Shades of '92: McCain as Bush the Elder

The Republicans peaked this too soon and pushed it to the point of people beginning to be tired of her-which is bad for the campaign.

But the scandals will continue. It appears Palin was a little Mussolini up there in Alaska, and people are practically tripping over themselves to dish the dirt on her. Even a lot of her own Republican party members want to get rid of her, or don't want her to be VP because of the knives she stuck in their backs.

She's also over her head, and it's already beginning to show. It's pretty clear she would have never made headway during the primaries if she ran herself, and things will only get worse.

The "economy" will work as a theme, and if Obama needs a Perot, perhaps he could talk to Boone Pickens about having a few joint events along with Clinton as well.

However, with him, the Palin choice sealed the deal - towards Obama.  He has always liked Maverick, moderate McCain and certainly able to relate to being in the 70s age range.  He was unclear that Obama was the better choice, although, like me, Dad hasn't been able to vote for a republican at the national level for over a decade. This is a man who was an alternate delegate for the Florida Republican party for the national convention a couple of decades ago.

But, Palin presents a clear directional signal to him.

Unless something changes, he'll stay in the Obama/Biden (a choice that helps people like my father) camp.

Thanks Al

every cell phone. Added as a signature to every email with a  "Check your tax bite under Obama" preamble.

http://obamataxcut.com

Everyone I've told about this tool has been impressed and surprised. Why this isn't featured high on every website is beyond me. Because. It lets people discover Obama's tax plan for themselves, and that is how you win people: self-discovery.

Recognizing the need to maintain some kind of consistent, overriding message - and the need to reply to the lies of the McCain camp - I woke up this morning and wondered whether it would be possible, or effective, to escalate the "McCain is lying" theme to the point where it becomes almost the main message.

For example, perhaps it could be as simple as this.

-McCain claims he will be an agent of change

-but McCain is lying and running a dishonorable campaign

-therefore, McCain can't be believed about being for change

 

Seems to me that the danger in making the lies a predominant focus is that such aggression (even in defense) will make Obama seem less "post-partisan."   Yet on the other hand, by loudly decrying McCain's lies AT VIRTUALLY EVERY OPPORTUNITY, I also think Obama would seize the initiative and even be seen as somewhat daring.

I'd like some feedback about this, please.

www.obamtaxcut.com is an awsome interactive tool.  I agree it should be spread far and wide, on the sides of buses, park benches, print ads - hoping the campaign uses a calculator like that.

 

But I also like this layout:

MCCAIN …………. OBAMA
Income …… . Avg tax bill ……. Avg. tax bill
Over $2.9M …. -$269,364 (-4.4%)… +$701,885 (+11.5%)
$603K and up…. -$45,361 (-3.4%)… +$115,974 (+8.7%)
$227K-$603K…… -$7,871 (-3.1%)…….. +$12 (+0.0%)
$161K-$227K…… -$4,380 (-3.0%)….. -$2,789 (-1.9%)
$112K-$161K…… -$2,614 (-2.5%)….. -$2,204 (-2.1%)
$66K-$112K …… -$1,009 (-1.4%)….. -$1,290 (-1.8%)
$38K-$66K …….. -$319 (-0.7%)….. -$1,042 (-2.4%)
$19K-$38K …….. -$113 (-0.5%)……. -$892 (-3.6%)
Under $19K ……… -$19 (-0.2%)……. -$567 (-5.5%)

 

It gives you not just your tax cut but enables you to see how the two cut taxes in exactly the opposite manner.  Obama's cut percentages are highest for the lowest wage earners while McCain gives the biggest cuts to the top.

Carol, I sure hope you are right.  I saw one review of her interview last night graded as good because she exceeded expectations.  Is that what it's come to in this country?  She gets the bar set low for her and then we all cheer because she clears it??  But, of course, "we still don't know enough about Obama."  And the new McCain ad calling Obama "disrespectful" makes me want to puke.  How could anyone not see through this?

Rant over.

They used their convention to effectivly redefine her and redefine their ticket as a ticket that is an agent of change.

Today: the Obama campaign took the first step in destroying the Republican messaging and reminding voters John McCain is more of the same. Similarly, the continual lies and decision by the McCain camp to go to war with the media has lost it a great deal of crediblity with Versailles.

I think it is very clear that John McCain got a five point bounce out of the convention and goal one for Barack Obama is pull that down next week. He jumped out the gate today with some ads. i don't think they're particularly effective; but a good first try at messaging.

The goal is to coninually work to drive the message between now and election day.

The Good: McCain is not the underdog. The Democrats taste fear and will work harder. Obama has a better ground game. Sarah Palin really does know nothing about international affairs; you could tell she was prepped and was scared to ever go off book so she repeated several key phrases. I think Biden will get some clean shots at her that will change the dynamic of the race.

The Bad: I think Obama's ads suck. Ads are so important and I don't see the Obama camp doing well with them at all.

Overall: I'm excited. I think this thing is starting to turn around. I'm glad the Obama team is adjusting. And I realized that McCain hasn't been in front of reporters or townhalls for a month; making him rusty. I think that will help Obama in the debates.

-Rhoda

Jim - I beg to differ. 99.9 percent of the public knows that politicians lie. Calling one a "liar" does absolutely nothing to move votes or generate outrage or shock or surprise.

In fact, the average American tells 24 lies a day. (Actually, I just made that up, but I still have 23 to go, right?)

 If more women vote on election day then men, I want them to push the issues that women like me care about. McCain was on the view this morning telling the audience that he believes Roe v Wade was a 'Bad Decision'.

In a McCain/Palin america,

If your daughter is brutally raped, she will first get charged for the rape kit itself, and then be told SHE must carry the baby to full term!

Is that the reform you want?

Alexa, that is a GREAT site.  Does anyone know if this an Obama campaign sponsored site?

I agree this should get out there...it should even be featured in an ad.

Yes, I think it should because it undermines McCain's phony "maverickness" - the central tenet of his bio. And to that point, we need more surrogates like this guy, who chews up the screen with that very point.

Keep the Palin interviews coming.. the Bush Doctrine 'dunno' has gotten traction but also there's her answer about how no shots were fired in the Cold War.  What was the Bay of Pigs?  There were a lot of shots fired in the Cold War in various places.

I spend a lot of time reassuring volunteers that the sky is not falling.  It's good to read that my sense that the bloom will fall off the Palin lily has some support. 

A supporter yesterday wrote to me that there was going to be an article today in Rolling Stone by Robert F. Kennedy about the 50 ways the Republicans will try to disenfranchise voters.  Apparently my searching skills are lacking because I'm not finding it.  If someone finds it, could you please link to it here?  Thanks

My feeling is that the other half of the Obama theme and message will be about Republican corruption and incompetence. That reinforces his change theme while making everybody see that he is a true fighter that doesnt pull his punches. Especialy if some good ads make McCain/Palin seem as incompetent as Bush, then the game is over.

As I am from abroad I would like to ask, how much of a difference would a Perot endorsement of Obama make in the minds of independent voters ? Would it be a meaningful endorsement and a big surprize that gets everybody's attention for some time, or something that almost nobody notices?

What I notice in independent voters, as I was canvassing in NH and also talking to friends in NY, is that they see themselves as savvy, intelligent and pragmatic. They are not as interested in the drama of identity politics, in fact, they seem to abhor it, and they want to know how leaders are going to reach across the lines and solve problems. I think there might be a lot of these types in Generation X (of which Obama and Palin and I are members). So, if McCain is stirring up the Boomer culture war with Palin as it's representative, Obama's response of how are we really going to address x, y, and z without all this drama and noise might get more play with Independents.

That is music to my ears!  Work away!

John Aravosis is saying that Obama doesn't have the balls to be president.  He is highlighting an ad from Planned Parenthood that attacks McCain where Obama is supposedly not brave enough to attack.  I wonder if it has even occured to him that Obama is sitting back and *expecting* other entities with a stake in this election to do the "dirty work" for the campaign?

(Apropos of nothing, my favorite part of this campaign so far is how the McCain camp trashed Obama for being a celebrity, and is now trashing him for not being such a celebrity anymore!)

adopting it as my signature at dkos. Hope many people will see it and get educated.

amk

Obama will continue to shore up our party, it's those undeclareds that we need either to vote with us, or not vote at all.  Either is a win.  The more the campaign hits the issues, the more the GOP looks like what they are - desperate.

I got an email today on the 2nd amendment - which if you have been calling or canvassing in swings like NV you'll know is an important issue.  This email digs under that single issue voter, by pointing out the other rights that the GOP trashes while "throwing a 2nd amendment bone" to the base to keep them happy.  It never mentions Obama, but I think it pushes some valuable doubt about the GOP.  It may not win an Obama voter, but it could keep a McCain voter at home.  I posted it at the Fieldhands site if you  want to pass it on.

Andrew Sullivan gets it:

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/09/a-first.html

Here's what happens:

1) Obama proposes something.

2) Bush and McCain grumble and attack proposal.

3) Later, they quietly go along with it.

They have tacitly admitted that Obama's judgement is better than their own.

Repeat this theme.

 Jack Cafferty's wife passed away this morning a few days ago. You can send condolences to him here. Jack has been a voice for us all year and I am very sad for him today.

Carol was an animal lover. If you’d like to make a donation in her memory, the family asks you give to the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. You can contribute at aspca.org.

Defenders of wildlife has a new ad, it needs to be seen by the animal lovers thinking of voting for McShame's ticket.

I was happy to hear Obama use this line against McCain today in Dover NH

After all, my opponent said just last night, “It’s easy for me to go to Washington and frankly, be somewhat divorced from the day-to-day challenges people have.” So from where he and George Bush sit, maybe they just can’t see. Maybe they are just that out of touch. But you know the truth, and so do I.

Maybe people are starting to get the idea, that we all need to be getting the message out, like the conference call above, not griping about "what Obama should do".  There was a post over at firedoglake about Frank Luntz with some dandy suggestions about how Obama should get mad, etc., etc.  I made my comment along the WTF lines, but this guy really nailed it.  Hilarious:

"Fuck Luntz. He’s a nasty ass punk bitch from the other side.

Two phrases, and only two phrases, have I been hearing lately: “Sara Palin is…” and “Barack Obama needs to…”. Republicans are insistent on the first phrase and Democrats are stuck on the second. We have formed the circular firing squad. It’s happened yet again. The message isn’t getting out because we’re too busy NOT REPEATING IT. Duh.

Someone who reads and contributes to this site created the obamataxcut.com thing. He introduced it quietly ten days ago here.

=====================================

To anyone going to Nevada . . .

Print out and take this article with you. Read it carefully. Enough for a quick discussion in NV. Tax raising is a big issue among NV retirees, small business owners. Note the update at the bottom:

The McCain Tax Increases

http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/09/the_mccain_tax_increasescontin.html

Update: What Holtz-Eakin [Alexa: current chief McCain economic advisor] admitted to Scherer was that the Obama's plan represented a net tax reduction over ten years.

 

That clip is spot on.  Huzzah to Ari for jumping in there and nailing that guy..."are you really going to go on TV and say that you believe that that bill was about teaching kindergarteners about sex?  It's a lie."  He took no shit.

 

And this meme that Obama isn't fighting back because he won't play gutter poitics is BS.  James nails it above.  We all need to stay on message - the Repbus are trying to change the subject away from issues that matter because they have nothing else to say.  They're making stuff up and throwing it at Obama because they have nothing to say about the issues.

 

Way too much testosterone in this country if we all only think that Obama has fight fire with fire to be deemed as worthy of defending us.  Is his entire candidacy not based on exactly NOT that?

Coincidentally, I learned that key strategic fact - that election outcomes are determined by one thin slice of swing voters - from one David Axelrod, at a Young Democrats conference in Chicago in the early 90s. But I think this is yet another way in which *this* election is going to be different from previous elections. You've talked about it here a lot already, but it should be added to the calculus you're posting about today: to win, Obama needs more of those swing voters than McCain gets, yes, but the other monkey wrench in the works with big enough numbers to swing things is the *new voter* slice. They didn't come out of the woodwork in '92. They did come out for this year's primaries, and I think they'll come out again in November.

 

Speaking as someone who did campaign for Bill in '92 before I was old enough to vote for him, he (as we know) did *not* particularly inspire young voters to get their registration in order and vote. I know that I was campaigning for him largely because, first, I look on Republican vs. Democratic politics pretty much as Greed Incarnate vs. Good Intentions. I don't always have a lot of faith in the latter, but it's our only hope, you know? Second, I liked that Clinton was at least highly intelligent. There wasn't much else about him that impressed me, and I disagreed with a number of his policy ideas (while really liking some others).

 

But for so many people of my age group who were not so politically engaged, none of that kind of reasoning added up to much motivation to actually vote. Moreover, Clinton personified our parents' generation. Sure, most people I know thought the Old Guy was an out-of-touch relic. But, as latch-key children of divorced hippies with substance abuse problems (more often than not), somehow not that many of us were thrilled at the idea of putting a Boomer into office. Especially when that boomer already showed signs of being pretty representative of the stereotype.

 

Compare that to Obama. My generation takes mixed-race backgrounds completely for granted; it has never not been normal for us. Obama has his act together both privately and publicly - that's so rare for us Boomer kids to see (we were raised expecting to find hypocrisy everywhere, and we found it), that we tend to find it especially impressive. Obama is lightyears ahead of the curve (relative to other politicians) on all the technology issues that many people my age are better informed on than any other general public concern. Add to that, of course, that the man looks cool in sunglasses, and you've got the first candidate most of my generation can stand to look at or listen to for more than 5 minutes. First, ever.

 

In addition, of course, Bill Clinton in 1992 got a fair chunk of the normally low-turnout African-American vote, and that was a factor in his victory. As we know, though, Clinton's popularity with that demographic, and more importantly, his ability to register voters and increase turnout, didn't approach Obama's.

 

You've got to excite them, you've got to register them, and then you've got to get them to the polls. Turns out, community organizing may be the best possible experience any candidate could have to accomplish the first goal: getting elected.

 

Putting it all together, it's obvious that we have to keep at the work we're already doing. But I think we have the grounds to be confident.

I think you are mostly right on this, but I think the important part is that this incompetence and corruption is tied directly to McCain. I agree with Ezra Klein's point - it's not enough to make people vote against George Bush, they must be convinced they don't want John McCain.

The problem with the "more of the same" charge is that it's a campaign against Bush, not McCain. At some point in the election, though, the Obama campaign needs to provide the reason to vote against John McCain -- a politician whom, lest we forget, ranked as one of the most popular in the country for most of this decade. Happily, McCain provided them with plenty of ammunition for a charge that's organic to his life and record: That he's out of touch. Doesn't get it. Too old, and too rich, for the world we live in. Thinks wealth starts at $5 million a year and has too many houses to even keep track. has voted to cut Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, health care for kids, and every type of income assistance program that exists. The raw material exists, strewn across video clips and voting records. They just need to use it. Voters may not want more of the same, but they need to also be convinced that they don't want John McCain.

http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/ezraklein_archive?month=09&year=2008&...

KD

I am singing this song as I gear up for another weekend in NH http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_7tN9NosDQ

"John Aravosis is saying that Obama doesn't have the balls to be president."

Aravosis has his panties in a bunch again? Oh wow. That's rich.

Know what? I want a President with Obama's steady poker-face calm and controlled emotion operating in a national crisis. I want to get off having to monitor the administration every goddam day so I can sleep at night. I want to spend the next eight years concentrating on what I've neglected for the past four so I can live my life again. I want a fucking grown-up in office with constitutional law experience and ethics. I would like to exercise more so that I can live to be 90, instead of pounding keys at my lousy 40 words per min. I'd like to turn on a teevee and have a President tell me the truth, grown-up that I am.

Aravosis can kiss my ass.

 

What do you guys think of this ad?  This would be a result of the 527s moving in.

 

Also, wanted to draw your attention to a comment made here at the end of a thread yesterday that I thought deserved more attention:

 

http://narcosphere.narconews.com/thefield/the-post-convention-roadmap-re...

An Epic failure on economic policy.

An Epic failure on foreign policy.

An Epic failure on immigration.

An epic failure on lobbyist reform.

An epic failure on banking regulation.

An epic failure on energy policy.

An epic failure on the mortgage crisis.

Choosing McCain/Palin will be an EPIC FAIL for America. Obama/Biden 08.

hey Tara thanks for the shout-out to my comment about how the blogs are being played at the end of the last thread. I am usually a lurker but woke up today just fumming. Not ONE word about the magnificent performance by Obama yesterday. This is  not the chikcen littles this is being incensed at how the liberal blogs have lost their minds. Nothing Obama does is ever good enough. And now on top of that, all they do is focus on McCain--and not sussing out things that would be useful for the liberal bloggers to put out there but instead they are spinning like tops at the command of the McCain camp. They are being used and in their own outrage at McCain and criticising of Obama they do not even see it. My sense is that if we lose the election--which I don't think we will--it won't be because Obama did not do what he had to do but because a big majority of the democratic leaders, the progressive voices simply followed McCain as the pied piper and cut the legs under the best politician we have had in 40 years. It is immensely frustrating and sad. And today I just cannot shake that anger. At these people who are not helping, they are making it worse and they seem not even see it. Sorry for the anonymous rant all of you.

 

While I agree that much of the electorate would not be phased by calling McCain a liar.  I think it has two potential upsides.

1.  I think it has the potential to change the image of himself that McCain has presented to the public as a "straight talker".  A possible small gain from independants.

2.  I think repeatidly calling McCain out on his lies and falsehoods has the potential to put McCain on the defensive and possible push him to lose his temper.  If this happens I think it could have a large effect.

 

I'll finish by add a quote from Obama today that I think is appropriate for the topic.

 

"I am not going to start making up lies about John McCain. There is an old saying that Abraham Lincoln had about one of his opponents, he said if you don't stop lying about me, I'm going to have to start telling the truth about you."

- Barack Obama, Sept 12, 2008

Love the embedded videos, and as I'm sure this bumps up the bandwidth fees over at The Field HQ, I hit the tip jar.

Any other takers?

I thought that comment was dead on.  As a result, I'm trying to write a diary on dKos today that will highlight the tax pledge that Obama made in Dover today (he commented that he would make taxes lower for most Americans than they have been for fifty years, and that no-one with an income below $250,000 will have any kind of tax increase - not payroll, not capital gains, no type of tax whatsoever).  If at least the blogosphere started covering the issues, and highlighting Obama's policies (instead of screaming why aren't the mainstream media doing it), then maybe the MSM might follow the blogosphere's lead in some small way.  So, my promise to myself from today on, is that if I expend energy writing a blog post or comment that it should at least highlight one aspect of Obama's policy proposals, or other strengths to be president.

(BTW, though, did anyone catch The View interviewing McCain - I saw clips, and he may be regretting deciding that his first interview after a month on national TV would be a "fluff" one - they tore him apart, especially watch Barbara Walter's body language)

KD

I'm sure there are several sites that exist which are intended to be a one-stop-shop for voter registration information and forms across all states.  But, I wanted to share one that was created by one of our grassroots computer nerds here in Buffalo. 

Some of you may be familiar with him (wnymathguy), as he created a site that had TONS of grassroots graphics that were used across the country during the primary season by those folks who couldn't afford to purchase "official" bumper stickers and pins from the Obama Store. 

He has created the following site that we will be using in our local office for people coming in with voter registration questions or needing information or forms from other states.  It's still in the rough stage as far as the "pretty" factor, but he assures me it's fully functional with all links.  Hope others find this useful.

http://wnymathguy.com/GOTV.html

Now that we are all gung ho on having learned how to embed videos, would you prefer that we not?

 There is a diary on Kos that I hope fieldhands will rec'd. It is telling the people who want attack ads or telling Obama to attack, to put there money where their mouths are and donate to Votevets, MoveOn, Defenders of Wildlife & Planned Parenthood to run with the lastest ads they put out.

@tars's link to anonymous yesterday. The blogosphere and MSM are being played by McCain and his ads. By releasing them online only he gets free airtime and diverts attention away from what's going on in reality. Remember when they got upset when they realized Obama was running secret! negative! ads! Without sending them a memo first. Well, real people in targeted markets saw the ads, probably in higher numbers than swing voters reading blogs. And if the ads were airing in between talking heads arguing that obama was weak for not attacking, the media is who looked stupid. Anyway, we are the change. We are the message. We should take our cues from Obama not McCain - and we can't do that in reaction / defense mode. It is the economy, and healthcare, and Iraq, and our place in the world... This election matters

showed the msm hacks how to grow "balls". I am continually astonished by the lowest possible hackery shown by the us msm. We, from the rest of world, are actually laughing at this buffoonery.

amk

I think that we've pushed through to the other side on telling people to stop being chicken littles.  The topic seems to dominate this blog and it's getting old.  I'm saying Enough.  Let's take the time to make comments like Christi's telling people to donate to the 527s and other great ideas and analysis that normally populates the comment section.

And speaking of getting ourselves out of the gutter, here, can folks tone down the foul language?  It's not forbidden, but Al did specify awhile back that language like that has its place, and sparing use is the best use. 

I want to retain the intelligent quality of this one place online where I know reason will prevail.

As we struggle to find the right message to bring in the independent swing voters that Al talks about. Is it possible that we will actually win them by default since McCain is running such a right-wing Karl Rove campaign? Maybe I assume to much about independents' distaste for negative campaigning. It just seems like he is loosing is straight-talk, independent cred...

 rules to follow, if you have some regarding the embedding.

Everyone's saying: "shocking" or "disturbing" or whatever.

Folks, this is what wildlife face every day from bounty hunters and just-for-fun killers. Get everyone you know to watch these ads by Defenders of Wildlife, even if he/she throws up. It's time we see/know/and then stop what's done in our name every day.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/11717105/robert_f_kennedy_jr__will_the_next_election_be_hacked 

Here is the latest I could find...

On their website,, you can donate directly to help air the ad (referred to above). I just went and did it. I don't know if the ad will help Obama with the right demographics but I feel good about donating the money for it.

Al:

I spoke earlier this week with a friend from Alaska.  She said anyone and I mean anyone would be popular with their constituents and have an 80% approval rating if you just sent them a check for $1,000 for each adult in the household.

The popularity is wearing off.  So far there isn't one story about Gov. Palin's success story in AK that has stood up to any scrutiny.

Some folks have asked me for guidance about when and when not to embed videos.

1. It doesn't cost us bandwidth (it simply adds to YouTube's burden, that's what "embedding" means: you're literally watching a window from this site into another site).

2. That said, this thread is an example of over-use of embedding videos. Don't just use the comments section here to show us the latest video you've seen, unless you have something new and interesting to say about that video other than "hey guys, what do you think of this?" or "this is cool" or "this is not cool."

Unless you are making a specific point in showing us a specific video, you're just occupying space. It's almost like spam. There is zero point in showing a video unless you're making a point larger than that within the video.

Gee, and he writes this just under my bad example.  : )

Hi everyone, I've been away for a while (well, just from the comments, I have been keeping up with Al's posts despite my hectic schedule lately).

 

I've been spending more time trying to understand swing voters, and I have seen that, despite what we read in the MSM, many intelligent conservatives (yes, that is not an oxymoron) are very, very disenchanted with Mr. McSame.

 

  One of these is Andrew Sullivan of the Atlantic, who just posted this very encouraging post.

 

  You may want to read other posts of his which deal with McCain's campaigns lying lies and the liers who tell them, but this one is quite interesting:

 

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/09/patience-an...