Capitol Hill Caution

Cross-posted at OpenLeft.com

As readers of OpenLeft know, I am one of those folks who personally doesn't like to criticize the Democratic Presidential nominee once the general election campaign gets underway. For me, as I have written, whatever faults they exhibit in the campaign almost never outweigh the risk of doing anything to damage their chances of winning. I believe in gritting my teeth and muttering curses to myself whenever they disappoint me, but not saying much critically in public and doing whatever I am asked to do to help the team win.

However, when the campaign is drifting seriously off course and threatening their chances to win, I make an exception on the no criticism rule. And I fear we're reaching that point. I think I know what the problem is, too. It's that Capitol Hill Caution has taken over the campaign.

It's no accident that the only two Democrats to win the Presidency since 1968 were governors who were from small states, far away from DC, unaffected by the Culture of Caution that tends to grip Democrats on Capitol Hill, and that those nominees most shaped by the Capitol Hill culture in that same period- Humphrey, McGovern, Mondale, Gore, Kerry- all ended up losing. Good legislators are consensus builders, good at crafting compromises, always aware of all the ideological and regional factions you need to get the votes. They tend to be more naturally cautious than a governor or mayor or general with executive experience, and more cautious than a candidate trying to win a national election ought to be.

My hope was that Obama would be more like JFK in that although he was a Senator, he was enough of an outsider and confident enough in himself that he was not infected by the Culture of Caution. Much of the time in the campaign he has shown that kind of confidence and strength. But I fear that, at least for the moment, the Capitol Hill Culture of Caution has taken hold of the campaign.

I'm not even talking about the much commented-on move to the center. While, as I have written, I don't think he needed to do this and in fact felt like a more open call for bold new thinking would have been a better general election strategy, I haven't minded the centrist shift as much as some others in progressive politics. It is, after all, a pretty predictable playbook move, one that most candidates in both parties have done for many years. And the Westen/Greenberg research I wrote about the other day showed that while Democrats could take clear stands on controversial issues and still win, it also showed that centrist-sounding inoculation language on those issues was necessary to win majorities on those issues.

What I'm talking about instead is the sense of overall caution that seems to have utterly infected the campaign. Instead of having the confidence to win the bigger argument on investing in alternative energy production and conservation, they make the shift on drilling. Instead of pushing back firmly and assertively on the race card accusation, they have the campaign's reply be "No, we're not playing the race card." Instead of having the confidence to really negotiate with McCain on debate formats, they fell into the we'll-just-do-what-candidates-have-always-done formats. Instead of having the confidence to lay out some of his good new ideas on foreign policy that are clearly different from the Bush doctrine in his widely watched Berlin speech, he stuck to cautious generalities. Instead of having the confidence to back up his strong and effective primary rhetoric on FISA and NAFTA, he cautiously moved towards the conventional wisdom.

I am haunted by this because of my past experience with Capitol Hill-shaped "wisdom" around elections -- being told by my brilliant young friend David Plouffe, who was running the DCCC in 1998, that the PFAW/MoveOn.org time to move on regarding impeachment campaign was a huge mistake, when in fact it was the theme that ended up turning the tide on congressional elections in our favor that year; being told by Gore's people in 2000 that if they just didn't respond to the NRA's attacks on the gun issue, the issue wouldn't have an impact; being told by Gephardt's top aides in 2002 that the only way to win the congressional elections that fall was to "take the war off the table" so that Democrats could get on with other issues; being told by Kerry's team in 2004 that if they just ignored the Swift Boaters, they wouldn't get any attention.

Caution kills when it comes to national elections, and the caution of my friends in Obamaland is hurting him. It's why despite the good coverage of the overseas trip and one gaffe after another by McCain, Obama is drifting down in the polls. And in an election where it is very likely we will lose some older blue collar white voters a Democrat would normally get, caution will kill us in the fall by dampening the enthusiasm Obama has sparked among young voters and new voters in the primary.

The Obama campaign's caution is allowing the McCain's campaign to define Obama and the terms of the debate -- and as Drew Westen points out here, they are doing much of it at the unconscious level. Obama needs to be direct about confronting the image of him that the McCain team is trying to create. Unfortunately, as the stories above suggest, the Democratic establishment has generally tended to be fearful about confronting their attackers directly. On impeachment, on war and national security, on Swift Boat attacks, on NRA attacks about guns, on immigration, on way too many issues, the establishment Democratic response has been to avoid the issues on which they are being attacked. But our recent history has proven again and again that avoidance of problematic attacks doesn't work -- you have to have the confidence to answer back and define the debate in your own terms.

I feel the tightness in my friends in Obamaland: they know that all the dynamics favor the Democrats, that McCain is a weak, uninspiring candidate running a weak, uninspired campaign. They know they should be winning this thing, and they are playing not to lose, which is the worst thing you can do in Presidential politics. The Obama team at the top hasn't been good at getting help or letting people in the door, because they feel sure that if they stay in control of the message, they will win. But, to my wonderful friends on the inside of the campaign, it's time to loosen the reins a little, not be so tight and careful and cautious, because you are in real danger with the course you are on.

Comments

[BADEN]

HillBill defined Obama.
McCain just picked up the playbook out of the garbage can.

That's black and white.
Literally.

Pathetic, isn't it.

[tyrdofwaitin]

Very nice assessment of the Obama campaign doldrums: They're in the doldrums because they are not taking the risks of principle and change they were built on. The fact is that Obama has to worry less about the people who might vote McCain and more about the people who will be energized to vote for him if he comes out swinging.

Senator Obama: Even Martin Luther King, Jr. came out swining when he had too!

[MalleusMaleficarum]

This column provides a sage bit of advice to a campaign that is stalled in the doldrums -- with everything now riding on his decision for the Vice-Presidential running mate, Obama needs to reinvigorate his message with a new jolt of fresh adrenalin then knockout McCain-Romney or rope-a-dope them into submission.

[PoliticalAnimal]

The election is Obama's to lose. But I agree - it looks like he's running a classic Kerry campaign ...

[bacaja]

Perhaps O's final mission will be to prove that "nice guys really do finish last."

[bacaja]

Obama needs to sign Hillary on as VP IMMEDIATELY and sic her on McCain with
a relentless series of merciless flesh tearing TRUTH.

[deecee22]

We 10% of UNDECIDED Is suffering from the OIE (obama ignorance excuse)
we don't really know who he is
he is not one of us....

[JennyJay]

This is a GREAT ARTICLE, terrific insight, and - right on the mark. So now, how can you, or us, get this extremely important message out to the Obama people?
Everything you said is what the Obama campaign is doing right now, being overly cautious, and it is beginning to look bad for a good outcome.
Obama HAS TO START THROWING MUD at McCain, and soon. You beat a bully by stomping on
his pea-sized head, you do it fast, and you do it tough, mean and dirty as possible.

[joebhed]

I guess I am not so sure that the image of Obama that is being portrayed is anything but who he really is.

As for the level of debate, the great orator seems to have a limited vocabulary when it comes to standing up for the principles that he told his followers they could believe in.

Like his energy, so-called, policy.

Now, its change, a.k.a. political compromise, you can believe in.

Every day.

Not much work for them Repug hacks.

[JimR]

Let's all calm down. It's still summer, when most people aren't really following presidential politics, and the Olympics are poised to command everybody's attention for the coming 2 weeks. Obama is taking a vacation soon, prior to the convention, and when he comes back on the trail, I'm betting he's going to hit it with full force.

McCain is going DOWN!

[FreedomFries]

So far, the battle is between an Islamic elite poindexter and a maverick war hero with a great sense of humor.
Obama needs to use the video clips of McCain sleeping in the Senate, singing Bomb Bomb Iran, claiming he can come up with billions of dollars out of the blue, and clips of the Keating apology, etc.
If Obama is relying on intelligence winning against ignorance, he has picked the losing side.

[justobserve]

Agree 100%! Excellent analysis.

[BCubedReg]

I couldn't agree with you more. O needs to be forceful and direct in outline his ideas and strategies, and in addressing the political attacks from his opponent. Not the next day or the next week., IMMEDIATELY. Otherwise McC will dictate the direction of the campaign season.

[ashenthorn]

Look - the Rev Wright episode has largely removed any largesse that Obama previously had among a skeptical white America. They haven't abandoned him, but now they are now watching him very carefully for signs that Wright's attitude and demeanor are representative of the "real Obama". The last two weeks of juvenile humor, Paris Hilton and mocking Obama as "The One" is a concerted effort to goad Obama into making angry, aggressive responses and counter charges. If Republicans can successsfully caricature Obama as the "angry black candidate" - heaping attack after attack on his elderly opponent, he is in serious trouble. Obama, seen in good humor laughing off the sillyness of the Republicans and getting right back to the issues, is the right way to go.

[gopindrag]

You make a very useful observation. But where are the surrogates, the 527 attack dogs?

[gemcando06]

Yeah. Where are the other Democrats ? Maybe after Obama gets formally nominated.

Meanwhile, McCain is taking orders from the old policy GOP - who cannot be trusted to abandon him before he gets formally nominated. He reads everything he says from a music stand.

[Manx]

I keep waiting for the Obama campaign to begin but for the past two months, McCain has kept Obama on the defensive. So far, Obama has allowed the McCain campaign to define him. Obama needs to take the offensive and put McCain on the defensive. That should be easy. As an enabler of George W. Bush's policies, McCain has a lot to be defensive about - the war in Iraq, lack of credibility and integrity, the privatization of Social Security, tax cuts for the rich, etc, etc. The list goes on. The passive nature of Obama's campaign reminds me of the Kerry campaign.

[PumaAnn]

I think that's leadership. Mac isn't constrained by gender or party back-room deals.