"FightTheSmears.com"? Not good enough. It's time for "StartSomeShit.Com."
History doesn't just repeat itself. For the Democrats it's like a broken record. Once again the party's blowing a healthy lead by being reluctant to engage its opponent. It's Groundhog Day starring Michael Dukakis, and Obama's VFW speech yesterday could have come directly from the Dukakis playbook.
Defensive plays like "FightTheSmears" are all well and good, but where's the offense? The GOP keeps throwing roundhouse blows. When they start to lose they make like Mike Tyson and bite somebody's ear off. Meanwhile Democrats fight by Marquis of Queensbury rules -- that is, if they deign to fight at all.
Some of us have been taught that it's wrong to speak harshly of others unless unless there's a higher purpose. Well, there is a higher purpose: This country's on the ropes and a McCain victory could devastate it. But instead of a fight, for the last month we've been getting the same old Democratic listlessness -- and the same impulse to be overly conciliatory. Obama ran a tough, smart primary campaign. Where did that guy go?
Meanwhile McCain's been hitting below the belt, lashing out like a punchdrunk flyweight. And guess what? It's working. You're not going to stop Raging Bull's Mini-Me with oratory and Facebook pages.
Look at the parallels between that VFW speech and this 24-year old Dukakis ad. First, Obama:
"... one of the things that we have to change in this country is the idea that people can't disagree without challenging each other's character and patriotism. I have never suggested that Senator McCain picks his positions on national security based on politics or personal ambition. I have not suggested it because I believe that he genuinely wants to serve America's national interest. Now, it's time for him to acknowledge that I want to do the same.Now for the Dukakis ad. It shows him angrily turning off his television as a George Bush Sr. commercial is running, then turning to the camera and saying:Let me be clear: I will let no one question my love of this country. I love America, so do you, and so does John McCain."
"I'm fed up with it! Never seen anything like it in 25 years of public life, George Bush's negative TV ads. distorting my record. Full of lies and he knows it. I'm on the record for the very weapons systems his ads say I'm against. I want to build a strong defense. I'm sure he wants to build a strong defense. So this isn't about defense issues. It's about dragging the truth into the gutter.Why do Democrats feel the need to reassure voters of their opponent's noble intentions? Who says they have noble intentions? And something else: What's striking about the Dukakis ad in retrospect is how good it is. His delivery is clear and forceful, and he seems to be making strong points. It's as good, in fact, as a defensive ad can get. And it didn't work.And I'm not going to let them do it! This campaign is too important. The stakes are too high for every American family."
That was the lesson of 1988, one that may have been forgotten: You can't land any punches from a defensive crouch. Dukakis is a brilliant man and he would have been a fine President. But he was painted as too cerebral, too passionless, and too remote from the occasionally atavistic impulses and emotions that drive us all. That was unfair -- but it's a candidate's job to triumph over unfairness.
Bernard Shaw's infamous "if Kitty Dukakis were raped ..." question was a low moment in American political journalism (up until then), and it set the tone this year's debate moderation. But you go to your campaign/war with the press corps you have, not the press corps you wish you had. You learn how to get your message across in a punchy way, even if -- especially if -- the questions are loaded.
Here's another problem with the defensive crouch: The candidates are defending themselves. Voters don't care if somebody lied about a politician! They figure that comes with the job title. What they want to know is what that politician will do for them.
Then there's the fact that both Dukakis and Obama affirm their opponent's good intentions, even as that opponent goes about slandering them. Why? In this context that looks weak, not generous or gracious.
Books have been written about why these tactics don't work, but the real reason is as simple as the old adage about the best defense being a good offense. You won't knock an opponent out with FightTheSmears.com -- or, for that matter, with ruminative evenings like the one Sen. Obama spent last weekend with Rick Warren.
Obama has new ads attacking McCain's voting record. That's good, but it's not enough. As uncomfortable as it may make them, the Democrats are going to have to hit McCain on his seemingly endless list of vulnerabilities: The flip-flops. His laziness. His craven surrender on matters of principle. His lobbyist minders. His misunderstanding of basic facts. And then there are all those legitimate questions about his personal integrity and character.
McCain's not reluctant to do whatever it takes to win. If his opponent is, the results will be all too predictable. If the past month's caution was born of a desire to protect Obama's lead, forget about it. That lead is gone. He may have hoped to avoid a brawl, but he can't. It's on.
But, some may ask, what about McCain's war record? The answer is simple: Stop bringing it up. That's their job, not yours. Remember, Bob Dole was a war hero too - and he lost.
Consensus is a beautiful thing, but it starts by forming a consensus around the understanding that we won and you lost. As for "FightTheSmears.Com" -- after watching McCain score with lowball tactics, I'm ready for a website that attacks rather than defends.
Is "StartSomeShit.com" taken?
_____________________
UPDATE: Some are saying that this is all premature panic, etc. etc., because the campaign's got a long-term strategy and they're holding the good stuff for the right time. In other words, we're told they're playing the old Rope-A-Dope.
But there's a difference between rope-a-dope and letting the other guy beat you senseless for the first three rounds. (Update 2: This guy used my boxing metaphor to defend Obama's strategy, but what he forgets is that Obama emerged from the primaries badly damaged. Anyone who thinks he benefited somehow from holding back wasn't really paying attention.)
Here's the bottom line: Obama's a relatively new national figure, which means first impressions count - a lot. He's been getting painted - successfully - as "just another wishy-washy Democrat elitist." He started going on the attack today, which is good. Let's hope he sticks with it, and that it undoes any damage done during the last few weeks.
As for those who are put out by these criticisms, a word: Now is not the time for Democrats to get defensive or turn Pollyanna-ish. It's time to point out, if only to beat a metaphor to death, that the bell has rung.
RJ Eskow blogs at:
A Night Light
The Sentinel Effect: Healthcare Blog
Future-While-U-Wait
RJ Eskow at the Huffington Post
Follow RJ Eskow on Twitter: www.twitter.com/rjeskow
Reminds me of a discussion ten years ago I had with a person who was complaining about all the "negative" tv ads being run against a particular politician. He spoke, pontificated about the subject on and on and on. I finally put an end to his rant by telling him that I didn't care about the "negative" label, that all I was interested in was whether the ads were true or not. He was so stunned that he stopped talking, uttered not a word thereafter. You see, the ads were true, but sadly his mind had been rewired/conditioned/trained a long time ago. Like a Pavlov's dog, mindless mimic, puppet to be played with.....
Another thing Obama needs to bring up is drilling. People have been saying that the democrats are holding up drilling in this country. Well that is a big lie too. There is alot of drilling going on right now but no one is talking about it. Obama needs to bring his campaign to my part of the country and I'll show him drilling. There everywhere and the democrats don't have nothing to do with it.
Also Rush and Hannity have been making alot of racist remarks lately. This needs to be brought out in public too.
Multiply those dead and wounded by spouses and dependents.
BO needs to put on a jock and a cup and start swinging and kicking, get pissed off.
How many bodies does it take people.
These Hillary supporters bitching and threatening to vote for McCain? I have two words for them I do not use on posts but will call them sorry asses for even threatening to vote for McCain.
Come on BO, time to put your boots on and get it on.
Here is a suggestion for his handlers, the next time he opens up one of his stops, remind the people there, "somewhere in Iraq a US soldier is taking their last breath, bleeding out, a Iraqi child has just lost their parent., family,....."
Half of the country thinks Democrats are, umm, not much use in a fist fight.
This is a fist fight Obama.
Hit someone.
I think the best ads use video clips of the candidates themselves. I love the one about McCain not knowing how many houses he has. But why aren't we seeing him singing, "Bomb Bomb....Iran" (do we really want to risk our national security on such a "loose cannon"? Why aren't we hearing him say that he doesn't know much about economics, or demonstrating how he doesn't know a Sunni from a Shite.
What I'd really like to see is an ad featuring Ronald Reagan asking the American people if they think they are better off than they were four years ago.
The Democrats were put on the defensive four years early and the Right was given a full four years to stoke their party’s hatred of all things Liberal. As usual, the DNC became obsessed with losing the Presidency and pulled out the old playbook that has allowed them to snatch Defeat from the Jaws of Victory so many times. This may be their last chance to fail as the Extreme Right spends four more years transforming our country from what’s left of a Solvern Democracy into a Global Plutocracy!
Hopefully the "how many houses" will become a "Dukkakis" moment for McCain (remember the ill fated tank picture?).
It took the Democratic Party's Experts about 15 years to learn how lethal "Willie Horton" was. To their credit, it only took them about 4 to learn what "Swiftboating" was... I think... they APPEAR to get it, now... despite the fact that John Kerry lost, during their leaning process.
I truly believe that after we've lost our democracy totally, the Democrats have a pretty good shot at finally understanding that when you begin each description of your opponent as a good and decent American, who is to be honored for his service to our country, most Americans will stop right there and go, "Well, then! I guess I'll just vote for HIM!"
It's not lost on me that Obama's people don't want Rove-ing bands of pundits, attacking him for not being deferential enough to the Tortured Saint. What they will understand, as they smolder in the ruins of yet another defeat, is that this is FAR PREFERABLE to buying-into the FRAME that only an unpatriotic Leftie terrorist sympathizer would fail to kiss John McCains ass...
... and therefore, ANY CRITICISM WHATSOEVER of John McCain constitutes not kissing his ass properly.
When you've sign-off on that, as Obama has (thinking he's protected himself from the Big Mean Ol' Pundits), you've pretty much locked yourself into a bear trap. The MSM is already properly intimidated into going not one level below the hype to investigate and define McCain. If his opponent isn't telling the story, either, then he's screwed.
I don't like 120 "present" votes in the IL legislature. What was that all about?? I am sure the Repugs will put that out there. I tell you. 6 years ago in MD we had a Dem candidate who was so far ahead in April that she got indifferent to "criticism". In April -5 people I knew were going to vote for her, by August because of "first impressions" the Republican opposition got out ahead, and lost 2 of those votes. By October, first impressions were still hanging on. The Republican labels prevailed. Voting for the first woman Governor was a risk and by November, 3 of those voters had decided to vote Republican.
It is a terrible mistake-to keep soothing people's conscience by "saying McCain is a nice guy". It's the old excuse to give McCain-offering a perceived comfort level (that is a myth) and stave off "high risk for later". It has to stop.
McCain is a real threat to the future well being of the people of this country and the world.
Doesn't Obama really believe with passion, that Republican policies are ruining the future of this Democracy? If he isn't hungry enough to fight this battle with urgency then he should not be the Democratic candidate.
Good piece. Two quick thoughts.
First, the attack machine starts by going after and neutralizing the candidate's perceived greatest strength.
For Dukakis, it was his story as the son of immigrants who pursued the American dream to the limit. They turned that into, this is a short little Greek guy with big bushy eyebrows who won't pledge allegiance to the flag, lets criminals roam the streets and who has a wife who burned a flag--his values are not your values.
For Kerry, it was his Vietnam resume, turning it on its ear with Swiftboats and portraying him as effete with a wife who had a funny accent instead of as a guy who dodged bullets in the jungle when he could have easily dodged the draft.
For Obama (so far) it's been his charisma and oratorical skills, reducing them to vacuous celebrity. There will be more. They haven't really started on Michelle yet, and will probably leave most of that to 527's. We ain't seen nothin' yet.
Second, I disagree on the Bernie Shaw question. I was backstage in Los Angeles that night and the sense among many was that Shaw had thrown a high, hanging curveball that Dukakis could have knocked out of the park. Instead,he struck out, not just for the debate but for the entire campaign. The next morning, he was behind in every state but Massachusetts and the election was over.
Obama's biggest problem, to me, is that he hasn't shown himself to be "one of us". It's not even so much that he's biracial, it's that to most of the public his American Dream is not their American Dream. The voting public did not live outside the USA in childhood. The voting public did not attend the most prestigious private school in Hawaii and then go on to Harvard, the law review and law school. The voting public was not able to buy a million dollar house with the help of an acknowledged political fixer.
And until Obama makes a visceral connection with the public, he may not win what should be a slam-dunk election. The public looks at Obama and sees somebody who is exotic; they don't see somebody they can relate to on an emotional level, somebody who reflects their hopes, dreams, aspirations.