Why do I always read a background "I told you so! See? See? We're gonna lose!" in these posts? Oh, right... they're "just sayin'." No real analysis, no suggestions of how the trends could change or be changed, just the usual tossing of the polls and an implicit "nyahh, nyahh, nyahh."
Barack has modulated his campaign pretty well to this point. I suspect he and his people planned to be in more or less this exact place going into the second week of September: a tough race, but with a good edge in places where it matters, and the issues on their side.
His toughness is going to pick up in the next few weeks, but it's going to be a patient escalation, supplemented by Joe and a harder-hitting ad campaign. Those expecting him to turn into Jeremiah Wright however will be sorely disappointed.
Barack is a young black man up against an old white guy and a younger, attractive white woman. Do we need to spell out the underlying historical dynamics there, and all the various problems they pose?
Barack can shout "enough" in the proper context, and he can get passionate at the stump. But to come across as the "angry black man" on TV is just too dangerous. Even though he's seriously threatening the status quo, he can't afford to appear threatening to seniors and moms, who'll fall back on the responses in which our culture has trained them.
The left wants him to pump his fist. I thought his chuckle was perfect, and the smile was even better. It says he's bringing change, but don't be afraid: it's the real change we really need, and it's gonna be great.
Well, he wasn't going to roll out his new campaign strategy on a Saturday afternoon. He waited until Monday and the called them on the bullshit they've been spouting all week. But they let the initial media hysteria die down first.
Hey, maybe they read your diary! Or maybe they read my comments this weekend, predicting a Monday attack on the Maverick Myth and Palin's extremism (both of which are happening today). Eh, probably not.
Anyway, I'm just tired of diary titles yelling at Obama to "do this" or "do that." A more effective "call to arms" would be to recommend talking strategies for supporters on the ground, you know, those of us trying to influence friends, family, and associates. To recommend ways of disseminating information through the net, radio, and other channels. To call on volunteers to push harder on the credibility issues, to come up with slogans and talking points that frame the matter clearly and succinctly.
Calling the troops to arms without issuing clear instructions doesn't get the job done. I suppose setting up the dialogue, though, is a good thing. Blog titles are all about getting attention and getting on recommended lists, so yours was certainly effective in that respect.
For the last week, the media has challenged the credibility of McPalin and the GOP has attacked the media for it, forcing the media to cower and giving the public the impression that it's biased against her. In this climate, the Obama camp is wise to avoid using the now-maligned media reporting to buttress their claims against McPalin's credibility. What they're waiting for is the candidates themselves to start talking, and use their own words to damn them. Countering their lies by exposing them for exactly what they are: lies.
And now that Palin is to be released from her undisclosed location, they're going to watch her carefully. It's already started today. Using Palin's own words against her, using McCain's words against him. While McPalin digs their own hole, Obama and Biden will be able smack them with their own shovels. That way, the media's Alaska reporting and the Washington fact-checking can be used as supporting rather than primary evidence that puts the lie to every claim McPalin makes in the coming days.
People here are caught up in this panicky sense of urgency. Obama and Biden are playing a more patient game, and moving carefully through the GOP's playing of the gender card to see where their openings are. The media, frankly, screwed up and played right into McCain's hand over that first weekend. Obama's a lot smarter.
By the way, while I have no problem with your point of view, I find your title counter-productive. Fear and panic are the worst kinds of motivation and lead to really bad decisions, and your title would appear to foment both.
to wage a "negative" campaign against an opponent that doesn't resort to lies and distortions.
The republicans have no problem campaigning with lies, distortions, manipulation, and demagoguery. Their strengh is their pure will to power, by any means necessary.
By and large, as a Democrat, I'm loathe to win through lies. The truth is damning enough for the republican party. So I'm all for taking it to McPalin in the strongest possible terms. I just want to be sure it's honest.
The polls have been swinging wildly all summer. The bounce McCain is getting is due to the religionists coming back into his camp and a short-term product of the media hype surrounding Palin. My guess is Obama's campaign expected numbers like this eventually -- and it's a good thing, because it gives a more realistic picture of the fight ahead.
Now that we know what they have in their hand, we can take the fight to them. State polling, not national polling, is going to be crucial. OUr candidates, along with our surrogates, should be hitting the road tomorrow and hitting McPalin straight on: The Maverick is a myth, and his Reformer running mate is too extreme for America.
You run against the top of the ticket. You run on issues that matter to Americans. Once you start playing the "character" game, you become victim to the viccisitudes of the media.
Clinton actually had more success when she avoided the personality approach and made her message about the issues. Obama still beat her because he's strong on the issues (and wasn't much different from her to begin with).
McPalin doesn't offer American anything issue-wise, which is why they want to make this all about personality and star power (i.e. hers, as it's the "freshist" at the moment).
Keep to the issues. Obama and Biden know it. The rest is just a distraction.
I'm ok with them not screaming, but I'd at least like someone to ask McCain and his surrogates tomorrow whether keeping her out of sight suggests a lack of confidence in her abilities, and why, if McCain is promising so much change from the Bush administration, have Bush administration officials been entrusted with her "training" in advance of meeting the public.
Where's John supposed to be tomorrow? CBS? Send them a letter.
"According to Nicole Wallace of the McCain campaign, the American people don't care whether Sarah Palin can answer specific questions about foreign and domestic policy. According to Wallace -- in an appearance I did with her this morning on Joe Scarborough's show -- the American people will learn all they need to know (and all they deserve to know) from Palin's scripted speeches and choreographed appearances on the campaign trail and in campaign ads."
They're going to keep her under tight wraps and in protected, scripted environments between now and November. Having created a media persona for her, they have to maintain it. Giving access to reporters, allowing them to ask uncomfortable questions, might damage the carefully constructed image they introduced this week.
Access to McCain himself has been reduced. They don't want reporters to see any more incidents of forgetfulness, confusion, or other evidence of reduced mental faculty.
The GOP ticket has been branded and is being marketed. No amount of reality will be allowed to threaten it. I won't be surprised when a "family emergency" causes the VP debate to be cancelled.
It's always bashing the candidate, because it's always advancing tired right-wing points. In the above case it's about Obama "lacking specifics" and not talking about issues. The clear purpose being to imply he doesn't have them or is incapable of communicating them.
It doesn't matter that you can point immediately to Obama's issue-oriented speeches, programs, ads, and the details each has provided. You could even spend a half hour composing a full detailed rebuttal. Tomorrow, the same thing will be reposted elsewhere, in some other thread: that he lacks specifics and doesn't talk about the issues. Given how prolific and driven this poster is, you probably won't have to wait that long.
The goal with trolling is to keep that crap as visible and repeated as many times in as many places as possible, so that the casual passer-by might get roped in by its sophistry.
I'm pretty tired of this one's act. The recycling of old tropes, over and over, is getting especially irritating. I'll respect your call on this one, but there's no doubt that taylor's here to cause trouble and nothing else.