TNR BLOGS

January 08, 2009 | 8:00 PM
January 08, 2009 | 6:03 PM
January 08, 2009 | 5:59 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
12.09.2008
How Obama Should Frame McCain

I'm sure the Obama campaign has solid research suggesting they should paint McCain as out of touch and closely tied to Bush. But, watching their new anti-McCain ad, I can't help wondering if they're ignoring their most brutally effective case against him. So, at the risk of offering advice to people much more knowledgeable than I am (why stop now, right?), here's the ad I'd run at McCain. It grew out of a conversation I had with Jason yesterday:

Start with McCain in a good light, both literally and figuratively. The narrator says something like: "Before 2007, John McCain was an honorable man. He stood up to his party on tax cuts for the rich, on global warming, on immigration." [Now the clouds roll in, ominous music starts playing...] "But when being honorable threatened his shot at the presidency [flash headline from summer of 2007 declaring McCain campaign dead] John McCain didn't put country first, he put his ambition first. To curry favor with his party's right-wing, he embraced the Bush tax cuts he once called "irresponsible" and renounced his own immigration plan. Later, he flip-flopped on offshore drilling. Now, in the biggest reversal of all, he's embracing the same Bush-Rove politics he condemned eight years ago [flash Paris Hilton and Britney Spears, a quote from neutral organization citing McCain's "Rove-style" tactics]. Why? Because, to John McCain, some things are more important than honor [grainy footage of McCain and Bush waving together from the White House]."

I see several advantages here: 1.) You can insist over and over that McCain is a Bush clone, but people still don't entirely buy it. They have a vague sense that this guy's a maverick. If you concede the maverick point and then explain why he's suddenly hugging Bush, they're much more likely to understand it and believe you. 2.) This cuts right to the heart of the McCain brand. If you're going to shred one of your opponent's assets, it might as well be his greatest one. 3.) It distills almost everything objectionable about the McCain campaign--both the policy shifts and the tactical shifts--into a simple, plausible, coherent critique. 4.) It will drive McCain and his top aides absolutely batty--nothing is more important to McCain than his self-image as an honorable man (witness the reaction to the charge that he got a heads up on those Rick Warren questions a few weeks back). 5.) As negative ads go, it's not even that harsh. You're just using McCain's own widely-known words and tactics against him rather than introducing ugly new information. You could do it in a more-in-sorrow sort of tone.

In fact, this line of attack seems so obvious I'm surprised Obama hasn't gone there already. My only explanation is that the campaign feels it's somehow out of bounds to impugn McCain's motives--as though, by doing so, Obama cedes his claim to a new kind of politics. As Obama said in his own convention speech:

[W]hat I will not do is suggest that the Senator takes his positions for political purposes. Because one of the things that we have to change in our politics is the idea that people cannot disagree without challenging each other's character and patriotism.

It's a noble sentiment. But, unfortunately, this campaign has become all about character. And, as recent events demonstrate, McCain's character is precisely what needs challenging. It's almost as though the McCain campaign interepreted this line as unilateral disarmament and decided to massively exploit the situation in response.

My plea to Obama: Please, please reconsider before it's too late.

Update: I just got a blast-e-mail from Obama spokesman Hari Sevugan saying the following:

Today on “The View,” John McCain defended his campaign’s latest ad campaign, which has been debunked repeatedly as both false and sleazy. In running the sleaziest campaign since South Carolina in 2000 and standing by completely debunked lies on national television, it’s clear that John McCain would rather lose his integrity than lose an election [E/A].

So the Obama campaign is comfortable with this line of attack off the air. They just need to roll it out on the air.  

--Noam Scheiber

Posted: Friday, September 12, 2008 1:15 PM with 59 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!

csmiller said:

I like the idea, but it's becoming clearer by the day how much Obama ties his own hands with his "new kind of politics" initiative.  McCain hopes he'll take the bait and dive into the mud with him, just so he can point at Obama and accuse him of abandining his "new politics" pledge.  Of course, McCain jettisoned his maverick status as you state, but nobody seems to care too much about that.  In any event, Obama's "new kind of politics" looks like losing politics to me, and there's nothing new about that at all.  Democrats perfected losing politics a long time ago.  

September 12, 2008 1:48 PM

teplukhin2you said:

Oh please, this integrity stuff is ridiculous. We're all adults. Obama received more money, in a little over three years, than all but one of his Capitol Hill peers did in * 20 years * from those DC monuments to corruption and incompetence, Fannie and Freddie. His pandering to King Corn on ethanol is sheer political cynicism: principles for IA's electoral college votes. As was his multi-decade suckup to his "spiritual mentor", the guy who asserts that blacks are right-brained, whites left-brained.

My vote and almost no one's vote will be changed by revelations about the above or about breathless revelations about McCain's lack of "principles." These are politicians. This is what politicians do. And if we live in (Iowa)(Detroit)(WVA steel country) etc, we expect them to pander to _us_.

If Obama wants to win, he has to destroy McCain's image as a heroic and patriotic leader. The ONLY way he can do so in the weeks remaining is to attack the man's fitness on grounds of health. This is Politics 101. That Obama can't or won't do this is yet more evidence that he's still learning how to play this game.

September 12, 2008 2:03 PM

jyunis said:

Noam, I couldn't agree more. I am not a strategist of any sort, but its almost painfully obvious that this should have been the line of attack for months. As Ezra Klein pointed out, Obama isn't running against Bush, and everybody knows John McCain so the whole "more of the same" theme is pretty bland.

I can't quite grasp why nobody, other than John Kerry (and Jon Chait) managed to figure out that McCain has reversed his position on every major issue--the Bush tax cuts, his own immigration bill, the sanctioning of torture, Guantanamo Bay, climate change--to win his own party's nomination. This is not putting "country first." This is ambition first. Why wasn't this in every Obama ad, and every DNC speech?! Something to the effect of "Did John McCain really put his country first when he reversed his position on tax cuts?" "Did John McCain really put his country first when he fought against veteran's benefits?"

When he picked Sarah Palin to win over the conservative base, why wasn't the first ad on TV something like "John McCain. Fundraising first. Polling Second. Country third or fourth."

As for Obama's admission that McCain is honorable in his convention speech, there's still time to change his mind about that. But time is running out, and this should've been their strategy since day one. The fact that it hasn't been, is puzzling, and disappointing.

September 12, 2008 2:08 PM

JEFF FREY said:

I say go for it. But it can't just be one ad, it needs to be the repeated theme. And it needs to hang together with whatever other themes the Obama campaign is pushing.

September 12, 2008 2:14 PM

hemlock41 said:

"...he has to destroy McCain's image as a heroic and patriotic leader. The ONLY way he can do so in the weeks remaining is to attack the man's fitness on grounds of health."

What the hell does health (or age) have to do with McCain's patriotism or his past heroism? A health or age-based line of attack would be an attack on his current capacity to meet the withstand the rigors of the job.

September 12, 2008 2:16 PM

roidubouloi said:

Excellent!  Finally the right track, if Obama will only go that way.  He must impeach McCain's character, his honor, his integrity, his competence.  But this cannot be a one-off.  There must be a blizzard of such ads, rolled out in succession.  Hang McCain with his lobbyists.  Hang him with Phil Gramm's contempt for ordinary Americans.  Hang him with his constant self-contradictions.  Hang him with his confusion.  Hang him with the fact that he is even wiling to play politics with the safety of small children, refusing to let them be taught how to protect themselves from sexual predators.  

But for god's sake, Senator Obama, get on with it!

September 12, 2008 2:19 PM

roidubouloi said:

No tep, you are as confused as always about electoral politics.  The basis of your confusion is that you seem to think that you are the target audience.  You are not.  What would or would not sway you is utterly irrelevant, most likely 180 degrees wrong.  If you like it, the public will hate it.  If you hate it, they'll eat it up.

September 12, 2008 2:21 PM

waynejm said:

I like it.  It's often said that the best attack is one which throws the opponent's strengths right back at him, and Noam's message does precisely that.  Americans' image of McCain as a maverick is based entirely upon his record prior to the current election.  Over the past several months, he has casually, recklessly and opportunistically abandoned most of what made him appealing to moderates and independents throughout his years in the Senate.  John Kerry framed the argument perfectly in his Senator McCain versus Candidate McCain convention speech.

The best way to destroy McCain's maverick image is to acknowledge  - and even honor - his pre-2008 record, while at the same time painting the current McCain as just another pandering politician by exposing and emphasizing his many flip-flops.

September 12, 2008 2:28 PM

nathang said:

There are many quotes and clips to show that McCain has flip-flopped most major issues in order to win the presidency.

The best thing about the "McCain sold his soul to gain the White House" theme is that it's true.

September 12, 2008 2:38 PM

timteeter said:

I dunno.  Maybe.  But could everyone please stop hyperventilating?  Do some yoga, or whatever?

Following the RCP averages, at it's height (9/2) the Obama convention bump-lead was 6.4 points.  At it's height (9/9), the McCain convention bump-lead was 2.9 points.  Today it's 2.3 and shows every sign of continuing to decline (Rasmussen notwithstanding).  It's taking a little longer than I thought it would, but McCain is going down overall, not up (look at the Gallup dailies), while Obama is starting to rise overall.  The state numbers will follow.

There are ways of suggesting--or just stating flatly--that McCain is a man who has sacrificed his integrity without using the "h" word.  And the shine is definitely starting to come off Palin.  Let McCain be the one who is baited into a trap, for Pete's sake.

September 12, 2008 2:50 PM

mcgumbleton said:

Good take, Noam - I am amazed that they haven't been going after McCain for his obvious naked ambition.

I'd also be interested to see a "Where's McCain?" ad, along the lines of Bush's "Where's Iraq's WMD" video. Ever since Palin came on the scene McCain has all but disappeared and completely turned his campaign over to his running mate. It's like *she's* at the top of the ticket, not him. NBC's First Read noted that this morning:

"The campaign has made it crystal clear who the campaigner-in-chief is. And it's not McCain. It's an astonishing and unprecedented development in American presidential politics. Essentially, the person driving the rallies, crowds, and campaigning isn't the person running for president. Just asking, but when are going to start hearing this from McCain camp TV ads, "I'm Sarah Palin, and I approve of this message.""

I'd love to see him called on that chicken-**** - is he going to disappear when big, bad Putin comes looking for him? Hide behind Palin's skirt?

September 12, 2008 2:55 PM

teplukhin2you said:

hemlock - sorry, let me make it clear. Destroy McC's *current* image as a heroic leader. Persuade the electorate that McC's over the hill, that his time has passed. As if JFK were running against Eisenhower.

September 12, 2008 3:02 PM

baxterjones said:

I've often admired and agreed with Mr. Scheiber's ideas, but I think this is a terrible idea. Few care about the kind of campaign someone is running; if they did, GWB would have lost in a landslide in 2004. The one way Obama wins is by making this election about policy. A president IS what that president DOES in office. The debates will be decisive, and Obama needs to hammer away at their differences on key issues, starting with the economy. That's how Clinton beat Dole. Also, mock McCain's talk about "the Washington Establishment" ; when it comes to foreign policy and fighting terrorism, the Neocons ARE the Washington Establishment - they have been for 8 years - and John McCain is their guy!

September 12, 2008 3:42 PM

waynejm said:

timteeter -

"There are ways of suggesting--or just stating flatly--that McCain is a man who has sacrificed his integrity without using the "h" word."

Doesn't the word you have in mind begin with a silent "w"?

September 12, 2008 4:00 PM

lymon1 said:

One quibble: Most of the nation is against immigration reform.  

September 12, 2008 4:06 PM

larryborowsky said:

excellent idea. i would tie it back into the rhetoric obama used in his well-received (but now forgotten) nomination acceptance speech, viz.: "Senator McCain has an honorable record, but he is running on dishonorable policies and using dishonorable politics. I'm disappointed to see it, because I think he's a better man than that. And I think America is a better nation than that. We have to be better than that, to meet the challenges of the future. Senator McCain used to be a maverick, but in the heat of battle he reverted to the worn-out policies and the politics of the past. I'll lead you forward, America."

September 12, 2008 4:08 PM

Eos said:

"Oh my. If Obambi was just not so good, honest, and kind, so truthful, honorable, and decent, so dedicated to the common welfare and unselfish--if only he were less perfect, he would be beating up that bad John McCain and winning now."

September 12, 2008 4:09 PM

hemlock41 said:

Tep: Exactly. Destroy his current image as a strong, unblinking, and competent leader. Patriotism has nothing to do with it. And heroism, at least in the sense it usually comes up wrt McCain (as a citation of his POW story) has very little to do with it. It would be bad for Obama to attack these latter things.

September 12, 2008 4:09 PM

perkowitz said:

I like the theme "mccain/palin: a bridge to nowhere". I'm not the first to state it here, but I think you can bring together a number of things under that rubric, including obama's change message, palin's corruption, general republican wrong-direction-ness, mccain's adoption of same... and it's catchy!

September 12, 2008 4:28 PM

timteeter said:

The e-mail you got, Noam, is part of a larger package:

www.huffingtonpost.com/.../obama-camp-steps-up-attac_n_126014.html

However, it is still not quite what you recommend.  In fact, it's smarter.  Rather than saying that McCain is dishonorable because of the positions he has taken, the Obama people are starting to say that McCain is dishonorable in the manner in which he campaigns.  You know, "He can't defend his positions [chosen, we assume, for honorable reasons], so he lies and smears dishonorably."  I think "The View" shows that this is a winning line of attack.  

September 12, 2008 5:03 PM

timteeter said:

Actually, how about "McCain-Palin: building a bridge to the 19th century!"

September 12, 2008 5:12 PM

tomeg said:

You can't effectively counter slime with legit criticism of McCain's policies or third party testimony to the truth vs. the lie. It's kind of a general rule that applies double or triple after eight years of Bush/Cheney's dogged adherence to false and deceptive disinformation. It just doesn't work.

No matter how distasteful it may be, slime must be answered in kind, lies with counter-lies, slander with anti-slander.

September 12, 2008 5:18 PM

jayfram said:

Here is what I would like to see:  An Obama ad surveying all the horrible things that have gone wrong over the past 8 years, during most of which Republicans controlled both houses of Congress AND the White House (and 4 1/2 out of 9 on the Supreme Court); and THEN juxtaposing that with his message that HE will bring the change from the scandals, lies, corruption, torture, out of control spending, and HE will not get us into a war under false pretenses, and without real consultation with our allies.  I'm saying don't pussy foot around -- repeating the line that McCain is just going to continue the "Bush policies" is so vague and stale.  Get down and dirty with what you're really talking about with "change" and ask whether John McCain, who has allied himself more and more closely with the GOP establishment to try to get himself elected, including choosing a running mate with no experience after saying experience was the most important qualification for a running mate, could possibly be the right person to trust with bringing real change to Washington.  Oh, and you could do a nice series of ads just juxtaposing what McCain said then about all the things he's flip flopped on, and what he says now.  (You could do sort of an Apple/Mac guy ad - show the old Maverick McCain as James Garner speaking his lines, and the new John McCain as the John Hodgman character giving his new right-wing policy positions.)  There's LOTS of possibilities that are better than what they're doing now.

September 12, 2008 6:04 PM

cal80 said:

I don't think any kind of ads are going to help Obama at this point.  He hit a wall early on that still plagues him:  lack of experience.  Almost half of all voters see this as a barrier to accepting him as commander-in-chief.  Even the most brilliant ad won't help him with this perception.  His best hope is with the debates.  Watching him respond with confidence to hard questions could change minds.  He had a shaky performance at Saddleback, but last night he did better at the servce forum (I doubt too many undecideds watched that, though).  He can blow money on ads if he wants, but it would be best to take time to brush up on his responses for the debates.  The first two are the most important.  The third debate is scheduled so late that many absentee voters will already be casting their votes.

September 12, 2008 6:08 PM

jss02002 said:

Noam,

Maybe it's the ol' rope-a-dope.

I've been banging my head against the wall wondering why the Obama campaign hasn't adopted this line of attack.  You should ALWAYS go after your opponent's strength.  And you should always have a moral/character dimension to your attacks.  And this narrative is perfect because it's fits into one of America's archetypal narratives:  the fall.  What once was pure has now been corrupted.

But maybe, just maybe, the Obama campaign is waiting for McCain to sully his reputation with the media before they launch this attack in full force.  Imagine if Obama introduced this narrative two months ago.  It would have been received by an extremely skeptical media that completely, totally, and utterly believed in the integrity of John McCain.  And now?  The media wouldn't just agree with this narrative; they would actively promote it.

Now it seems to my untrained eye that Monday would be the day to unveil this attack.  Last week the McCain campaign jumped the shark so thoroughly that he lost the AP and was grilled on the View. (Talk about losing his base!)  It would bump Palin from the news cycle, and it would set up a powerful narrative for the first debate that brings the campaign back to Obama vs. McCain-Bush instead of Obama vs. Palin-McCain.  

-James

September 12, 2008 6:32 PM

ironyroad said:

I think the other angle worth considering is that if McCain has switched, as he has, every one of his earlier principles to curry the Evangelical base of the GOP, it's not only independents who should be suspicious of that, it's the evangelical base itself.  They know, in fact, that the only reason McCain picked Palin is that he was told by Rove et al that any other choice would lead to an implosion at the convention.

Obama should deploy ads and other media tools that emphasize that NOBODY can trust McCain any more, not liberals, not blue-collar conservative Democrats, not the evangelical base -- he'll toady to anyone to get a point or two in the polls.

In fact, there is something weird about the way in which he's now being dragged along on Palin's wake -- it's as if he doesn't have any say anymore and has just given up and goes with the flow.

That I find a bit disturbing and is imo one more negative against him and his capacity to make thoughtful, rational decisions in a crisis situation.

September 12, 2008 6:50 PM

tomeg said:

Maybe Obama could run an ad confronting McCain about the sex ed slur. Begin by showing a family, kids, pets at home watching TV, onscreen is the McCain ad. Voice over: "John McCain approves of showing your family this ad (camera zooms closer to watch the slimy ad) that is telling you Barack Obama wants to teach sex to your children. Maybe he doesn't know [show screen filling up with close ups of kids at school] that Senator Obama supported legislation [show parents dropping off kids at school] a program to protect your children from [screen fills up with pics of yucky looking sex predators both out of prison and behind bars - a red slash or the banned symbol covering each pic] from sex predators and kidnappers. But, John McCain voted against legislation that would provide your child x y z health child care etc. [McCain scowling as he speaks on the Senate floor, in the background legislation/ streaming Senate bills across the screen and 'no' or 'voted down' or black ban symbols superimposed]. Voiceover with display across screen "Doesn't he know the difference?" largest size emphatic  question "DOESN'T HE GET IT?.

September 12, 2008 7:26 PM

BHLnyc said:

I might suggest a variation on the theme. I'd drag out as many of McCain's colleagues and constituents as possible -- Senators, governors, residents of Arizona -- and do a series of spots with testimonials that laud the old McCain but which hammer away at the fact that he's just not the same guy. Draw stark contrasts between *Senator* McCain and *Candidate* McCain. Biden, Kerry and a few other of his Senate colleagues have done this to good effect in recent months.

The spot could end with some tag llne like: McCain, The Changed Candidate

September 12, 2008 7:59 PM

The Stump said:

In response to my post suggesting an anti-McCain ad for Obama, commenter jss02002 had an interesting

September 12, 2008 8:26 PM

ramboorider said:

Maybe he's just keeping his powder dry. We're all out here panicking over a convention bounce. There's another month and a half PLUS left in this campaign and the debates haven't even started. And at what may be his high point, McCain has essentially pulled into a tie in a campaign where Obama has the stronger ground game for a change. They may not feel the need to go hard negative and, to the extent they have to, not yet. They've done some negative ads, but not enough to change the overall perception of Obama. My bet (certainly my hope) is they've got all sorts of negative stuff in the can and ready to go if they need it in the last couple of weeks of the campaign. When there's not enough time left for the McCain folks to effectively refute them and when time is too short for serious blowback.

I'm not panicking. I take nothing for granted and I NEVER expect to win. But I think the campaign is doing just fine.

September 12, 2008 8:26 PM

jayfram said:

I LOVE the "Changed" Candidate - That's brilliant!  

September 12, 2008 8:42 PM

cal80 said:

Well, maybe he should use an ad showing Whoopi Goldberg on The View today asking McCain if he is going to reinstate slavery in the US.  That should do it.

September 13, 2008 12:42 AM

Bulbman1066 said:

The demographics are lining up.  On one side are the affluent liberal snobs who love Obama because he assures them that if they vote for him he will in his majesty forgive them their white guilt.  On the other side we have the solid lower middle/working class people who are immune to this and other upper middle class neuroses.  Obama has attracted privileged women who have the wealth and leisure to indulge in leftover 70's feminoid BS.    By contrast, John McCain and Sarah Palin appeal to strong, independent women who live in the real world.

What delicious irony!  The upper crust leans to the left, the working class leans right.  Only in America.

September 13, 2008 12:43 AM

ChanRobt said:

Noam, maybe they don't run your spot in the swing states.  But, they run it for sure in Washington, D.C.  Then Obama is guaranteed to win D.C.

September 13, 2008 1:32 AM

gregstolhand said:

BHO should start referencing the '00 version of McCain constantly, lament that he is not running as then America would have a REAL choice for how to change and improve the country.  Keep hammering that it is 8 years later and every major policy position that McCain had that earned him the Maverick label have been flip-flopped.  BHO can say that if that if the '00 McCain were here we would actually be discussing policy, but since his ambition has taken over we are stuck with standard politics.  Express disappointment because a real debate is what we need to move the country forward.

You get the benefit of saying that it is 8 years later (age inference) and you can priase the honor of the other candidate (in the past) but only the one that does not exist in the present and hammer the present version incessantly and viciously.

September 13, 2008 8:07 AM

BHLnyc said:

Bulbman is apparently a dim bulb.

September 13, 2008 8:33 AM

Wandreycer1 said:

Go Roi Go!

September 13, 2008 8:58 AM

Wandreycer1 said:

Why can't surrogates and/or former friends of McCain make ads too?  Why the hell not?  Lots of people of all parties ad persuasions are revolted by McCain's shocking flip flops and bold face lies.

My PA relatives who were undecideds say "I have no idea who this man is."

USE IT!  How is this not fair game?

As far as McCain's age - I've consistently discouraged age-ism when discussing his fitness for office.  No more, this isn't even age-ism.  

It's objectively stating that McCain seems like he's on planet ozone, either one foot in the grave or so rich he doesn't even know how most people live/suffer (he's said as much, quite calmly).  It doesn't matter. Its a gestalt of age and inclination.  He's out of it.  

Use the fact  that he repeats his POW story over and over instead of discussing what he plans to do about the problems facing this country.  I ask again: what does John McCain plan on immediately doing to halt the destruction of our middle class (which is at REALLY separates us from the rest of the world, that and what used to be the Justice Department), the escalation of various wars, global warming.  

Get someone out there to scream in to the camera:  

"JohnMcCain:

Stop hiding behind your Rove machine!  

Come out and say what your exact plans are to help the middle class NOW.   Stop treating the American people so disgracefully.  Respect them enough to give real answers to this question.  Stop pandering, stop lieing.  The American people demand specifics from you, not filth!"

Why be squeamish?  This is not only totally fair, its Obama's absolute OBLIGATION.

September 13, 2008 9:14 AM

jts44 said:

Maybe TNR should have a "Write an Ad for Obama!" contest.  

September 13, 2008 10:32 AM

gaiseric455 said:

I completely agree with Tep: If Obama's main "positive" narrative is one of change then he should have been slamming McCain all summer simply for being too old. For some reason, there seems to be this idea that going explicitly and unabashedly negative will turn off voters. It seems pretty clear, however, that people may theoretically object to ad hominem attacks but that they are very effective if done correctly.

In particular, if you're gonna run a commercial stressing McCain's long career and age, how about this kind of opening:

John McCain has had a long career, filled with ups <insert photo of McCain from 30 or 40 years ago doing something> and downs <pic of shaking hands with Bush> but now....

Why haven't we seen any pictures of a very young McCain--the contrast is striking.

September 13, 2008 10:53 AM

wagonjak said:

There are so many ways of attacking McKrusty in a valid and devastating way...I would love to help script and image some of them...

...I do think the ad attacking McC for being old is not very effective and might turn off older voters who are more likely to vote then younger ones.

September 13, 2008 12:20 PM

johnchen1 said:

I think somebody mentioned it above, but everyone remembers George Bush in that skit looking for WMD under the desk. The ad can run that video with the narrator asking "Where's John McCain?" and continue asking about tax cuts,  drilling, Rove-style politics, and the rest. Adding some kind of music indicating Flip - Flop would be good and ending up with Bush "finding" McCain can be the finale. Maybe both this ad and your ad can run alternately. Sort of the light touch versus the ominous touch combo. And different themes can be interspersed in the search. Even one about Sarah Palin could be worked in. Another ad can be using McCain's own quotes against him. People have criticised Obama for "lying about McCain's statements" but by having him speak the words will give them substance. These methods were done with devastating effective against John Kerry and destroyed his ability to gain traction. There's no reason not to turn these ads against McCain, now that he has embraced Rovian Politics.

September 13, 2008 1:25 PM

The Stump said:

Sticking with the rope-a-dope theme, I&#39;d say early next week is the perfect time for an Obama ad

September 13, 2008 2:10 PM

henson1d said:

Simple.

The Mighty McCain has sold out.

September 13, 2008 2:39 PM

cal80 said:

You guys are in the OODA loop.  Read Michael Barone's article about how fighter pilots operate and understand why these proposals won't work.

September 13, 2008 3:23 PM

jayfram said:

According to today's Wall Street Journal, Obama is airing a new ad this weekend focusing on McCain's age.  Doesn't sounds like it goes into the issue of the abandonment of all the positions he was supposed to be a "maverick" on. But I haven't seen them yet.

September 13, 2008 7:42 PM

RRB52 said:

    I agree with many of those above; it is necessary that McCain's policy reversals and outright lies be exposed without delay or excuse.  As for McCain's connection to Bush, an appropriate visual might be that photo showing McCain and Bush laughing over a birthday cake on the very day that Katrina struck New Orleans.  

September 13, 2008 7:49 PM

leertracy said:

I am amazed at how out-of-touch everyone here is. Doesn't anyone here watch The Daily Show?

www.youtube.com/watch

September 14, 2008 1:10 AM

jayfram said:

Are you saying the Obama campaign should rely on the Daily Show to counterattack against McCain?  Good strategy there.  

September 14, 2008 1:49 AM

remainder said:

I like your idea, Noam (though saying it's a way to "frame" McCain is a bit retarded).  And I don't think clean politics entails pulling one's punches.  All it requires is that you be truthful and straightforward.

September 14, 2008 1:52 AM

remainder said:

Oh, and I do think we'll see an ad like you suggest.  I'm guessing they're just working on the timing.

September 14, 2008 1:55 AM

apex_naturalism said:

No, No, NO

That is too subtle.

We have to go after his trust-worthiness and ability to lead. Mu ad:

<John McCain.  He buckled to the right wing of his party [clip of before and after policy statements]. He buckled to advisors when it came to running an honest campaign. [clip of him saying he would run a positive campaign].  He buckled to Washington lobbyists [clip showing newspaper article about lobbyists running his campaign]. and when it came to choosing the person who would be a heartbeat away from the presidency he buckled again. [clip showing articles stating Palin most unqualified VP in modern history]. John McCain, buckling for the 21st century. [clip showing text with leadership beeing crossed out or erased from the quote and buckling replacing it,>

This ad suggest that McCain hasn't made these decisions because he is unscrupulous but rather because he is weak. It begs the question of who in reality would be controlling a McCain presidency. Palin?

September 14, 2008 12:35 PM

gurdjieff66 said:

I'm not sure what Obama should do, what ad he should run.  It is occured to me what McCain's most effective line has been: "I said I would rather lose an election, than have my country lose a war."  

It perfectly frames the personalities of two men in terms of selflessness and patriotism vs. ambition and entitlement.  

Like I said, I'm not sure what Obama should do to counter, but it helps for starters to REALIZE how the race is being framed.  

September 14, 2008 2:26 PM

jayfram said:

I just found the new Obama campaign ad that was mentioned in the WSJ yesterday.  Unbelievably, the theme of the message is that McCain HASN'T changed since 1982 (doesn't know how to use a computer, etc.).  While I can see how that plays into Obama's theme that he is the change candidate, it misses the opportunity to show how McCain HAS changed since 2000 (see discussions above).  Given the message of this ad, I find it hard to see how they are going to be able now to pivot to highlight these changes.  Aren't they reading this blog for god's sake?  ;-)  Ergg.. On the other hand I can see this ad appealing to the younger voters who are part of Obama's base.  ...

September 14, 2008 3:34 PM

esmense said:

Obama is running the ad he needs to run right now -- questioning McCain's choice of a high powered lobbyist to run his "transition" team. In doing so he is directly attacking the argument McCain has been making since the convention and his Palin pick -- that he is a "reformer."

That is the argument the Obama campaign must counter forcefully. He has to relentlessly make the point to voters that HE is the agent of change and McCain is not.

Partisans are offended that McCain is "lying" about Obama. But, independent, less partisan and "swing" voters tend to not only expect politics to be dishonorable, they believe both sides indulge in the same kind of conduct.

Forget Palin. Forget Rove. Focus like a laser on refuting the argument that has brought McCain from behind; the absurd notion that he is a "reformer."

The beauty of that argument is that it DOES powerfully appeal to those independent, less partisan, swing voters who will decide this election. That's the argument Obama has to destroy in order to beat McCain.

September 14, 2008 5:33 PM

klosko said:

aboslutely

that is excellent

to take things one step farther,  i would like to hear about the keating five

this is not consistent with the kind of campaign obama would like to run

but if he runs that kind of campaign he will lose

with all the republicans screaming about rezko and ayres, is it conceivable that they would not be harping on the keting five if it had been obama?

September 14, 2008 5:43 PM

The Stump said:

Well, it&#39;s not exactly what I was proposing , but it&#39;s not a bad start. And the timing couldn&#39;t

September 15, 2008 1:32 PM

moomaw1 said:

Best way for Obama to win?  (And I see that the panicky screams have already started, although today's Gallup and Rasmussen polls give McCain an edge of only 2 points -- a very small bounce.)  Hammer the following point at the end of every single TV ad he runs from now on: "If you want a third term of Bush-Cheney, vote for McCain."

What could McCain possibly do to counter this?  By now he's publically Crazy-Glued himself to virtually every significant economic and military policy of Bush -- who, lest we forget, still has a 70-30 negative approval rating.  Is he suddenly going to announce that he really dislikes the policies of that awful man after all?

As for Sarah Palin: the Obama camp should whisper the fact in reporters' ears (although not, I think, run direct ads on the subject) that until 2 years ago she was a member of a church whose pastor makes Jeremiah Wright look like Albert Schweitzer -- and who has announced that:

(A)  Israeli Jews deserve to be murdered by the Palestinians because they haven't converted to Christianity;

(B) Everyone who voted for John Kerry is going to Hell; and

(C) The godly should begin gathering in Alaska because the Book of Revelations indicates that it's the refuge where the godly will escape the tribulations of Armageddon.

Now, Obama and McCain have both indicated that they tolerate the droolings of Wright and Jerry Falwell (Mac spent the last two years of the latter' s life warmly cuddling up to him, despite that public statement Falwell and Pat Robertson issued two days after 9-11 announcing that it was God's just punishment on the US for supporting gay rights).  But there's no indication that Obama and McCain actually believe Wright's and Falwell's droolings -- they just tolerated them out of political cynicism.  There are disturbing indications, however, that Palin geninely is a serious religious nut.  Consider her announcement that the people of Alaska should "pray" that Congress would vote for that natural gas pipeline -- that is, they should pray that God would cloud the minds of Congressmen who honestly thought the thing was a bad idea so that they'd vote for it anyway.  Maybe after she becomes Veep she can suggest that Americans pray that God will cloud Bin Laden's mind enough that he'll voluntarily turn himself in.  I mean, the policy possibilities are endless.

September 16, 2008 12:14 AM

The Stump said:

I&#39;ve been underwhelmed by some of Obama&#39;s ads, particularly his efforts to define McCain . But

September 20, 2008 10:44 PM