecided voters. The Democrats have a greater burden, because the issues are on their side and they are more intelligent and sincere than their opponents, and therefore are expected to do better than the Republilcans. I'll be watching Friday and expect to post my thoughts over the weekend.
4. The economic situation is overwhelming. Traditionally such a mess would clearly be an indictment of Republican politics, but for the last 30 years Democrats have confused matters by accepting financial support from the same laissez faire capitalists and corporate welfare seekers who fund the Republicans. McCain seeks to avoid blame by saying Obama has financial lobbyists on his team, the Democrats have controlled Congress for the last two years and we need to concentrate on solving the problem and not placing blame [this is a perennial Republican tactic - fouling something up grossly and then emphasizing the overwhelming need to solve the problem in a bi-partisan effort without trying to "play politics" with it - the same way they have treated the occupation of Iraq]. Obama's best response is to point out the total infestation of the McCain campaign with financial de-regulators and financial corporate lobbyists, remind voters that Bush and the Republicans controlled all the Government for six years and had a Congressional sufficiency to sustain Bush vetoes the last two years, and point out that the best way to solve a problem without having it recur is to learn what caused it.
John McCain is beginning to look like a senile schizophrenic. On the economy, one day he says it is fundamentally sound, and then a few days later declares it it in bad shape and if he were President he would fire the head of the SEC, a Republican appointee who the President cannot fire and who is by consensus not a part of the problem. Now he declares the economy is so terrible that the Presidential campaign and Friday's debate need to be canceled while he rushes to Washington to help fix it.
The day before McCain declared he is vitally needed in Washington to cure the economy, he was in the midwest for a day of campaigning about energy policy - you know, "drill, baby, drill". It has been several months since McCain was in Washington for a roll call vote on anything at all. It's a wonder he didn't have a cavalry bugle playing "charge" while he announced he was going to heroically rush to the rescue [Republican talking points now say refer to the corporate bailout as an economic rescue].
This trick by the McCain campaign is intended to make McCain look Presidential, to derail the debates (the first Presidential one might have to be postponed a week - oh and maybe it will have to bump the VP debate, thereby freeing Sarah from trauma), and in general to create another soap opera type sideshow to distract us from the real issue of the economy and the polls that show Obama in the overall lead and way ahead of McCain on the economy.
George Bush also emerged from his spider hole to address the nation in prime time for the first time since he was selling us on the surge [another version of the Republican cavalry charge] over a year ago. It took him twelve days from the time his economic gurus presented Congress with the $700 billion blank check plan to come forward and calm the American people. After the attacks of 9/11, Bush calmed us by telling us to go shopping. This time he calmed us by trying to scare us to death (he is much better at the fear thing). Then Bush invited McCain and Obama to join him and Congressional leaders for a photo op at the White House this morning (Bush uses photo ops as extensively as Alfred E. Neuman does in Mad Magazine - though not as effectively).
Obama responded with his characteristic coolness, pointing out he has been in continual contact with Congressional leaders and with Treasury Secretary Paulson, and is available to fly back on a moment's notice if needed in Washington Senator Dodd, leading the negotiations in the Senate, says he hears daily from Senator Obama, but has not heard at all from Senator McCain. Obama says the American people need the debate to go forward and that a President needs to be able to multi-task.
This is all backfiring on McCain. Instead of looking Presidential, he is looking like a quack, and ironically for a hero, like a coward. He has been ducking the media whenever possible, to the point where they have changed the McCain bus name to the "No Talk Express". His visit with the ladies of The View was like being in a lion's den. He bailed out on Larry King, because a CNN reporter had the audacity to ask a McCain spokesman, who had said Sarah Palin made important decisions as Commander in Chief of the Alaska National Guard, to name one example. Last night, he bailed out on David Letterman, supposedly because it was so important he rush to Washington. Letterman was so irked that he replaced McCain with MSNBC progressive pundit Keith Olbermann, and began his show with a brilliant monologue and top ten list taking McCain and Palin to task.
The debates will go on, with or without McCain and Palin. Palin did a visit with Katie Couric. I have not yet watched it all but have seen excerpts which show Palin's communication skills appear to have been vastly overrated. At Friday's debate, McCain will look like he was trying to duck a test and voters will know he really does not want to be there (like George the first did when he stole a look at his watch during a 1992 town hall meeting with Bill Clinton).
The photo op with Bush will serve as yet another reminder of who got us into all these messes - Bush and fellow Republicans like McCain, with ineffective resistance from the Democrats present, except for the young, dark face in the picture - the one who gave up the opportunity for a rich Wall Street career in order to do community organizing and who had the intelligence, wisdom and courage to oppose the invasion and occupation of Iraq.
Assessing the latest McCain gimmick, commentator Chris Matthews used a football analogy to rhetorically ask whether Americans want to spend the next four to eight years watching a game full of trick plays, or whether they would prefer to see the game played seriously like it is supposed to be.
I am ashamed that I once supported McCain, saying he was an acceptable alternative to Hillary and Obama. I now feel defeating McCain is imperative. He seems unbalanced. An unpredictable leader of the US is the last thing the world and our country needs now. Tonight the world is on the brink of financial anarchy because of McCain's antics. And all this to escape a debate with Obama?
John
Post a Comment
<< Home