TNR BLOGS

January 09, 2009 | 9:00 AM
January 08, 2009 | 8:20 PM
January 08, 2009 | 8:00 PM

January 07, 2009 | 12:20 PM
January 07, 2009 | 12:13 PM
January 07, 2009 | 9:41 AM

January 08, 2009 | 6:31 PM
January 08, 2009 | 4:13 PM
January 08, 2009 | 2:50 PM

July 26, 2008 | 2:24 PM
July 23, 2008 | 1:55 PM
July 17, 2008 | 3:56 PM

January 08, 2009 | 5:12 PM
January 08, 2009 | 3:25 PM
January 08, 2009 | 1:16 PM
COLUMNISTS
TODAY'S STORIES
05.03.2008
McCain's Free Ride

Matt Yglesias cites the media's utter lack of interest in John McCain's courtship of, and endorsement by, anti-Catholic, anti-semitic John Hagee as a concrete example of how the ongoing Democratic race benefits John McCain:

I've been Hagee-bashing since before it was cool, so pisses me off, too. But realistically it's not the press and the cable networks that gave McCain a pass, it was Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. They gave him a pass because, of course, they were arguing with each other. For a little while during the Wisconsin-Texas interregnum, Obama did pivot in the direction of McCain and it gave Clinton the opportunity to smack him over the head with a frying pan. I assume neither campaign is going to make that mistake again until this thing is actually wrapped up. But that means that there'll be nobody effectively pressing the media with anti-McCain talking points. It also means that Clinton will continue re-enforcing whatever good lines of attack McCain comes up with against Obama, and if McCain starts delivering good anti-Clinton lines, Obama will probably start re-enforcing those, too.

This kind of dynamic hardly guarantees defeat in November, but it's hard to see how it helps.

It's not just the Hagee episode. This is also a big part of the reason that McCain's attack on Obama for contemplating breaking his public-financing "pledge" got so much more attention than McCain's own, possibly illegal (and clearly far outside the spirit of the law) decision to opt out of public financing for the primary after having opted in last year. Had there been a Democratic nominee to forcefully make the case that McCain was being disingenuous, the media would have given this far more attention. But there wasn't, so it didn't. 

--Christopher Orr

Posted: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 1:17 PM with 13 comment(s)

Comments

You must be logged-in to comment.

Not a subscriber? Click here to get a digital or print and digital subscription to The New Republic!

sdcrippen said:

I'm not worried. Obama and Clinton are the big story right now, and over at Slate, David Greenberg is recounting how most of the primary seasons (at least for Democrats) go well into June. This is a hot race, and it's a lot of fun for everyone. When it's over, people will rally around the nominee, and maybe the nominee can carry a good amount of the excitement into the fall. In the meantime, I think John McCain is below the fold. If the media or the Dems had made a big deal about Hagee, who would have cared? It reminds me of the time just after Princess Diana's death. A British journalist whined that there wouldn't be any good stories about royals anymore: Diana was gone, and (this reporter told someone at the New Yorker), "nobody gives a f*** about the Windsors." The Clinton/Obama race is to Diana as John McCain is to the Windsors.

March 5, 2008 1:56 PM

Rhubarbs said:

Editorial idea: Sick Kirchick on combing the records of every prominent McCain supporter, looking for reprehensible statements and actions (since 1973, to be fair to McCain). Three beneficial effects from such an assignment:

1. Dig up lots of dirt on McCain's associates;

2. Keep Kirchick too busy to post here; and

3. Delay for at least a few weeks Kirchick's inevitable open endorsement of McCain.

March 5, 2008 1:57 PM

brianlitz3 said:

if Obama had hammered away at McCain in the last two weeks (the FEC dustup/Hagee/etc) would that have helped moved the focus of the media away from him and onto McCain in any way?  just wondering

March 5, 2008 2:27 PM

jhildner said:

I disagree with Matt's analysis.  How did Obama get hit over the head because he was campaigning against McCain?  I don't think he was campaigning against McCain *enough*.

The remaining game on the Democratic side comes down to comfort level and electability, particularly among working class whites.  Obama can argue with Hillary about why he's the better choice, prolonging McCain's honeymoon, or he can *show* why he's the better choice by going strongly after McCain with a general election strategy right now.  Start digging McCain's hole.  Everything else should follow.

March 5, 2008 2:47 PM

kenshap said:

Sorry,  dissing blacks and/or muslims is acceptable.  Dissing any Christian leader is not.  It's ok to keep bringing up Jessie Jackson or Louis Farrakham but not Pat Roberson or John Hagee even though to cover their statements would require more space than the New Republic magazine has.  For some reason,  everyone is scared of the Christian right wingnuts.

March 5, 2008 3:23 PM

teplukhin2you said:

The GE strategy should be to soft-pedal the Iraq and f-p issues and outclass McCain on ECONOMICS, which is ever and always our home turf as Dems.

Before he can make his case, though, Obama will have to neutralize the inevitable GOP charge that he's a 1970's-style tax-and-spend liberal who will make a bad situation worse, as Carter did. Then he should move the discussion into realms where McCain's shallowness becomes immediately apparent, forcing a few golden gotcha moments i which McCain shows he doesn't understand the impact of some macroeconomic or financial development on ordinary people-- the equivalent of GHW Bush marveling at a price scanner.

Shouldn't be too hard to do-- assuming, of course, that Obama is not a hardcore lefty and actually does know much, and care about, macroeconomic and financial issues...

March 5, 2008 3:36 PM

mmathog said:

Obama is a joy to listen to on global economic matters, there's no sign that as a UofC associate, he's the 'liberal devil' Tep's so scared of... but none of that matters.

McCain as an individual candidate is surprisingly weak. Did anyone notice the field he ran against? The buck-toothed freak show, the somnolent idiot actor, the corporate Mormon, the happy wingnut running the Chuck Norris platform, the crackpot libertarian? The Mormon was actually pretty sharp, but he was a lousy candidate.

It's not merely that Edwards was better than all of them, even Richardson was.

Tep's wrong though, there will be a zillion moments for the Dem nominee to make McCain look like a tool, no one cares though. It's not like Obama (if he's the nominee, and I doubt he will be now) can have a tough and jocular conversation about economics that makes McCain look like a dork and anyone will really give a shit, these temporal issues never make a difference.

March 5, 2008 7:44 PM

teplukhin2you said:

There's liberalism and there's liberalism. It's one thing to put forth a sensible plan to overhaul the tax code and decrease the rate of entitlement spending growth. It's another thing to hurt the economy by raising the marginal rate while doing nothing to control entitlement spending or revise the tax code.

March 5, 2008 9:30 PM

wildboy said:

Don't worry, Russert is keeping notes on Hagee to spring that one on McCain in the General debate.  After all, the Jeremiah Wright/Farrakhan angle was percolating in the MSM for months before that question was sprung in a debate (yeah, I know that Farrakhan's endorsement was "news", but it's not like Hagee and his ilk are going to avoid controversial statements for the next 9 months).

March 5, 2008 9:52 PM

mmathog said:

I'm not that interested in getting into this particular debate, but Tep 'raising the marginal rate' will not appreciably tamp down domestic demand. Cutting rates in '01-'03 didn't raise demand, and raising 'em on '93 didn't hurt demand.

As for presidential politics, I think that shit is ephemeral. It's identity, it's race, it's class, etc...

The more I think about it, the more I see HRC as the better Dem general candidate. She can appeal to old white voters (a requirement) and she can reassure people about the economic future while parrying McCain's 'I AM SPARTA!' routine.

March 5, 2008 10:00 PM

aeromonas said:

mmathog, you doubt Obama will be the nominee?  Really?  That's not my read, at all.

Clinton has to win 60% of the remaining pledged delegates, and that just ain't gonna happen.

Moreover, I just heard Ohio's--that's OHIO where HRC just won--Democratic Senator on Morning Edition.  He refused to throw his superdelegate vote to either of the candidates, but he made it clear that his criteria, and what's more, the criteria he expected the party to follow as a whole, was the popular vote and pledged delegate winner, and I just don't see any way that isn't Obama.

March 6, 2008 7:13 AM

selish70 said:

Yeah, like all this coverage doesn't benefit the Democrats in the slightest.  Anyhow, I HOPE this thing gets sorted out soon, because I am what I've waited for.

March 6, 2008 9:16 AM

Editorial said:

To paraphrase the not-so-great-rapper Bubba Sparxxxs, this week in politics has gotten ugly as a somewhat...

March 14, 2008 6:23 PM