All the money in the world cannot salvage a losing strategy. Right now we are cornered, we are on the defense and we have no offense in sight.
I will select three little clips I read today:
The Democrats are in trouble. Sarah Palin has totally changed the dynamics of this campaign.Period.
Palin's speech to the GOP National Convention on Wednesday has set it up so that the Republicans are now on offense and Democrats are on defense. And we don't do well on defense.
Suddenly, Palin and John McCain are the mavericks and Barack Obama and Joe Biden are the status quo, in a year when you don't want to be seen as defending the status quo.
But the idea that Americans instinctively recoil from negativity or that there will be some sort of backlash against Republicans generally and Palin specifically because of how "negative" their convention speeches were is pure fantasy. Cultural tribalism and personality attacks of those sort work, especially when they're not aggressively engaged.Every four years, the GOP unleashes unrestrained personality attacks on Democrats and exploits cultural resentments. Every four years, Democrats tell themselves that such attacks don't work and are counter-productive. And every four years, that belief is disproven. These "character" issues end up mattering largely because Democrats, in election after election, allow wars over "character" to be waged in a largely one-sided fashion.
And finally Jake Tapper (who has been probably the most fair MSM journalist):
Not the daily tracking poll, the actual Gallup poll, has Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., pulling ahead of Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill.The numbers among registered voters are 50 percent to 46 percent -- and 54 percent to 44 percent among likely voters.
Obama's campaign always said before the American people made their final decision about him, the Democrat would be judged on three things -- the VP pick, the convention, and the debates. Now two of the three have gone down, and the American people have liked McCain's stuff better.
So here we are ceding not just 10 points but a total movement of 17 points. The poll taken last weekend after the Democratic convention showed Obama leading by 7 points from that he is now down by 10 points. So McCain does have a significant post-convention bounce. To try and dismiss it or poke holes into the methodology is delusional. The race is tight and as of right now things look bleak. Whether we as Democrats like it or not the Republicans have done a pretty good job of defining the Obama-Biden ticket as out-of-touch elitist Washington insiders who are running on empty rhetoric with relentless negative ad. It does not bode well 60 days before election.
So why are we in this state in a year where we should be far far ahead by now. The reason: ineffectual campaigning. It seems the Obama campaign is stuck in primary mode. The people who elected him were informed Democrats and political activists. But this is the GE.
A very good sign that we are setting the tone of the election is if the Republicans are screaming foul...that unfortunately is not happening. Obama is reacting and being defensive. His entire interview with ABC this morning sounded like someone pushed to a corner and forced to react to all those myriad negative ads that he did not answer. His biggest mistake was to distance himself from Gen. Clark who at least made an attempt to knock down McCain's POW meme. Now he has to fight POW, sexism, maverick and reform. He cannot do that with this high-minded "issue" based campaign. The answer is a broad offensive attack plan with multiple ads by which he defines the McCain-Palin ticket, casts doubts on their character and credibility and in that way once again snatch the initiative.
The American people as Greenwald observed do not get turned off by negative ads, only the pundits do. We Democrats tend to listen to MSM pundits to our detriment while the GOP plays them like an expert fiddler. Look at the way they basically said f-you to the media this past two weeks and in spite of that had the media groveling at their feet. Negative attacks serve a purpose, it sows a seed of doubt in the electorate. If you make a long ad about how McCain voted with Bush 90% of the time, or his campaign has lobbyists, or his tax plan is ineffectual people will tune it off in less than the 30 seconds it needs to air. But if you have an ad that calls St. John a liar, or question his credibility or tell people that his VP does not speak the truth and cast doubts on their character, they will listen. If Biden goes tomorrow and launches a broad-side on McCain like Sarah Palin does everyday to Obama, the media will pay more attention to this new incarnation of Joe Biden, people will sit up and listen (but don't hold your breath it ain't gonna happen. Biden reminds me of Edwards in 2004). Will the Republicans then accuse Obama of partisanship? Sure they will. Will they accuse the Democrats of denigrating a POW? They are dong it right now. Will they accuse us of sexism? You cannot ask any question about Palin's credibility even now. But Obama has to do all that and only then will he again dictate the momentum. Is it negative? Yes it is but it is also effective (the Republicans have already said issues are not important and right now it seems their strategy is working). If he does not do that he might as well start writing his concession speech.
Update [2008-9-8 13:37:30 by tarheel74]:It took a long while for this diary to get on the rec list. Some might call it pessimistic, but I rather raise the alarm now, have the Democratic base force Obama (we control the purse string after all) and make him listen to us. The Democratic brand is more important to me than brand Obama.
Finally for those of you who have been making a case for running on issues I have some "eye-popping" numbers for you as Greg Sargent calls it:
* On the question of who has the better plan for Iraq, it's McCain 55%, Obama 41% -- despite multiple polls showing solid majorities agreeing with Obama on withdrawal.
* On the question of who has the better plan for energy independence, it's McCain 54%, Obama 42%.
* On the question of who has the better plan for health care, it's McCain 46%, Obama 45%.
* McCain is seen as stronger on education, 50%-45%.
Obama does hold a nine point lead on who's stronger on the environment, 49%-41%. But somewhat ominously, more respondents (49%) say they'd bet that McCain will win the election than say Obama will (44%).
So in other words the SUSA Poll suggests that on the issues like energy independence, health care and education McCain is leading. Now the question is did anyone hear anybody talking about these issues during the convention or anytime before or since then? The answer is no. Yet why does he lead? Because the effectiveness of negative ads. The people truly believe that the candidate who is supposed to be running on issues is an empty suit. It reminds me of 2004 when I met many conservatives who believed that Bush will not veto stem-cell research, that he will overhaul education and make healthcare more accessible without a shred of evidence all because they believed more that Kerry cannot be trusted based solely on negative ads. Negative ads work. They are working for the Republicans and unless the Obama campaign can seize the initiative and go on the offensive this thing will go down the tubes and fast.
Update [2008-9-8 14:27:57 by tarheel74]:One other thing, we are seeing a lot of Democrats here, on TV and also the entire media obsessing about Palin. Yes she is the new celebrity who has turned this election around. Yes she is the Republican pitbull in lipstick and the Obama campaign needs to define her fast, highlight her negative and find a suitable line of attack. But before they do that they have to do more to define and question the credibility of the person on the top of the ticket. The 90% voting with Bush and 8 houses ads have become old. People know he voted with Bush, people know he is rich and yet he is still connecting as a maverick. The framing of the ads is not right, the main and explicitly stated question should be "McCain says he is a maverick but he voted with Bush 90% of the time..does that make him credible?" "McCain changed his positions when he started running for president for political purposes...does that make him credible?". The Obama campaign has to do more to define McCain and question his credibility and also that of his running mate. Which also means less of the "John McCain is one of my best friends" from our VP and more of "I am disappointed in John McCain's partisan and politically expedient positions". But I expect too much.
Update [2008-9-8 18:10:20 by tarheel74]:Finally an attack ad questioning St. John's credibility. Note they use the word 'lie'. Now that wasn't so hard was it? Can we now see a few more of these?
|
|
|
Permalink :: 117 Comments :: Post a Comment
|
