Noam,

Loved this exchange. Hey, in my pantheon of tnr favorites, you, jason, orr, cottle, and many others are highlighted. But I have to tell you, Chait has a special place in the tnr part of my heart. The way he incinerated poor hapless kirchick recently - hell, he even gave the prone kirchick a kick while he was down - earned him a special "badass" place in my heart.

Chait is a scrapper. He reminds me of a sparring partner I once had. The guy was sort of a friend but when you sparred with him, you always had to be alert and not too lax. He would, at times, just to keep you honest, throw an elbow or forearm, or in a clinch, lock your right to his left side and come at you with his right. Bad form perhaps but it kept you on your toes.

Chait is a lot like this guy. Competitive, will test a pal or buddy, just to see what he's got, and if he is sparring with a kirchick, just flat out beat his ass to the canvas and then, as he walked away, say the sorry ass got better than he deserved. I like that kind of guy. He may not be popular at mixers but he is respected.

also what weakens McCain's message is that his arguments against Obama are all over the place and contradict themselves. THe only consistent message that McCain has for his campaign is: "Vote for me because I have more experience because I was tortured in Vietnam, which makes me more qualified to protect America against future terrorist attacks."All his other positive arguments (i.e., pro-McCain) have kinda been lost. Especially because he's been flipflopping all over the place much more pronouncedly than Obama has.  Most of his message is anti-Obama and not even consistently on message in its anti-Obamaness. And all his policy positions seem to have been developed in reaction to Obama's, or as extensions of Bush's, neither of which is an strong way to assert one's personal qualifications to lead the country.

with regard to Chait, after reading jaunty: don't you also think Chait kinda has to throw in cautions of these sorts every once in awhile? Aren't all us Obama supporters kinda fearful of jinxing him by being too confident of his inevitable election? We have to throw cold water on ourselves occasionally to keep Obama on his toes (although I think Obama is as aware of the danger of his own hubris as the rest of us are), and ourselves in check.

McCain's campaign is about where it was on the eve of the primaries, in disarray and with dim prospects. This all goes to prove that an election isn't over until it's over.

Just having Barack Obama sitting where he is right now seems to indicate that Americans aren't going to fall for that old banana in the tailpipe trick anymore (changing one's mind makes you an unprincipled flip flopper).  Poor old John McCain is the worst flipper of all.  He's just got so little to work with.

The level of fed-upness of anything to do with that shtick is probably broad and deep. Let's hope America gives it the Bronx cheer it deserves.

(PS Noam, you're in Israel having fun at a wedding and you wrote something this long?  Get thee to a party and have a good time).

The anti-Kerry message wasn't sufficient for Bush to win in 2004; it needed to be reinforced in the right micro-markets at the right time by the right people. For ex in Clark County OH during the last  few weeks of the campaign, by neighbors knocking in doors and convincing people they knew well that Kerry was a turkey.

If McCain is to have any chance at all, he not only needs to create and constantly reinforce the (very plausible, to me and millions of other voters) "can't trust him" meme-- ie  of Obama as world-class bullsh*t artist who will say anything to any audience so long as it doesn't cause him to spend any political capital or define himself with any real precision. McCain's team also needs to use the microtargeting techniques of Mehlman and Rove to determine where to press this message for maximum electoral impact.

These two tasks aren't really difficult at all. Don't let the incompetence of Rick Davis convince you that Obama's in a good position. IMO he's an extremely vulnerable candidate who combines some of the worst features of Kerry and Carter.

Some great video footage of the Obamas at their eldest girl's soccer game. He and Michelle sure didn't look like "outsiders"...they looked like the all-American couple, and were very engaging and cute...flirting with each other and cheering their daughter's team on!

We need more of this kid of stuff to push back to the McCain's campaign BS casting Obama as the strange other...

Especially now that McCain has brought on board the bullet headed Schmidt, who was the attack dog for Cheney and Bush, and learned all the dirty tricks from his mentor Karl Rove.

tep is a great indicator of when it might have possibly been safe for Obama to pick Clinton as his running mate, and as we can tell, it won't be any time soon.  If tep is still fuming more about Obama beating Clinton that the possibility that McCain might get anywhere close to the White House, then I guarantee neither side is ready for the O&C team.

It's funny, tep, because what I always heard from Obama was that you couldn't just elect him president and magically, everything would be fine.  I'm still hearing that message now.  Yes, I know about his FISA stance, but it's not like we didn't have a gas tax pander, the shot glass incident, or a vote on Iraq to prove someone's foreign policy bonefides.

I agree with Noam's assessment that the Democrat has to clear a much lower bar than the Republican, but, considering the fact that Obama beat the establishment candidate in the primary, I think he knows that you can't take anything for granted.  As for Republicans, they are trapped animals, and I do think they'll eat their young this year if it means that they could win something.  This race has not yet gotten nasty.

Disarray, today yes, but that's about to change. THis guy schmidt is a take-charge kind and not a Penn-weight either. People respect him and if they don't they get run over. I agree.

I'm naive -- I think the American electorate is smarter than they get credit for and if McCain respects them enough to offer some truth (go uterly hardcore on energy and public school choice, make his tax cut plan dependent on pay-go as an excuse to trash it for the ridiculous deficit-exploder it is, and most importantly 1) tell the nation there will be pain for the sake of future generations and 2) promise if you don't make certain benchmarks neither you nor your running mate will seek office again), that will go far.  Heck, I'd say "I was happy to be tortured for this nation's future, it's long past time that our government call for some sacrifice from our citizens."  Yes, I know what happened to Mondale...

As to TNR, Chait and Crowley's hatefullness towards Hillary Clinton was unbearable -- they remind me of every smug, wealthy, self-satisfied liberal snob I went to school with and made me second guess that my political beliefs might be wrong if they fit in so well with these jerks.  I usually agree with Noam but when I don't he's still one of the classiest, both on TNR online and in general.  Happy trip!

Tep, you're really foaming these days.  Just vote for McCain or get over it.

Chait's a scumbag.

Chait - I forgot to add that you are my favorite TNR writer.  You're always a blast of telling it exactly like it is with more courage than anyone else.  You give it straight up, no chaser and I greatly appreciate it.

lymon1: Respectfully suggest you hire a speechwriter before opening your first press conference with "I was happy to be tortured." ;)

New numbers from CNN reveal that Americans think both Barack Obama and John McCain are flip-floppers

Sorry, Scheiber, but Chiat has the better of this argument. Why? Because if the idea that Obama is merely a "typical" politician takes hold it will harm him more than the typical politician. That's because an Obama win, in order to offset the usual Democratic  disadvantage among white males (the most dependable voting block), must depend on the enthusiasm of, and LARGER THAN NORMAL support from and TURNOUT among, some of the least dependable voters; young people, independents and working/lower income women.

Among these groups, the notion that Obama is a "typical" politician (untrust-worthy, lacking real commitment to the "change" they especially need) can easily turn enthusiasm into apathy. Apathy that can translate into low turnout among precisely the voters Obama needs most.

An apathetic electorate works in McCain's favor and to Obama's disadvantage.

esmense, that's a very intelligent point. I hadn't thought of that, but you're right. Although, do you think that the young vote is going to be affected by the flip flop charge, or have the indignation of the netroots?

I don't have time to read the whole post, but let me just say that I think it's terrible that Chait has attacked Noam's family, especially while Noam is out of the country.

Anybody can say anything about anyone these days and get away with it, it seems. Half the time it's little more than rumor or innuendo or unsubstantiated hearsay. It's like on that other site where somebody posted PDFs of prescriptions of bizarre medications they'd somehow talked Cindy McCain's druggist into revealing. That's the kind of stunt that can ruin a person's reputation.

TNR has really gone downhill ever since that nice Mr. Wallace left.

My favorite writer on tnr doesn't even draw a salary: William Yard is a guy of delirious, oozing-out-of-every-pore talent. He's kind of insane, of course, but he writes something surprising, smile-worthy and mind-broadening in almost every comment. I have no clue how he does it, but if he starts a cult I'm joining it.

As for the rest, it's hard to deny that Chait's the most fun, with Cottle a not-too-distant second. But I still have to say I prefer Chotiner and Cohn. They don't do all the razmatazz, granted. You don't ROFL with them. But there's a certain deadly seriousness to them, a kind of quiet intensity that shines through the page (erm, screen) time and again.

That's what's good about TNR, in the end. Cuz, when you get down to it, the internet is full of guffaw-inducing hatchet-job artists. Some are more competent than others, and few are as good at it as Chait. But what's in short supply is readable wonkery...and Cohn, especially, serves it up regularly.

Shame on anyone who dilutes the opportunity a campaign offers and chooses to sling insulting slogans.  

If one is so insecure or has doubts about their own qualifications, let them lie about their life and their vision but do not turn a most precious argument into an attack against the other person.

A candidate who is this close to the highest honor our country bestows should at least refuse to squander the final months in an effort to define his opponent as lesser than him.  

Elections for this office demand a candidate tell us what he will do. This isn't a contest where trash talking can be a psychological technique to unhinge the other team on the field or the floor.

Every time a surrogate, a campaign or a candidate turns a question about their purpose into an attack on their opponent we should react with outrage. The real reason we should deem that strategy repugnant is because it assumes the voter deserves less than the best effort to inform us, about what they will do.  Tell me what you will do, I will decide.  Your insults may harm your opponent but by hiding behind them you deprive me, a voter, the rare chance to know you.

We should all pause and ask ourselves, "Do we want to elect the candidate who is adept at framing the opposition in the most unflattering manner or should our next President tell us what he will do, now.?"

It can be more than shameful if we come up with the wrong answer.

anonevent - I never "fumed" about Obama defeating HRC because-- maybe you'll recall my mentioning this a few times here-- I voted for Obama.

wandrey - tell me true, what are you going to say when this slippery, smarmy man reverses course on that ur-issue that propelled him past far more experienced, IMO more deserving, aspirants to our party's nomination, Iraq? You know as well as I do that he's already laying the groundwork to go back on his promises to the Kossacks and Iowa caucusers to withdraw in short order. His pledge to "end the war" has about as much credibility at this point as Nixon's pledge for same in the 1972 campaign. So direct your ire his way. I'm merely pointing out the man's fundamental slipperiness. His prob, not mine.

I'm not disillusioned with Obama. I never had any illusions about him to begin with. From the evening he made that ridiculous "awesome God in the blue statez" speech in '04, I pegged the man as a slippery BS artist. Now that he has tried to have both sides of yet another critical issue, you and others here turn your guns not on the Artful Dodger but on the man in the audience who has the honesty, and intellectual clarity, to call BS on this man.

Some, maybe not today, or tomorrow, or this week or month, but someday before the end of the man's first  90 days in office, you'll realize you've been had. And you'll be a lot angrier than I am. Me, I'm just amused by the spectacle.

E il nave va, as Fellini had it

E la nave va

Tep - you need drugs.

Steady there, wandrey. Even money that Obama's position on Iraq morphs into McCain's by the end of March 2009. Care to wager?

tep:

I dunno. Look, I was never under the impression that Obama was as mindlessly hell-bent on Iraq withdrawal as teh liberal base.

But there is a REAL and SERIOUS segment of the Democratic party (see: Jim Webb) that is NOT mindlessly passifistic.  They have serious plans to withdraw from Iraq. They genuinely believe that this is the best course of action for the region.

For John McCain, it's less about policy and more about Vietnam-syndrome. He CANNOT and WILL NOT admit that America has lost a war. He is more dedicated to this philosophy than even Bush, I think. Obama and McCain are on opposite sides of the spectrum on this issue...it's fashionable to be cynical about Obama's Iraq plans, but I'm not sure there's any merit to the charges...

Andrew Sullivan, writing in the Times of London:

"This election will be about who can deliver the most change in a way that least disturbs an anxious electorate. McCain reassures in as much as he is obviously not a simple heir to Bush and Dick Cheney. But his refusal to countenance any tax increases or entitlement cuts in a debt-laden America, and his visceral hostility to diplomacy and nuance in the politics of the Middle East, worry many who have been rattled by the reckless rigidity of the Bush years."

"Obama’s main liability has always been that he may be too inexperienced for an America at war and too culturally different from heartland America to win it over. In the past few weeks he has done a much better job in removing his liabilities than McCain has. This election, unlike the past two, will be won in the centre. It’s a centre in which Obama looks increasingly at home."

I for one am thrilled that Obama is tacking to the center. I'm a centrist and a pragmatist. Enough with the ideologues of either stripe!

Eight years of "governance" by someone who has thumbed his nose at the political center (never mind the left) and who has consistently refused to acknowledge views other than his own, let alone tailor his policies to accommodate them, is eight years too many. If the last eight years have taught us anything, it's that rigid adherence to one's political roots may be appropriate for a talk radio host but it's anathema to statesmanship and leadership.

If you don't like "this slippery, smarmy man," tep, why not tell us why we should vote for McCain rather than vote for Obama? All we've heard from you for weeks is how awful Obama is. Not one word about why McCain is better. Or maybe I'm missing something, and there's a chance someone other than one of the two of them will be the next POTUS.

You claim to be the one with the "intellectual honesty." In that regard, I suggest you put up (why we should vote for McCain) or shut up.

And while you're at it, please explain how you who so vociferously supported the invasion of Iraq and who have repeatedly warned against a too hasty withdrawal of American forces are now criticizing Obama for apparently coming around to a position closer to your own?

It's not Obama who wants to have it both ways: it's you.

Or it could be that Obama is embracing the bi partisan War Party consensus, the result of the most painstaking and detailed bootlicking by the Congressional opposition.

That FISA bill would not pass under the Republican majority nor did that majority give him the surge. Under the guise of the opposition, these measures have passed into a surreal beltway consensus...

Perhaps, here, in the anarchy of the computer age can a real opposition exist.

My take on this is similar to cthulhu2000's, except that for me and my family, and many tens of millions of working families int his country, the issue of issues is not The War but UHC.

Obama's very opportune, post-primary jettisoning of the position that, probably more than all others combined, enabled him to win the nomination is a taste of many reversals to come. Based on this man's clear and concistent track record of pandering and preening for various audiences, I'd say there's not one chance in ten that he will have the guts and the desire to spend serious political capital and make a meaningful reduction in Americans' vulnerability on the health insurance access front.

Now, I will almost certainly vote for Obama because on UHC, the issue of issues, McCain and the GOP are dead wrong, and incapable of seeing reason. For the life of me I don't understand why they persist in defending a kloodge of a non-system that is bad for business, bad for families, bad for national competitiveness. But really, if the candidate of the working man's party doesn't have enough spine and desire to seize this once-in-a-generation opportunity to pass UHC and end our health insurance nightmare, I have to say that I see the wisdom in the ($10 MP word alert) diehard _ultramontane_ cthulhu attitude toward this candidate.

He's clever, he's smooth, but he simply doesn't have any guts or desire on the issue that, for me, dwarfs all others. I will vote for him but without any enthusiasm and with the lowest of expectations.

t

The situation in Iraq changes weekly, sometimes daily but seems to be on a steadier path for now.  This was not the case when Obama started running a thousand months ago.  

I'm very pleased, but not surprised, to see that Obama is mature enough to be flexible and stay open to seeing things for what they actually are. He has to keep an honest eye o available resources, continue planning for the eventual withdrawal that America wants no matter what is happening on the ground and finally - act in accordance with what he sees is best for the country (while running for President) and not what is best for his ego or the NYT editorial page (or Talkback for that matter).

The manufactured flip flopping rage-o-holicism is dangerous, tired and insincere. The American people clearly think so too, thank God. It's best ignored and I'm also pleased that he does so.

I'm going to two fund raisers this week that they just annouced *yesterday* that Hillary was going to speak to as well. They were smart: they sold the tickets first.  First up is the Women for Obama wing of the DNC, it should be interesting.  Her victim shtick wiould go over like a lead balloon with this crowd, I really hope she sticks with the Smiling Statesman Hillary instead.  And in a small dose.  I didn't pay to listen to her.