Re: 44

1

pacing!


Posted by: soup biscuit | Link to this comment | 09-16-08 8:32 AM
horizontal rule
2

Remember, kids, 'pacing' said backwards is 'kneecap'! Which is what somebody needs to do (metaphorically) to McCain.


Posted by: Merganser | Link to this comment | 09-16-08 8:35 AM
horizontal rule
3

McCain is a fighter pilot, just like Bush!


Posted by: togolosh | Link to this comment | 09-16-08 8:37 AM
horizontal rule
4

McCain is an honorable man, just like Brutus!


Posted by: Merganser | Link to this comment | 09-16-08 8:38 AM
horizontal rule
5

My attack ad goes in a more visceral reaction, but it might just work to piss people off.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-16-08 8:51 AM
horizontal rule
6

"visceral direction". My language goes in a more visceral sleepy.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-16-08 8:51 AM
horizontal rule
7

"John McCain is your new velocipede"


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 09-16-08 8:55 AM
horizontal rule
8

Perhaps he should attack the party, not the people. However magical McCain's personal character, he's still going to have to staff an Administration. And a lot of the problems of the GWB era have been a function of the people appointed. If ever there was a political faction that should be considered discredited, it'd be the neocon faction. And McCain is a neocon. How hard can this be?


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 09-16-08 9:01 AM
horizontal rule
9

People, you should be making more ads. Do it, if it's so easy!


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-16-08 9:04 AM
horizontal rule
10

8: How many people who vote based on attack ads know who the neocons are?

BG (typing from a public computer)


Posted by: | Link to this comment | 09-16-08 9:04 AM
horizontal rule
11

I don't know... the fact that McCain is going to such lengths to distance himself from Bush tells me there's something to the "McSame" attack.


Posted by: mrh | Link to this comment | 09-16-08 9:06 AM
horizontal rule
12

Republicans have concentrated wealth in the hands of people who are using that wealth to screw the country. The fact that the Democrats can't come up with a candidate who can wage a populist campaign making that point is a key reason why liberals are screwed in this country.


Posted by: politicalfootball | Link to this comment | 09-16-08 9:18 AM
horizontal rule
13

The Obama campaign has been admirably disciplined in sticking to the Same theme - I'm pretty sure that it's sticking in the public's mind, and undermining the sense that McCain is independent, or 'not one of those Republicans.' It's a tough charge to make - going against McCain's strength, as it were - and only repetition will make it happen.

That said, I think Becks is exactly right that Bush has been so low-profile for so long (as Atrios says, he's bored with being Preznit) that being tarred as McSame isn't the gut-punch it would have been a year ago.

I don't know if the solution is to remind people why they hate Bush, or whether to stick with this line of attack and trust that, as long as independents don't think that McCain will represent a change, they won't vote for him. But I think it's clearly right that non-campaign types need to use different lines of attack.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 09-16-08 9:24 AM
horizontal rule
14

I agree that it doesn't really fire me up, but I'm split on how effective it is with the wider public. On the one hand, Obama isn't ahead by anything like as much as he would be if he were running against Bush. I intuitively think the out-of-touch line of attack would be better, and has plenty of supporting evidence that doesn't need to get past the existing media narrative about McCain. On the other hand, it's attacking one of McCain's biggest (political) strengths, and if it does stick, that will neutralise his sole appeal to non-insane independents.

I think the main problem I have with it is a question of opportunity cost, which is amplified by the lack of 527s pushing other, more aggressive lines of attack. Every time they respond to a McCain comment or an event with "more of the same", they're passing up the opportunity to attack McCain for his own qualities/policies. Sometimes they tie it to the wider out-of-touch argument, as with the recent comments on economic policy, but it still feels like a lazy political attack rather than a valid argument.


Posted by: Ginger Yellow | Link to this comment | 09-16-08 9:29 AM
horizontal rule
15

I thought up this ad this morning. Anyone want to help film it?

[News headlines of Republican scandals.]

VOICEOVER: Now that George W. Bush is almost gone, some worry we won't have enough political scandals in Washington.

TABLOID REPORTER: The Republicans in Washington are so corrupt they've basically been doing our job for us. The stories about corruption and incompetence practically write themselves.

[Scandal headlines being pushed (swept?) off the screen.]

VOICEOVER: Is this the beginning of a cleaner, boringer era for American scandal?

TABLOID EDITOR: Luckily, the McCain/Palin ticket looks like it'll give us all kinds of new disgraces.

VOICEOVER OVER APPROPRIATE IMAGES: Remember McCain and the Keating Five? Now his whole campaign is run by lobbyists. One of them worked for the Republic of Georgia.

TABLOID REPORTER: And now Sarah Palin is stonewalling an ethics investigation in Alaska. This mess could drag on for years!

VOICEOVER OVER PHOTOS OF CHENEY, LIBBY, ROVE: Stonewalling that goes on for years. Sound familiar?

TABLOID EDITOR: I'm supporting McCain/Palin. They'll make my job a whole lot easier.


Posted by: Bave Dee | Link to this comment | 09-16-08 9:39 AM
horizontal rule
16

Why is McCain's part in the Keating Five scandal apparently off limits? Especially given the current crisis in the banking system, it seems an appropriate issue to raise.

On preview, I see that it's not off limits to Bave. But he can't be expected to shoulder the burden of that meme by himself!


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 09-16-08 9:45 AM
horizontal rule
17

But he can't be expected to shoulder the burden of that meme by himself!

But he's a longshoreman!

Anyhow, making ads is easy.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-16-08 9:49 AM
horizontal rule
18

McCain is a liar, just like Bush, and will get us into another preemptive war, just like Bush.


Posted by: | Link to this comment | 09-16-08 10:37 AM
horizontal rule
19

John McCain supports torture, just like Bush!

John McCain won't even say he was tortured any more - because according to the Bush administration, what was done to him when he was a PoW (did you know he was a PoW? he doesn't talk about it much. Well, he was) amounts to "harsh interrogation", not torture.

...that's kind of sad. John McCain has redefined what happened to him as "not torture", because the party that he hopes will make him President says that when you beat a prisoner, injure him, force him into stress positions, deny him medical treatment, that's just "harsh interrogation"... and so McCain obediently no longer thinks or says that what happened to him was torture.


Posted by: Jesurgislac | Link to this comment | 09-16-08 10:42 AM
horizontal rule
20

8: How many people who vote based on attack ads know who the neocons are?

The neocons are my bugaboo of choice, but you can walk your way through any policy area. The problem is much deeper than just John McCain. The problem is that the Republican party wrecked itself over many, many years. And, judging from previous polls regarding generic candidates, the public knows this.


Posted by: | Link to this comment | 09-16-08 10:52 AM
horizontal rule
21

I suspect Bush's low approval ratings are based more on fatigue than on any issues. McCain is a new face by comparison, so saying he's just like Bush might not really resonate with the average low-info voter.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 09-16-08 11:15 AM
horizontal rule
22

"Why is McCain's part in the Keating Five scandal apparently off limits? Especially given the current crisis in the banking system, it seems an appropriate issue to raise"

Because apparently Americans can't be expected to know or care about political events from more than 10 years ago, unless it involves Vietnam or Chappaqiddick.


Posted by: Ginger Yellow | Link to this comment | 09-16-08 11:21 AM
horizontal rule
23

Why is McCain's part in the Keating Five scandal apparently off limits?

Because McCain was a POW. You don't hate POW's do you?


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 09-16-08 11:54 AM
horizontal rule
24

I think you are underestimating that this is being effective with the part of the population that is not suffering Bush Outrage Fatigue like most of us here. I'm sure that McCain so obviously running away from Bush has some impact on those who were until somewhat recently willing to give Bush some credence. I do think Obama should expand the attack to "Republicans" a bit more.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 09-16-08 1:03 PM
horizontal rule
25

Why is McCain's part in the Keating Five scandal apparently off limits?

Because McCain was a POW.

Listen, McCain spent five and a half years without lobbyists or scandals, damn it, and because of that he deserves all the lobbyists and scandals he can heap onto one plate.


Posted by: Robust McManlyPants | Link to this comment | 09-16-08 1:28 PM
horizontal rule