John McCain's Blunder

John McCain has made a terrible mistake.

Recognizing the likelihood that Barack Obama is going to be his opponent in the general election, John McCain has begun directing his attacks toward the Senator from Illinois. Our first taste was with McCain's victory speech in Virginia, where he criticized the "platitudes" that form the basis of the Obama candidacy. Days later, McCain began a line of attack that has continued into multiple news cycles, accusing Obama of reneging on a pledge he'd made to accept public financing in the general election.

On its own, it is generally a good line of attack against Obama. For all of his misguided policy positions, McCain is generally regarded by the media as trustworthy, and could benefit from shaping a debate to suggest that Obama is not. The problem of course is that John McCain does not have the kind of campaign finance record that he would want to share. The loan he took out to save his campaign was to be paid back by taxpayer dollars, not his own, through the federal matching funds program. A taxpayer funded bailout is certainly not the kind of scenario that proponents of public finance envisioned.

What's worse for McCain is that this may have been his best hand in a race against Obama, and he played it far too early. First, his strategists should have recognized that the best way to defeat Obama was to help Hillary defeat him first. John McCain fairs far worse against Obama than he does against Hillary in general election match-ups. Simply put, the best way to beat Obama is to avoid running against him.

Instead, McCain has opted to elevate Obama to the national stage, beginning the general election battle a few months early, marginalizing Hillary with every attack. To confound her problems, incredibly, she has taken to joining in on the attack against Obama on public finance, actually articulating publicly, a general election scenario which wouldn't include her.

McCain's first strategic move should have been to target Hillary, weakening her as a general election match-up while elevating her in the Democratic primary. Instead, it appears that McCain doesn't believe a Clinton nomination possible, and so wants to focus his energy where it will be needed most. Even so, the move was a terrible blunder... for other reasons.

Trust is an especially difficult angle from which to attack Obama. The trust he has built among his supporters is a substantial part of what drives his campaign. For McCain, there will be very few places to grasp for a deceitful Obama moment. But if he can succeed in shaking those foundations, it could prove worthwhile.

Public financing may well have been McCain's best opportunity. But rather than wait until the general election was in full swing, rather than wait until the media would give it above-the-fold attention, John McCain began his attacks before the race had begun. The story line is a negative one for Obama, and yet it's being dissipated, if not completely diluted, in the wave of momentum that Obama is currently riding. At a time when no one, not even serious political observers, have moved on to the McCain/Obama race, McCain dropped his best gambit in the trash. He gave a Page 1 story a Page 4 death.

The negative press will be blunted. Soon, Obama may give a definitive answer on public financing, ending the story and whatever value it may have had. When the timing is finally right for John McCain to bring it up, it will be a rehash, stale and not worthy of recycling.

The Obama campaign should take advantage of this moment by kicking the story out of the news cycle quickly. Obama should give a definitive answer against publicly financing the campaign. Like most of the best responses from the Obama campaign, the truth will be the appropriate spin.

After all, when Obama preserved the option to publicly finance his campaign, no one could have conceived that his campaign would already be financed by the public. The Obama fundraising operation has broken every record by staggering amounts, almost entirely from small donors. With over 900,000 donors, no special interest money, and less than three percent of the donor base maxed out, Obama could not have asked for a campaign to be more "of the people." The spirit of the pledge is being upheld. And more importantly, Obama owes something to the movement he has helped to create. Having told so many that their role in the campaign was essential, he has to let them participate.

Comments

[cheforacle]

Obama did address the issue in the USA Today yesterday in its op-ed page saying he had committed to negotiate vigorously with the GOP nominee about not only public financing but other aspects to ensure the race is fair. I do not have a link to it.

[mamacat]

Sen. McCain's biggest blunder is in not being the best candidate for the job.
He may look good in comparison to the Doofus, or Huckabee, or Romney, but he is definitely not what the country needs or wants - another incompetent Republican.

[BNAUGHTY]

Nice piece Dylan. Well reasoned. Cheers.

[crimlawdfender]

Does the Clinton campaign wonder why their negative attacks on Obama are not working? Let me tell you. Obama has not only created a strong campaign, he has created a strong social movement. His supporters become part of the social movement and every time there is a negative attack on Obama, each supporter takes it as a personal attack on him/herself. The only thing I don't understand is why McCain is starting with the negative attacks on Obama when it clearly isn't working for Clinton.

Keep it coming Clinton and McCain, every negative statement you make about Obama, including those comments made by your spouses and campaigns, only make his supporters more resolute in their support and willingness to donate more time and money to his campaign. Not to mention the fact that the negative attacks only make his supports, as well as your own, dislike you more.

[scepticalobserver]

With the exceptions of Obama and Huckleberry who have exceeded expectations and Edwards, who played his cards against a stacked deck, the rest have looked like novices.

Two will go down in history; The Clinton's managed to lose it all to a skinny black kid who had never played before and they had the money, the cards and the umpires writing the rules for them. Oops, they forgot the caucuses!
Rudy will get his own little note in history. He's going to become a textbook example of hubris.

The video of McCain strolling through the market in Baghdad will come to be as a mistake too. Especially if he's trying to exhibit competence.

[CanSoc]

"The spirit of the pledge is being held". What sophistry! This is like saying, as some on the libertarian right have done, that the absence of the welfare state can be compensated for by charitable giving. Obama made a firm pledge for public financing but now that his campaign is rolling in money, that was then and this is now. Just admit he's broken his word on grounds of expediency and leave it at that, don't make an argument that only Obamaniacs and Obamaphiles will swallow. Public campaign financing, like welfare state funding, comes from all taxpayers, the Obama campaign's riches, like charitable giving, have come from only a section of it.

[RogerHWerner]

If personally don't care one whit what the GOP or McCain thinks about Obama's campaign financing. Obama should put McCain's nuts in a crusher and squeeze until they pop and I do hope he will use every nickel he has been given to do it. And what Loewe discusses is hardly sophism but merely hardball politics, something with which the GOP should be familiar.

[zcosca]

A bit of sophistry, yes, but also with an air of truth. Nonetheless, the last part, about having the people join in, still applies, whereas accepting taxpayer dollars is to take from those who are not interested in joining as well as those who are opposed, which isn't so nice after all...though i guess that could be said is what happens in a democracy.
But we agree in essence, he needs to make clear times have changed, new information is available, and while he might be happy to negotiate, the likelihood of him coming to an agreement on something he never pledged to do when it is neither in his nor his supporters' best interest, is low.

[BUBBY]

Now that McCain has sucked up to Bush 41 he won't need to worry about money. The Bushites will see to it that he is taken care of for toeing the party line and keeping alive their opportunity to plunder our treasury with never ending war.

[RogerHWerner]

Don't count on this. I don't care what the media thinks or how the polls are interpreted, McCain will lose the general election and few in the GOP intend to back a loser. They may give money to McCain as a way of hedging their bets but Obama is going to be the favorite and he will defeat McCain by a wide margin. Hillary Clinton would defeat him as well. Further, Democrats will win large majorities in both houses of Congress. That's been my prediction for some time.

[BUBBY]

From your lips to God's ears Roger!

[BitJam]

CORRECTION: Loewe said the Obama campaign has nearly 500,000 donors. That was inaccurate. He should have said the Obama campaign already has nearly 500,000 donors THIS YEAR. This is an incredible achievement and the number of 2008 donors is growing rapidly. In the past 24 hours he gained another 80,000, nearly ten times the daily average in previous weeks.

But if you count ALL donors from last year as well as this year then the total is around 900,000 and they are shooting for a million.

[nunzia]

According to today NYTimes site and Olbermann, this ain't the worst McCain blunder.

[mishte]

actually, John McCain's biggest blunder is on the front page of the New York Times right now (online version-will be in print tomorrow).

[SShaw490]

Apparently, McCain's biggest blunder is his inability to control himself around a female lobbyist. Talk about a double-whammy - not only apparently having an affair, but an affair with a LOBBYIST? The only way that could be worse would be if it had been a MALE lobbyist...

[illinoisan]

The worst blunder to date is McCain's criticism of Obama's readiness to attack targets in Pakistan without getting Musharaf's okay. Just tonight I saw a news report showing Bush saying as much himself to Wolf Blitzer and then showing the recent example of such an attack. McCain's idiocy on what's supposed to be his strong suit was highlighted and inescapable.

[BNAUGHTY]

exactly, that in conjunction with O's foresight on IRAQ... I believe help blunt any criticism of his foriegn policy "experience"... I will take sound judgement and fresh ideas over "experience" anytime.

[lboucher]

Hillary please name for me an Obama accomplishment!

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/02/20/sot.clinton.new.york.cnn

[ProudLiberalDan]

The Republican machine and conservative movement may hate both John McCain and Hillary Clinton for different reasons, but they really secretly wanted Hillary as the nominee because they believed that would hold their crumbling coalition together.

However, don't be naive in this. The Republican machine will have no problem rallying around McCain and the conservative movement will swallow their pride to do what they feel they have to do to hold on to their crumbs of power through McCain.

The conservative movement invested everything in George W. Bush. His failed presidency disproved all of their failed policies. However, a Republican winning will prevent history regarding their movement as a failure. As Romney's empty-suit, pandering campaign showed, the conservative movement will align with anyone to maintain a sense of relevancy.

DO NOT BE NAIVE IN THIS. They will launch the dirtiest campaign we've ever seen. For starters, they will use Barack's whole name for six months: "Barack Hussein Obama", hoping for "Bradley" or "Wilder" effect.

McCain's campaign may have secretly preferred to run against Hillary, but anyone who thinks the Conservatives won't ultimately do what they have to do is beyond naive.

Obama will not be able to just "rise above" the onslaught that's coming. He will have to fight before, during and probably after election day to win power. He's capable of it. But his naive supporters are not doing him any favors underestimating the conservative movement.

Ask yourself this. The neoconservatives told 935 lies to mislead the nation into war under false pretenses against the wrong country. WHAT WON'T THEY DO to hold on to their remains of power?

[illinoisan]

Not to councel naivety by any means, but I've watched negative attacks against Obama since the 2004 primaries and they always end up backfiring.

[MsLiz]

"...they will use Barack's whole name for six months: Barack Hussein Obama"

Go for it, Sidney!
(With apologies for any Sidneys in the audience.)

[poppaculture]

Because he'll need to "react" to negative framing from 527 groups, Obama cannot accept (or be limited by) federal funding.

[illinoisan]

Agreed. He's inoculated by the fact that his donor base is 600,000 or so small donors. Limiting our contributions really is anti-1st Amendment.

[scepticalobserver]

Agreed! He needs to defend himself and since he can't coordinate with any 527, he would be allowing others to control his fate.