Yes, McCain's Attack Ads Are Pathetic, But Obama Can't Assume that Voters See It

As we all know, John McCain has gone negative. And he has done so in an especially egregious and clumsy way, resorting to lies and obvious pandering in an effort to scare voters away from Barack Obama.

But here's the thing: It's working. And it's time for Obama and the Democrats to recognize that fact in crafting a response.

Nowhere is the McCain bungling strategy actually succeeding better than on the issue of offshore oil drilling. Every piece of evidence says that this kind of exploration will do nothing to help the price of gas in the short term, and it certainly won't do anything to help the energy and global warming crises the country is now facing. And yet, McCain keeps hammering Obama in his ads, saying that Obama is against lower gas prices because he won't support offshore drilling. And the statements in these attacks are blatantly dishonest, mischaracterizing both Obama's positions and the effects of this kind of exploration.

By any reasonable analysis of McCain's strategy, it should not be working. To a rational observer, the attacks smell of desperation and reveal a candidate without a plan, and they should be driving voters straight into the Obama camp.

And yet they're not.

A Rasmussen survey on the offshore drilling issue last week found that 57 percent of respondents favored offshore drilling, which makes sense when you consider that 56 percent of those asked thought that offshore drilling would cause gas prices to fall. In Florida, a recent poll revealed that 60 percent of the people supported drilling.

In other words, more than half of the American people (based on the polls, anyway) are relying on false data to make their judgments. On last night's Countdown With Keith Olbermann, Paul Krugman cited a finding from Bush's Energy Information Administration last year that offshore drilling would produce no oil until 2017, and the effect on pricing would be insignificant. The EIA also reported in May that drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would not result in oil production until 2018, and the effect on pricing would be a reduction of 75 cents a barrel (less than one percent of the current price) in 2025. Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a senior advisor to the McCain campaign, admitted to the Los Angeles Times in June that offshore drilling would have no immediate effect on gas prices.

So if it's crystal clear that offshore drilling won't lower prices at the pump, how is McCain turning this into a winning issue for his campaign?

On Countdown, Krugman said that Obama has fallen into the trap of thinking, "This is so ridiculous, nobody is going to believe (it)." Krugman thinks Obama was being "dismissive" when he needed to be "outraged" and come out with a strong statement to the effect of: "(McCain) is insulting your intelligence, he is really doing bad stuff." I think Krugman is right, and the Obama campaign has to take Krugman's advice and be more aggressive in fighting the obvious lies and distortions that McCain is shoveling into the marketplace of ideas.

But what Krugman is really saying is that voters are uninformed and/or uninterested, and that Obama has to take action based on that assumption. Sadly, I think the evidence supports Krugman's premise, but I'm outraged that this is the case. Yes, Obama is running for president, so, by definition, he has to make his case to the American people, but should the case have to be this hard? Shouldn't Americans themselves take the responsibility of understanding the basic issues being discussed in the campaign? Should a candidate really be responsible for spoon-feeding every last detail, pointing out obvious lies? As Krugman pointed out on Countdown, for a change, the press has done a pretty good job of reporting the facts on offshore drilling. It's disgraceful that 56 percent of Americans would believe that gas prices would be reduced, when the Bush administration and the McCain campaign have admitted they wouldn't be. Sure, Bush and McCain are out there saying the opposite, but Americans shouldn't be buying the lies.

But, again, they are.

In the Rasmussen daily tracking poll, Obama leads today by 45 percent to 43 percent. The numbers have been incredibly steady for the last two months: Between June 5 and August 1, Obama has never been higher than 48 percent or lower than 42 percent, and McCain has remained between 39 percent and 43 percent. In fact, the current percentage represents McCain's highest standing in the poll during this period.

In light of the fact that McCain is running with the burden of sharing party affiliation with a historically unpopular sitting president, in a bad environment for Republicans (a Rasmussen poll has Democrats ahead of Republicans 47 percent to 34 percent in a generic party congressional matchup), and with the electorate rejecting McCain's policies on his signature issue of Iraq (another Rasmussen poll had 52 percent of Americans saying that it's more important for the next president to bring the troops home from Iraq than to win the war there, and 63 percent of respondents want the American military out of Iraq within a year, regardless), the fact that the race is a virtual dead heat demonstrates how McCain's attack ads haven't hurt him.

That's why it is so important for the Obama campaign to take McCain's seemingly ridiculous attacks seriously, even though I think Americans need to take charge of their citizenship responsibilities and become more informed on the issues. Obama's team has to respond swiftly and powerfully to attacks, in a manner that voters will understand and relate to. Democrats need to make very clear, in simple terms, that McCain is working for big oil, not the American people. The campaign needs to get the facts out there, that McCain raised $1.1 million dollars from the oil industry in the last month, with three-quarters of it coming after his June 16 speech supporting offshore drilling. Obama has to loudly and forcefully relate that offshore drilling will not produce any immediate change in gas prices, and that the next president has an obligation to enact a broader energy policy to address the economic, national security and environmental ramifications of oil dependency. And it has to be made clear that offshore drilling will only serve to further enrich the oil companies, who, while Americans are suffering under the crushing heel of high gas prices, are raking in record profits off the backs of these citizens.

But no matter what Obama does between now and November 4, if the American people are going to allow themselves to be fooled, there is only so much progress he can make. The campaign can't simply assume that voters see how desperate, disgusting and inaccurate McCain's attack ads are, because the evidence seems to indicate that Americans are falling for McCain's lies. The United States is a democracy, and its citizens get the leaders they deserve. Let's hope they don't end up deserving John McCain.

Comments

[larmarch5]

RE: "but SHOULD the case have to be this hard? SHOULDN'T Americans themselves take the responsibility of understanding the basic issues being discussed in the campaign? SHOULD a candidate really be responsible for spoon-feeding every last detail, pointing out obvious lies?"
"Should" is a fantasy word. It doesn't matter what someone "should" do, think or be. It matters what they WILL do, think or be.
So Obama and his campaign has to take voters where they ARE, not where they SHOULD be. Informed voters might find this a odd, but we have to realize the "choir" is not the target audience. He has to present himself clearly and define for the uninformed voters who McCain really is.

[gemini08]

Very good post Mitchell.

I really hope the Obama campaign will step it up in the coming weeks... It would be SO EASY to craft an ad purely based on McCain's own statements and gaffes in recent interviews. His last three sit-downs with ABC and CNN (Wolf Bitzer and Larry King) alone should have given the Democrats ample ammunition - McCains platitude's about catching Bin Laden, knowing how to win wars, his statement that president Maliki wont ask the US forces to leave, based on the fact that McCain "knows him very well" (and despite the fact that Maliki had just endorsed Obama's timeline), his flip-flopping on taxes, his non-support of the GI bill, the list goes on.....

Also, why don't the Democrats use McCain's "at the end of my first term in office in 2013 speech" to paint HIM as presumptuous and out of touch?! Based on that speech one would think that McCain sees himself as a Messiah, as he just ticks of a list of all things he will have accomplished, like win the war in Iraq, balance the budget, catch Bin Laden, bring gas prices down....

Had Obama given that very same speech, the Republicans would have RIDICULED him. John Stewart on the Daily Show made a GREAT point about that, the clip is posted here:

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/08/01/the-daily-show-mccain-touted-his-accomplishments-missed-by-media-oh-and-the-hiltons-might-want-their-money-back/

[darlingdem]

McCain is successfully turning this crucial election into a referendum on Obama. Obama MUST NOT LET THIS HAPPEN. With so many Americans" strong disapproval of the Bush administration, THIS MUST BE A REFERENDUM ON A McCAIN PRESIDENCY BEING A THIRD BUSH TERM!! Obama"s ad of McCain and Bush together with the "same failed policies" graphic was a step in the right direction. However, they need to be relentless in getting out this message.

Also, Obama should milk Phil Graham"s "mental recession/a nation of whiners" comments for all they"re worth in a commercial. Include images of McCain"s $500 loafers and him riding in the golf cart with Bush Sr. to drive the point home.

While Obama"s at it, he should point out the hypocrisy of McCain calling Obama an elitist. Create an ad comparing their upbringings and personal finances. Juxtaposed against McCain"s world of wealth and privilege, Obama (a self-made man) has the ultimate AMERICAN success story to tell.

Finally, Obama had a very successful trip overseas. He should create an ad showing him on the world stage with heads of state, military commanders and our troops. Obama was warmly received and those were such powerful images"he did look very presidential. I don"t believe that we, as Democrats, should allow Republicans to turn Obama"s popularity and message of hope against him. I, for one, think it's A GOOD THING to see citizens of the world once again waving American flags...and embracing Obama and the change that he represents.

[barackobama4prez]

Yeah I don't think he assumes anything after the 2 terms of the current president.

[jennbeez]

Obama should run the clip of McCain singing Bomb Bomb Bomb Bomb Bomb Iran over and over and then ask if McCain's dream of bombing Iran comes true, then what does he plan to use for troops? Then run the "Yer drafted!" response he gave to the kid in the town hall meeting who asked him if he was too old to run for pres. That ad wouldn't be a sneaky underhanded attack of association of the Revrend Wright type. It would be the candidates own vacuous rhetoric coming back to haunt him.

They should let me run this thing. I have great ideas- all honorable and above board, I assure you.

[justobserve]

Agree! Whatever McCain attacked Obama with, he can counterattack strongly: age/young, inexperience/experience based on old, not current, info, contrast of views on specific issues, suing McCain's own news video clips.

[justobserve]

Correction: "using McCain's own news video clips"

[Pagon]

The more McCain's advertisements and pronouncements are analyzed, the more likely that their real funcions are obscured.
McCain's ads are doing exactly what they need to do for him to win.
1) Remind everyone, over and over, that Obama is black.
2) Give the closet racists a new "buzz phrase" they can use in polite company, so they can avoid saying, "I'll never vote for a n---er".
Old buzz phrases have to be replaced from time to time, as people come to realize what they really mean. For example: "He's too extreme." is no longer usable.
By the way, I'm a white male.

[missette]

Testing

[dorian39]

Well, now you see the stuff that Obama is made of.... he has come out in support of "limited off-shore drilling." What a piece of work. The man has no principles- only a rabid desire to win. Not only does he not deserve to win the election, the Democrats should rethink their love affair with this ideological giggilo and nominate HRC. He does a disservice to the Democratic party. He is not "the One," Hillary is- or anyone else for that matter who says what they believe. "We are who we've been waiting for"- I think not.

[timm553]

I just have to wonder how MANY things you don't get.

[Mitchell Bard - Huffpost Blogger]

Seriously, dorian39, with McCain changing his position on EVERY SINGLE MAJOR ISSUE in order to win the 2008 nomination, you are saying Obama has no principles?!?!!??!

By your own theory, you absolutely cannot, under any circumstances, vote for John McCain.

[budfox]

Bard,
Thanks, one of the best analyses I've read on what is now happening in the campaign.

American presidential campaigns are often decided by the "independent swing" voter , usually this is 15-20% of the electorate.

A more accurate description for the "independent Swing" voter is the "low info" voter, These "low info" voters are most susceptible to emotional based, factually irrelevant, campaigning.

Obama's diminishing poll numbers reveal the success of the McCain campaign's "low road".

I agree that Obama must go on offense in a big way, and not be particularly genteel about it. The "low info" voter is not moved by nuance, they need a hammer to make them react.

If Obama loses the election, this week will be a line of demarcation.

[jennbeez]

"A more accurate description for the "independent Swing" voter is the "low info" voter, These "low info" voters are most susceptible to emotional based, factually irrelevant, campaigning."

With all due respect, bullhonkey. I have been a registered independent for years because I want the freedom to choose between unpalatable alternatives in the primaries. I don't know how it works in the rest of the country, but that's how it works in NC. Only unaffiliated voters can vote in either party's primary.

Besides that, after observing the way BOTH dems and repugs act (dems are all brains and no guts, repugs are all guts and no brains), I refuse to associate my good name with either of them.

[Freesia2]

"independent Swing" voter is the "low info" voter, These "low info" voters are most susceptible to emotional based, factually irrelevant, campaigning."

Ouch. One of the 15-20% here and you just hurt my feelings budfox. (But then I am "emotion based".)

And keep your hammer to yourself. Or use it on yourself, please. Because you seem to have gotten the idea that Independents are incapable of appreciating nuance. We love a nice nuance. Why do you think we're Independent? We so rarely get it from the Republican or Democratic tickets. It's all or nothing, and one party gets all and the other gets nothing. Which means we all usually get nothing. And your real low information voter is the straight ticket voter, R or D. They hear a promise of getting it all, even knowing it's a lie, and they swing the lever.

Take it back budfox!

[larmarch5]

Hmmm, there's lots of data out there for independents like you. What do you think of McCain's ads? Do they appeal to you? Informed independents can make a list of policies under each candidate's name and check off what they like. Still in a quandry? Flip a coin till it comes up the way you want it.

[peterg76]

A complaint I often hear is that it's impossible to have an informed dialogue with voters when campaigning is dominated by 30-second advertising clips. But it's not impossible, merely difficult. It may take a little creativity, but there has to be an non-condescending effort to inform voters, to go over the heads of the media even, which has a vested interest in obstructing the truth. Reality is on your side - use it!

[darlingdem]

Obama doesn't have to get down to the same desperate level as McCain. But he does need to quickly and vigorously refute his lies. He should also go on the offensive against McCain on the candidate's major weaknesses:

* McCain is the real flip-flopper on everything from tax breaks for the rich...immigration...taking money from lobbyists...torture, etc. The maverick of 2000 has sold out to the rabid right wing of his party to the point that he is no longer recognizable.

* McCain's less than commanding grasp of the issues...as demonstrated by all of his gaffes on foreign policy, his weakness on the economy and so on.

* The combination of McCain's bad temper and hawkish world view...and whether we really want this man to have his finger on the button.

* McCain's involvement in the Keating 5 scandal.

* McCain's unimpressive academic record. Do we really want another slacker/frat boy for President?

* McCain's campaign increasingly being financed by big oil. (No coincidence that he's for off-shore drilling.)

All of these are legitimate issues that can be used against McCain...and it can be done in a tone that doesn't sound like Obama is mocking McCain.

While we've all been inspired by Obama's hopeful new kind of politics, it won't do us any good if he doesn't get elected. Once he's in the White House and turning things around, his re-election should be easier. Then maybe Rovian campaigns will finally be a thing of the past!

[swoosie1]

You know it bro...I watched the latest "Moses" ad and I realized that first, it was funny--sort of in an Jon Stewart way, and secondly, it was brilliant, in that it pokes bit gaping holes in the Obama framework of inevitability. It also renders the entire Obama campaign speech catalog completely overblown, useless, and laughable. Anybody who sees the Moses ad, will feel compelled to laugh out loud whenever they see Obama read that teleprompter from here on out. And if O does not have his words, he has nothing. So be sure to know that this is the big gun fire across the campaign bow and Obama better find a new strategy and direction, as this is clearly a big, useless, sinking ship that he has run aground.

[Mitchell Bard - Huffpost Blogger]

Well, swoosie1, you have done a good job of outlining the GOP view of the race.

I think I speak for many other Americans who saw the ad very differently.

I love how the McCain camp loves to say Obama only has words, no substance, when McCain is the one with no proposals of substance, only plattitudes that are empty beyond the surface. Obama is the one with more detailed plans. Go on the two campaign sites and compare substance. I think you'll be unhappy with the difference in detail.

[larmarch5]

And you support John McCain's position on . . .? Are you satisfied at just voting against someone? How about your local, state and congressional races? Got opinion? Or just being a brat?

[Freesia2]

Anyone who's ever gotten a headache from the "Head On - Apply Directly To The Forehead, Head On-Apply Directly To The Forehead" commercials can see what McCain is doing.

The ads don't have to be good (they aren't) and they don't have to even be true (they aren't). They just have to be so repetitive, so incessantly hammering the one point home -Don't Trust Obama - that that's the only thing people remember. They walk away complaining about the stupid ad which was about...."something about not trusting Obama."

Integrity and style isn't the point of an ad. It's getting you to buy what they're selling. Snake oil or Head On. Or McCain.

[harriscrl3]

Well he has changed his mind about offshore drilling I guess the American people are dumb as rocks They deserve what they get. I'm so sick of stupid people ruining this country. We are on the cusp of Fascism McCain gets in and its Full flege fascism in this country.

Carol

[Rowland]

It is not McCain... every repub in Congress is talking drilling and the Alaska Reserve. Watching C-Span has become a joke. Every problem can be solved by drilling. Yesterday a lady from NC was speaking on the bill regarding equal pay for equal work and summed up by saying drilling is the answer to equal pay for women. These folks are going home this weekend until after Labor day and will talk this until they are blue in the face...what else can they talk about?

[Mitchell Bard - Huffpost Blogger]

Good point, Rowland. The GOP has nothing to run for, only what they can run against.

[Egalitare]

The one advantage that the GOP will ALWAYS hold over Democrats is party discipline.

Those of us who desire a more cerebral politics, one that actually uses data and facts to solve problems and chart our nation's course need to understand that most our fellow citizens can't properly weight the options. Those so-called "low information voters" that some of us rail against are the majority of voters...PERIOD. Many of them believe that "their place" is to be led by "better people," and like it or not that is a burden that all progressives -- whether you're a Dem, a Green, a Socialist or of some other stripe -- have to always bear in mind. When we argue with each other over degrees of "carbon-freeness", it appears to the less informed that we are divided (and therefore no more "worthy" than they are) rather than being at different points along the same side of a continuum.

Perhaps it is impossible for us to bury our differences (after all, Pro-Clinton and Pro-Obama people are STILL sniping at each other less than a month from Denver). But we need to get into the habit of at least feigning consensus.