Nervous Dems Give Obama Stupid and Redundant Advice

If it's September in an election year, it's a Democratic media train wreck.

No matter how the Democrats are doing, it seems, their top strategists and party elders spend September publicly "worrying" that they look weak -- which is weak. Or they lament how their party lost its message -- and what could be more off message than advancing media coverage about how "the message has gotten away"? Just describing that is lame, let alone doing it.

Finally, some Democrats gesture towards a supposedly constructive iteration of the September blues, airing their advice in public. For prominent politicos, this is still an absurd tack. Why tell The Washington Post that Democrats "should" attack McCain harder when you could just go ahead and do it? Right there, in your interview with The Post! Parceling out tips through the paper, an indulgent exercise in metapolitics, is not only ineffective, it's redundant.

Take the "big three" tips from "concerned" Democratic strategists that Mark Halperin announced on ABC'S World News Sunday. I pick this example not for its brilliance, but because it is representative of the CW:

1. Stop Focusing on Palin.
2. Attack McCain Harder.
3. Prioritize the Economy.

Starting in reverse, the economy advice is redundant. Obama's current stump speech prioritizes the economy. His positive ads are all about economic populism -- and pocketbook arguments about energy. He's made economic policy the top priority for his surrogates, from Sen. Joe Biden in Michigan (today) to both Clintons in Florida. Do the Dems who are peddling this advice actually read the paper?

Moving on, yes, everyone wants to hit McCain harder. "Take him out!," roars the base, from union halls to blog meet-ups to Chelsea fund-raisers. "But don't go too far," caution the same political sages, mindful of Obama's promise of New Politics and the challenges facing non-traditional candidates, from black to brown to female.

Obama and his team have definitely heard it all. They turned up the heat last week, calling McCain a liar and launching more personal attack ads.

At some point, you'd think party strategists would start reinforcing this escalation -- even if they want more -- emphasizing the heavier fire to reinforce a Tough Obama narrative in the media, rather than undercutting his new attacks by telling Halperin that it's never enough. But if you thought that, you'd be wrong.

All Sarah, All The Time. Gov. Palin electrified the GOP's anti-abortion-crazed, media-bashing base and, apparently, boosted McCain's overall numbers. If a campaign adds one component and pulls ahead, it's logical that opponents would respond by attacking the source of the new mojo. So the Obama campaign's pushback on Palin makes sense. Also, are the same Democrats who clammer for more attacks on McCain really asking for less attacks on her?

"Despite speculation that Obama would frame the race as all about McCain," I reported last week, while traveling with Obama, "he has clearly decided Palin must be diminished before she can be ignored." That could turn out to be the wrong bet, but in this Palin-powered media environment, it is probably right. She is wowing her base, lying to the press, launching repeated false attacks on Obama -- that's not political behavior you can usually afford to ignore. Even if Democratic strategist Steve Elmendorf tells Obama, through a newspaper, naturally, that he should not talk about Palin "at all."

The best proof for the Nervous Nellie set, however, is probably a peek at that predictably savage Republican playbook. Here was the G.O.P. response to the selection of John Edwards as soon as it was announced in 2004, per CNN:

EDWARDS DRAWS GOP FIRE
John Kerry's choice of Senate colleague John Edwards as his running mate drew swift criticism Tuesday from some Republicans.... the Republican National Committee characteriz[ed] Edwards as a "disingenuous, unaccomplished liberal".... [the] Bush campaign... accus[ed] him and Kerry of voting "against our troops on the front lines"... The GOP also released a torrent of e-mails highlighting issues in which it said the two men had been at odds during the Democratic primaries.

Finally, since public advice is all the rage, here's my advice for the Democratic strategic class:

1. Stop Focusing on Obama.
2. Attack McCain Harder.
3. Be The Change That You Want to See in the World.

From the Washington Independent.

Follow Ari Melber on Twitter: www.twitter.com/AriMelber

Comments

[harriscrl3]

AMEN!! espeically to the advice to democratic strategist.

Carol

[NewAmerican]

well said, ari

[allonfla]

"Why tell The Washington Post that Democrats "should" attack McCain harder when you could just go ahead and do it? Right there, in your interview with The Post! Parceling out tips through the paper, an indulgent exercise in metapolitics, is not only ineffective, it's redundant." - FINALLY, someone gets it! I have always thought the same thing when I listen to these guys. These strategists waste valuable time with big papers and popular news programs criticizing Obama when they should be attacking Palin/McCain - dumb, real dumb. Even if you are worried, don't let the other guy see you sweat.

[JackWOrf]

Here's some advice that I just thought of: Stop spending 1400 jillion dollars on negative ads against McCain and Palin which will probably backfire on you anyway.

Spend 1400 jillion dollars gathering together the best economic thinkers in the USA and come up with a definite course of action to solve the current financial crisis. Pledge that you will follow this plan if you are elected and reveal who your economic advisors and cabinet picks will be.

I'm talking about people like Rubin and Greenspan, not 2-bit political hacks.

The American people need to see what Obama will DO as President, rather than just hearing more hot air.

As far as Obama hitting harder? Bad idea. I personally already perceive him as MUCH more negative than McCain. He will start looking like some angry, bomb-throwing, black dude, which will further turn off mainstream America.

[DemoMom]

Willie Brown (former mayor of San Francisco) is a good example of someone who needs to get a grip. These past 2 Sundays he has written in his column in the SF Chronicle about how the Obama campaign should be worried about Palin, how strong she is etc.......We know Willie likes a good pair of legs but, really - do we have to endure such defeatist writing from someone who claims to be a Democrat?
With that sort of attitude on our side, who needs a McCain campaign? If everyone listens to the likes of Brown, we might just as well throw in the towel now and concede defeat to the next neocon administration.
No way - no Palin - no McCain!!! Keep the faith!

[aprilshowers]

What everyone needs to do is stop and take a deep breath. McCain/Palin agenda is a reactionary agenda eroding our rights and our freedom of choice. The American people are not as stupid as the Republicans have taken us to be for the last 8 years. Once we, the people, understand what this truly extreme right wing agenda really is, the majority of us will reject it. Now, granted, just like the invasion of Iraq, we will not be able to discern it from the media. But word of mouth and campaign ads will get the message across. We must be diligent , positive and enthusiastic in getting our message out for Obama/Biden and unrelenting in letting the American people know just what this McCain/Palin ticket means.

[avraamjack]

.
Nobody cares about lies, lobbyists, McCain, Palin, Rove, Bush, etc.
.
Everybody cares about peace and prosperity.
.
Therefore, explicity state the choices. If you want peace and prosperity like the last Democratic administration brought, vote for the Democratic ticket. If you want war, recession and bankruptcy like the current Republican Administration brought, vote for the Republican ticket.
.
Spell it out, clearly and repeatedly.
.

[RobynMc]

Thanks for this article Ari! I've been wondering for weeks if these 'so-called strategists' are even following the Obama campaign. It seems that their advice is more of a reaction to the Press coverage, not the campaign itself. It's amazing how they buy into the identify created for them instead of changing it.
As you stated, Obama has been hitting the economy on the stump. The MSM chooses not to show clips of those statements in newcasts unless they include the words "lipstick" & "pig". For God's sake, the whole dust up over the "lipstick" comment was him discussing the Economy. Secondly, I thought the lessons of Kerry's Swiftboat fiasco was NOT to ignore attacks. Yet this is the advice they give regarding Palin? Lastly, as for the "attack McCain" meme - until the Press was willing to see McCain for who his truly is; any attack would have been turned into "Disrespectful Obama" and played right into McCain's victim strategy. Now that McCain is FINALLY seen for the liar he is, the attacks can be effective.
Thanks again for proving that sanity does live out in the political press somewhere.

[Df7702]

ditto