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
08.10.2008
Another Change of Course?

For a few days prior to last night's debate, the McCain camp seemed to have decided to put its eggs into the guilt-by-association basket, linking Barack Obama to William Ayers at every opportunity and even raising (through Sarah Palin) the subject of Jeremiah Wright, whom the campaign had previously declared off the table. At the debate itself, though, this line of attack wasn't raised once, and Politico's Jonathan Martin and Ben Smith report that the campaign may shift away from it altogether:

 After days of attempts to persuade voters that Obama’s ties to ‘60s radical Bill Ayers are a crucial character issue, McCain didn’t mention Ayers’ name during the 90 minutes of Tuesday’s forum. His top aides suggested afterward that, going forward, the candidate wouldn’t focus on the former domestic terrorist nor invoke the name of Obama’s controversial pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

Nicolle Wallace, a top McCain adviser, hinted McCain would not bring it up. “If asked about it, of course [he’ll talk about Ayers],” she said.

McCain’s chief strategist, Steve Schmidt all but said the controversial pastor remained off-limits.

“What Sen. McCain has said is that it’s not an issue he intends to talk about in the race,” said the aide, though he did note that Obama himself had called Wright 'fair game.'

For now, this strikes me as a rather thin and equivocal disavowal of the strategy. We'll probably get a better sense of how sincere it is at the next Sarah Palin rally.

It is striking, though, the extent to which McCain and Palin seem to be running disconnected campaigns at the moment. She publicly encourages him to "take the gloves off" at the debate; he declines, and picks up on none of the assaults she's been leveling daily (on Ayers, on Obama's supposed criticism of our troops in Afghanistan, etc.). Indeed, as Frank Bruni noted in the Times, though McCain mentioned his friend Joe Lieberman four times during the debate, he didn't mention Palin once.

Over the course of the next week, it will be interesting to see how much this dual-track strategy seems calculated and how much it suggests genuine disagreements within the campaign. Either way, if McCain loses, expect the recriminations between his camp and Palin's supporters to be fierce.

--Christopher Orr 

Posted: Wednesday, October 08, 2008 12:17 PM with 9 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!

satyendra said:

Did I hear Obama mention Joe Biden yesterday?

October 8, 2008 12:28 PM

anonevent said:

satyendra, I don't know if Obama did, but you have to love it when McCain mentions his true running mate, Lieberman, more often than the one he picked to shore up his base.

How bad would it have been for McCain, though, if he had brought up Ayers, and not only did Obama get a chance to publicly rebuke him, but to have CNN's Insta-poll meter tank.  Then Obama could have just put out an ad showing that no one cares.

October 8, 2008 12:46 PM

aquamon said:

McCain mentioned Biden... or at least his hair.

October 8, 2008 12:49 PM

purcellneil said:

When he refers to Sarah as "That One" we will know that the honeymoon is over, doggone it.

Neil

October 8, 2008 12:49 PM

GSpinks said:

As was discussed extensively prior to the conventions, the VPs job is to assail the opponent; it seems the current situation is simply an extension of that CW.

I think the distinguishing feature is that the McCain campaign knows these issues only play well with the already decided and partisan crowd. Anyone who is going to be legitimately swayed by the association of Ayers, Wright or Rezko would, thanks to the plethora of coverage these issues have received, denials to the contrary not withstanding, have already been swayed. It would, therefore, not behoove McCain, to any degree, to insert these figures into the discussion of the actual issues.

Thus, it seems to me, that Palin is whaling (wailing, perhaps?) away about the three stooges in order to fire up the partisans in preparation for that all important, national tracking poll conducted on November 4th while McCain is trying to work the undecideds and moderates with debate on the issues about which they care. I predict no "shift" in strategy going forward from this regard, except perhaps to migrate the oppo stuff to a seperate medium, like email and phone banks, in lieu of having Palin bring it up from her stump.

October 8, 2008 12:54 PM

ironyroad said:

Mention of running mates was completely absent from last night's debate.  Unless McCain thinks Lieberman is his running mate.

October 8, 2008 1:00 PM

blackton said:

Palin supporters? You mean they are going to poll the local insane asylum? Sarah Palin has zero future in the Republican party if McCain loses. What, the Alaskan mafia will exact its revenge? She will go the rubber chicken circuit, and face the same kind of reception Quayle got when he ran (and remember he was the actual Vice President)

October 8, 2008 1:06 PM

The Plank said:

Earlier, I expressed a bit of skepticism regarding Politico's scoop that the McCain campaign was

October 8, 2008 1:35 PM

mundye said:

I kinda wonder if the bloom is off the Palin rose for McCain.  It appears to me that McCain may be coming around to realizing just how big a blunder he made in picking Palin in the first place.  She has, certainly, had some positive impact - bringing the conservative base fully on board, adding a much-needed sense of excitement - but those positives have been swamped by her negatives.  I don't just mean the obvious gaffes and inability to handle questioning, I'm referring to the sense that Palin is power-hungry and delusional.  It's been mentioned around here a few times that one of the scariest attributes of Palin is that she seems to believe the narrative the campaign has concocted for her, despite its huge divergence from objective truth.  I get the sense watching her that Palin actually believes that she is some sort of savior (little "s", not the Messiah) for the Republicans if not this year, then going forward.  It was a bit humorous and harmless the first couple of times she referred to a "Palin-McCain Administration", inadvertantly transposing the order, but her continuing tendency to do so hints at a much deeper psychological issue.  I think McCain has realized this and is trying to distance himself a bit from her (while of course still trying to reap any benefit).

October 8, 2008 1:36 PM