TNR BLOGS

November 20, 2008 | 3:55 PM
November 20, 2008 | 1:45 PM
November 20, 2008 | 1:06 PM

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

November 20, 2008 | 2:15 PM
November 20, 2008 | 1:52 PM
November 20, 2008 | 11:06 AM
COLUMNISTS
TODAY'S STORIES
26.08.2008
Advice Obama Should Not Take

My choice of conventions this week is the American Political Science Association, and so, like most Americans, I am watching the Democratic convention on television. These days, save for C-Span, you don't get to watch without suffering the commentary. I continue to be struck, not by the proceedings themselves, but by the way they are chewed over by media mavens.

I have not made a statistical count, but something like 90% of the commentary seems to be offered in the form of advice: Obama should do this or Obama should do that. The advice coming from liberals and Democrats is, if frequently contradictory, at least well-meaning. If you are really convinced that the Bush years are a disaster, you naturally are a bit anxious when the Democrats appear to be making mistakes; the thought of eight more years of a Republican presidency is too much for even the most moderate Democrats to accept calmly.

More striking to me is the advice Obama receives from conservatives and Republicans. For one thing, I wonder why they are giving him advice in the first place. Have you ever noticed that Bill Kristol is always telling Democrats what they should do while Paul Krugman almost never offers strategic counseling to Republicans? It is as if conservatives are not content to control one party but want a say in what the other does as well.

Some of this, as in the case of Kristol or the often odious Alex Castellanos, is little more than ill-intentioned meddling. But when a David Brooks lets Obama know who he should pick as vice-president or whether he should attack McCain personally, something else is going on. Higher-minded conservatives appear to recognize that we really do live in a Democratic country, even if with a Republican Electoral College. They understand that Democrats worry about how they will actually govern if elected and that, as citizens rather than as partisans, they therefore have a stake in what the Democrats do.

All of which suggests that Republicans are rarely offered advice because there is not much to advise them on. Republicans do not need to be told whether to take the high road or the low because they always take the low road. They do not ponder whether brutal campaign tactics will affect their ability to govern, since they care so little about government. If liberal media pundits are not particularly interested in offering conservative politician advice, conservatives understand their role as cheering their side on. No wonder Democrats are viewed as more likely to make mistakes. You can only make a mistake when you have a choice.

Most of the advice Obama had been given before Monday night's event was to let the American people know more about himself. He obviously chose to follow that suggestion; his wife was particularly effective in letting the prime time audience in on the appeal her husband has. I am glad Obama followed the advice he was given. This was not the night for attacks.

Now the core of the advice holds that starting tonight the Democrats should go after McCain and Bush. Should they? My guess is that they should - and will. But something in me wants Obama to ignore the advice he is being given - even mine. We always tell our politicians what to do, and when they do it, we are usually a bit disappointed. We need something called leadership. Short definition for today: leadership consists in knowing when to spurn the advice you are being given.

--Alan Wolfe

Posted: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 2:49 PM with 7 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!

wgcreeley said:

Well-said!

And completely agreed. Thank you, Mr. Wolfe.

August 26, 2008 3:11 PM

icarusr said:

Actually, on some point or another they were asking Castellanos if his advice to and critique of the Republicans would be the same, if they did the same thing as the Democrats, and he said - somewhat disarmingly, I thought - "Oh no, I'd be on the other side."  He might well be a sleazebag - I know nothing of him - but at least he's honest.

August 26, 2008 4:40 PM

jsayko said:

YES!

August 26, 2008 4:46 PM

kevincollins said:

I think a dynamite thing for Obama to lay on McCain's doorstep is McCain's practically blackmailing our troops into staying in the service longer so as to get the GI Bill when the ones already receiving it have put in more than enough time. Can't believe this didn't get more publicity an spark major outrage.

August 26, 2008 4:53 PM

Robert Powell said:

Yeah, I find the commentary profoundly annoying. For football games you can just turn down the sound, put on some music, and enjoy the game. But here there are speeches to hear, and if the network blabbermouths get bored, as they easily do, they just talk right over the speakers. Good example last night when the Dems had a distinguished Republican speaking.

Who do these people think they are? No one elected Wolf Blitzer.

August 26, 2008 4:54 PM

michael said:

The advice from the right falls into two major categories.

The first sort is blatant mischief and the target is the most loyal Dems. It tends to be specific and the strategy, tactic or policy position is offered along with the dire consequences Barack will face if the wisdom isn't followed. It serves the purpose of a Tokyo Rose for the left and the goal is to sew doubt and division among the camp. "If he doesn't do X, he can expect a catastrophe." The A in this case is usually a policy or strategy that is guaranteed to exploit a minor division and it's a no-lose form of sabotage for the advice giver. One faction will quote the third-party and any debate that ensues is a distraction at the least to alienation (their idea is ignored) but the ultimate goal is suppress the vote when a narrow interest isn't addressed.

The other type of advice is what I call Reverse Talking Points. Pick any position from the McCain manual, dress it up in a Dem costume or Obama demo and present it as necessary for success. This is aimed at the independent voter and it seeks to communicate McCain's message which the voter will only hear from McCain. EX: Uncle Pat isn't really pushing Barack to drill everywhere abandon a timetable in Iraq because it's good for Barack. But, Pat hopes he's done a good sales job on the unsound reasoning & the undecided voter will line up with McCain when he pitches the nonsense.

But it's easy to see the advice from the right as 1.) An attempt to cause trouble among the base or 2.) Lure the center toward the right.

I've reached my word allotment but there is plenty of bad advice from the left. You can recognize them by their sore loser name-tags. The motive is equally obvious.

August 26, 2008 5:06 PM

gary21cp said:

Particularly annoying has been John King -- the CNN guy with the "magic maps" -- who said after Ted Kennedy's appearance, "No matter what you think of his politics," blah, blah, blah.

Why has this kind of editorializing become acceptable on a news show? Especially for a moment of memorializing a uniquely influential Senator and American icon? Does CNN think that it has to raise questions about an American leader so that whoever doesn't like him/her can think that CNN is being fair? This means that CNN thinks its viewers are dumb as dirt, and that the CNN team -- the "greatest political news team on TV" -- is just as idiotic.

Hey, CNN! How about if you just let Americans savor a historic moment? Get the %$#@ off the mike!

August 26, 2008 5:19 PM