Killing the Brand
John McCain and Barack Obama are both noteworthy for getting better-than-average press and for having savvy communications teams. They’re also noteworthy for the fact that their teams have very different ideas about what their job is supposed to be. The Obama team is constantly frustrating progressive bloggers and news junkies by being extremely cavalier about the news cycle. They don’t seem especially interesting in pouncing on gaffes or in responding to accusations, and they’re not especially quick on the draw or generous with talking points. Instead, they have a very inner-directed approach that’s all about building and cultivating the Obama brand to their own specifications and on their own schedule. The McCain campaign’s not like that at all. They’re obsessed with winning the news cycle and they’re good at it. But they’re much less interested in the McCain brand. That’s one thing you see with the “POW! POW! POW!” schtick — McCain’s war record is a great asset so they don’t hesitate to bust it out in all kinds of situations irrespective of the fact that busting it out constantly undermines the asset and creates a powerful negative counter-narrative.
What you see with the Palin pick, from a political strategy point of view, is I think the McCain campaign’s focus on winning the news cycle taken to a myopic and senseless extreme. The case for Palin in news cycle terms, is pretty good:
- Crazy pick utterly stomps on the Democratic Convention as a news story.
- Choosing a woman gives the tired PUMA story new legs.
- Crazy pick confuses Democratic oppo research and gets into Obama OODA loop.
- Palin is a hard-right conservative who the base loves so no dissonance.
Which leaves you, basically, with the fact that this is a crazy pick. In particular, it goes against the image McCain is trying to paint of himself as the serious, sober-minded choice in difficult times. This is not a “country first” pick, it’s an “I have a personal beef with Mitt Romney” pick. Nor does a VP whose most noteworthy quality is that she’s less corrupt than other Alaska Republicans do anything to distance McCain from Bushism — we’ve now gone from one alleged maverick who agrees with Bush about everything to two alleged mavericks who agree with Bush about everything. And that’s all really the best case scenario — normally VP choices don’t make much of a difference politically, but a VP candidate with no experience dealing with the national media who the candidate himself has barely spoken to risks an Eagelton Scenario. Nobody’s going to care in two months about the good coverage on the morning of August 29, but they might care about some horrific gaffe or skeleton in the closet.
Most fundamentally, I think this pick violates the contemporary understanding of the role of the Vice Presidency. With the exception of the four Bush-Quayle years, ever since 1977 we’ve had a POTUS-VPOTUS team that features a charismatic outsider at the top of the ticket (Carter, Reagan, Clinton, Bush II) backed by a seasoned Washington hand (Mondale, Bush I, Gore, Cheney) with “charismatic outsiderishness” generally being an asset, but an asset whose value is enhanced by showing some humility and good sense by bringing a veteran on board. McCain is reaching back to an outdated model of casually made choices. It’s hardly a crippling blow to the campaign, as such, but over time it’s going to seem increasingly dissonant — it looks and feels wrong, not at all like what we’ve come to expect from a Vice President.
87 Responses to “Killing the Brand”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
August 30th, 2008 at 11:51 am
Carter and charisma in the same sentence?
August 30th, 2008 at 11:53 am
actually, i think it stands a very good chance of being a “crippling blow.” palin isn’t ready for prime time: she doesn’t have the staff or the issues background.
and, of course, mccain doesn’t know her at all.
over 10 weeks, there will be any number of time where palin doesn’t know enough about the issue at hand, or about mccain’s position on the issue at hand, and it will be a steady drip, drip, drip reminder of mccain’s essential irresponsibility.
which is why i came to think by mid-day yesterday that there is a 10% chance that she will drop out.
August 30th, 2008 at 11:55 am
The other day David Plouffe said that the McCain campaign is a war room masquerading as a campaign. I think that this post elaborates on that theme nicely.
August 30th, 2008 at 11:58 am
Carter and charisma in the same sentence?
Speaking as someone who remembers the ‘76 campaign, yes. This was in the direct aftermath of Watergate, where the consummate insider Nixon had been shown to be utterly corrupt. Carter had a folksy, honest charm that seemed a breath of fresh air after the drama and trauma of Nixon’s catastrophic end.
Carter’s historical reputation as a feckless stumblebum (not really earned, IMHO) came later.
August 30th, 2008 at 11:59 am
I would like to know when and how John McCain came to this decision. It’s definitely a “mavericky” decision but it makes me question John McCain’s sanity. Maybe it plays well with female voters between the ages of 30 and 50 but if I were an older voter, I’d be less inclined to support McCain because of this move. Anyhow, I’d like to see what the polls have to say.
August 30th, 2008 at 12:01 pm
The thing that gets me is that there are a lot of Republican women who would have passed the substance test. While I would have had serious issues with many of the following, consider:
. Condi Rice
. Christine Todd Whitman
. Olympia Snowe
. Liddy Dole
. Kay Bailey Hutchinson
While Palin’s potentially being a heartbeat away from the president is a serious issue, there is an even more serious one:
Is McCain going crackers?
As for stealing the news cycle, McCain could drop his trousers and do that.
August 30th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
There we have it in a nutshell. Everything about the modern REpublican party involves reaching back 80 years, 100, 200. Why not their selection of VP as well?
August 30th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
which is why i came to think by mid-day yesterday that there is a 10% chance that she will drop out.
I agree with this, except I think the chances are higher than 10%.
Those bemoaning their notion that McCain foxed the Dems with this bold move should get a grip. Substance matters (which is why Dubya is finishing his term with years of cellar-dwelling in the polls). A pick this bad will start to stink fairly quickly.
August 30th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
Obama’s campaign is a preparation to be a national president, who is liked by the entirety of the country. On day 1, Obama will have an approval rating in the 60s–and it will only be that low because the Republicans are poisoning the well.
McCain’s campaign is a furtherance of the Stalinist Bush agenda to serve exclusively the constituency that put them in power while marginalizing, disenfranchising, and imprisoning the population that threatens its power. On day 1, McCain will be despised by the majority of Americans.
August 30th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
when this is all over and someone does a post-mortem poll, we’re going to find out that there were approximately 1000 PUMAs, and half of them were mentally unstable.
IOW, can we please STFU about the fucking PUMAs ?
August 30th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
Not a maverick choice. This was Rove’s choice, it’s meant to get the Chistianist voters excited.
August 30th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
Here’s something I don’t see getting a lot of play – look at the powers amassed by Cheney. Does anyone – including Republicans – think that this woman can wield those powers with anything approaching competence (that Cheney’s use of them has been entirely malicious says nothing about his competence)?
August 30th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
Basically the choice of Palin reveals their chief prior criticism of Obama — his inexperience — as feckless. And it makes their embrace — mmmm, embrace — of Palin patently hypocritical.
August 30th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
Thank you, PUMA people, for your role (as bait) in tricking McCain into making this hilarious pick.
August 30th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
I think Andrew is right, this speak volumes about McCain’s contempt for Obama. They honestly believe that Palin, right now, is at least just as qualified, if not more, than Obama.
August 30th, 2008 at 12:34 pm
It’s actually a disproportionately male group. Instead, Obama-skeptical Democrats are older, hawkish, and perhaps not buying Obama as an economic populist. Is going with a young, transparently underqualifed woman with orthodox economic views really such a great way to reach these people?
I wouldn’t underestimate Palin’s ability — rightly or wrongly — to appeal to a significant portion of male voters in states such as Michigan and Colorado. The middle part of the country, plus the intermountain West, is where statewide (male) Democratic politicians feel obligated to stress that they’re comfortable with hunting and associated cultural trappings. It’s not unusual to see Democratic candidates produce ads showing themselves in hunting regalia. The candidates don’t do that for a lark.
That’s the kind of cultural door that Palin could soon be barging through as she campaigns in these swing states.
For historical background, dust off an old copy of Richard Hofstadter’s “Anti-Intellectualism in American Life.” The parts about anti-elitism and hostility to credentialism, starting with Andrew Jackson.
August 30th, 2008 at 12:34 pm
which is why i came to think by mid-day yesterday that there is a 10% chance that she will drop out.
I agree with this, except I think the chances are higher than 10%.
Right, as incompetent as I believe these guys to be, I just have trouble believing that I knew about troopergate from New York, and they didn’t know about it before they picked her. I have trouble believing that McCain met with other candidates at such length and only met her twice, briefly.
Which is why I’m think she may have been chosen for her potential booby traps by drawing us into playing up the importance of experience and making “sexist” gaffes, and that the McCain campaign may have planned from the start to have her eventually step down to spend time with her family/deal with the investigation, making this more of a reverse than a Hail Mary.
Remember how ‘outraged’ conservatives got at BS like referring to Cheney’s daughter as a lesbian? Notice how Bill Kristol is now a feminist? Insincere outrage is what they do best. Get ready for a lot of fake outrage at how sexist we dems are, for forcing this poor woman off the national stage.
Who knows though, hopefully its just a big screw up.
August 30th, 2008 at 12:34 pm
The qualification to be vice president is that the presidential candidate chooses you, and that’s about it.
Palin is a more than adequate vice presidential candidate. She seems bright, based on absolutely nothing except that she won the Alaska governorship fair and square, meaning without family connections.
Most likely McCain will survive his first term. In that case the US gets its first female president in 2012. Palin will have been vice president for a full terms and that is enough experience.
Possibly McCain will die during his first term. In that case Palin will have people around her to tell her what she doesn’t know and the world will continue. The United States is a big enough country that for many reasons, it will survive a Palin administration.
In fact, Palin is nearly certainly more bright and better at getting good advice and taking it than Bush (based on the fact that she won the governorship without family political connections, which cannot be said for Bush’s Texas governorship), and the country is about to survive eight years of Bush.
What Palin does is take “historic” away from Obama and takes “experience” away from McCain. Making this a head to head “who do you want as President, Obama or McCain” election.
Obama can win by burnishing the Obama brand, putting cracks in the McCain brand and out-organizing McCain. Unless he does one of these very well, McCain has a good chance to win now.
There is no attack on Palin that will cause her to stop serving her purpose. Unless she is really a man, she is historic, which means there are two historic tickets no matter what Obama does. Attacks on Palin serve no purpose at all.
August 30th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
Typographical note about the post: reading a passage of text of that length, set in a sans-serif font of that point size, on a large display is extremely difficult–at least for me.
I can only plead again for someone in charge of the site to either switch to a serif font or make the type bigger.
August 30th, 2008 at 12:41 pm
The biggest risk to McCain is very simple: she is a generic Republican. McCain is only doing well in the national polls because he is outperforming the Republican brand.
We don’t need to dwell on asking her specific questions, all we need to ask is how she differs from Bush/Cheney.
This is a good way to approach it from the Democratic perspective because she either is familiar with the differences she has with Bush, or she isn’t, or she doesn’t have any differences.
Another extreme weakness with this pick is that McCain simply cannot deny access to her and maintain a happy press corp. She leaves all of them truly without anything to talk or write about. In order to write, they may want to get an on the record quote.
Finally, any failure to provide this press access will be seen as poor handling and decision making by McCain, since they have no facts about Palin, they will be left with why they have no facts to write about.
August 30th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
I only hope that the Obama campaign continues to do what it did in the ad released this morning; picture Palin (no alliteration intended) so that people remember her while saying NOTHING else about her. That way the press will continue to question the pick without defending her from Democratic attacks, the Republicans who question the choice will continue to question it and the ones who defend it by pointing to her 20 months as Governor in a state with a population smaller than that of metropolitan Minneapolis as the “executive experience” that qualifies her to be President will go on making that absurd argument. There is no reason for the campaign to raise questions from a partisan perspective that public already has and that the press will continue to raise on it’s own.
When Biden debates her, he doesn’t have to bully her and shouldn’t try. All he has to do is treat her respectfully and let her lack of knowledge of both foreign and broad domestic policy speak for itself, while letting her rail against abortion all she wants.
August 30th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
Notice that he is finishing what is his second term. Substance doesn’t seem to matter that much.
August 30th, 2008 at 12:48 pm
Her gaffes will be so breathtaking that Biden will be immunized. I’d put money on it that she will drop out. Now Ism looking forward to the Repub convention.
August 30th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
“Possibly McCain will die during his first term. In that case Palin will have people around her to tell her what she doesn’t know and the world will continue.”
Wow. Were Republicans always this sanguine? I would have loved to see that kind of Zen attitude in December of 2000.
August 30th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
I was ready to say after the DNC that Obama stood a good chance of losing. I appreciate that Obama and the Clintons delivered strong speeches. But I believe that the Democratic Party is not united in the sense that the Clintons will not come out full bore for Obama.
I think that concern vanished with the Palin pick, which was truly an awful pick. The blatant play at women fails because what women I know want is not tokenism, but recognition that a qualified woman ought deserves a shot at the presidency.
Second, McCain loses his central argument – that he is prepared to lead. Were he younger, he might have credibly said that Palin would have time to grow into the role of presidency before he kicked the bucket: kind of like Dan Quayle. But voters might naturally want a VP who was not three years ago mayor of a town when the president is a 74 year old.
Third, Biden’s major problem is that he’s gaffe prone. But the Republicans have put up an VP candidate who is as unvetted as you could possibly be in modern American politics. I predict that once the press starts digging, they will find all sorts of crap on Palin.
VP picks usually do no harm. Quayle didn’t do as much damage as he could have, but remember that there was still the question in 1991 that Bush would dump him.
Palin quite possibly could lose McCain this election.
August 30th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
ML – quit it. Palin dropping out would be a terrible and embarrassing blow to the McCain campaign, not a brilliant masterstroke. How many times does this need to be repeated? There’s no way to spin it as a good thing. Even if they get some leverage out of “look how sexist Democrats are,” it won’t matter. The whole thing will have been an Eagleton level fiasco
August 30th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
Those who are saying that Palin will drop out: there is no chance. She’d have to be caught with a dead boy or a live girl. If Palin drops out, John McCain loses 100% of the time.
August 30th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
Adding, those that think that McCain could actually benefit from Palin dropping out are making the same mistake Matt identifies in this post: thinking that winning the news cycle is all that matters. Why not have three consecutive VPs drop out? That would get a lot of press.
But even McCain’s not that dumb. Doing this intentionally would be unprecedented craziness. It would raise sincere questions about McCain’s mental health. It won’t happen.
August 30th, 2008 at 1:07 pm
What Palin does is take “historic” away from Obama and takes “experience” away from McCain.
Historic how? We had a female VP nom already. Dems did it. I mean it’s great that the GOP is catching up after 20 years, but historic? I don’t see it.
Historic in terms of her supreme unqualifications, I guess.
August 30th, 2008 at 1:07 pm
I think Andrew is right, this speak volumes about McCain’s contempt for Obama.
No, it reveals McCain’s contempt for the public.
August 30th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
I think Palin represents a change from the Bush administration. Bush Republicans abuse the powers of the government for partisan political advantage. Palin abused her power for petty personal spite.
August 30th, 2008 at 1:20 pm
That “Country First” sign looks like the name and logo of an unethical mortgage lender about to get taken over by the FDIC.
August 30th, 2008 at 1:25 pm
“McCain is reaching back to an outdated model of casually made choices.”
There obviously is some small but higher than normal chance of an Eagleton Scenario playing out here. But if that doesn’t happen, it’s a great pick politically for McCain.
For the first time, it gives him a pathway to winning without having to rely on Obama making mistakes.
If you don’t think there is some very good strategic logic here beyond just winning a crucial news cycle, you’re not paying attention.
—–
Also, none of your 5 proposed reasons why they made the pick gets to the heart of the rationale.
August 30th, 2008 at 1:43 pm
Dan Quayle was considerably more experienced than Governor Palin.
August 30th, 2008 at 1:43 pm
I would more or less agree. Troopergate could get embarrassing, but not so embarrassing as having to pick a new running mate. It’s possible that something worse than that will come out, but I think, barring anything really crazy, he’s stuck with her.
August 30th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
I saw a comment somewhere in which someone listed the capsule resumes of the last thirty or so D or R veep nominees. A couple came close (Ferraro and Agnew) but Palin has the thinnest resume in a half-century. If McCain just wanted 3 X chromosomes on the ticket, then just off the top of my head I can name Christine Whitman, Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, Liddy Dole, Meg Whitman, Jodi Rell, Carly Fiorina, Condoleeza Rice, and Kay Hutchinson as being far, far more plausible. I have no doubt another several dozen R women with histories of accomplishment in Government, Industry, or Academia stretching more than two years could easily be found. Palin has no record of even being interested in most of the issues facing our country. If (and it’s a big if) the media report this story straight McCain’s having gotten The Speech out of the headlines will be seen as a Pyrrhic victory.
August 30th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Excellent analysis, except that it really is a crippling blow. This one doesn’t meet the smell test, it seems unhinged, and it is seriously indicting of this man’s judgment over incredibly important issues that will be reflected on once the humor factor is over – heart beat away. Assuming that Dems can show enough restraint in light of this unexpected gift, this was the moment….
August 30th, 2008 at 1:49 pm
Petey, pray tell, what’s the secret “heart of the rationale” that Matt is missing here?
Is it the “historic” nature of the candidacy? Do you think women will show up in droves to vote for someone to be VP simply because she is a woman? If so, do you know any women?
August 30th, 2008 at 1:51 pm
ML – quit it…. The whole thing will have been an Eagleton level fiasco
I’m sorry John, do you have some corner on the truth I wasn’t aware of? Or does being in law school and dropping the Cf. in blog comments convince you that you do?
Just because Eagleton was a fiasco doesn’t mean this would be, nor does it mean it won’t be. Who knows! Not me, and not you, we’re just dudes on the internet trying to make sense of this seemingly irrational pick.
I’m not saying how it will play out, I’m saying that we should be aware of the potential traps because this seems so crazy it may be intentionally so.
August 30th, 2008 at 1:58 pm
So, Petey is here to defend Palin. If I had any doubts that this was a terrible mistake on McCain’s part, they’re gone.
August 30th, 2008 at 2:02 pm
I don’t know why you guys are all throwing Liddy Dole’s name around – she’s actually older than John McCain! (by a month). I’m pretty sure you don’t want two 72 year olds on the ticket. Hutchinson is 65, which is a bit better, but probably not quite enough of a contrast with McCain.
I wonder why nobody mentions Linda Lingle, the governor of Hawaii. Yes, there are those (seemingly unfounded) rumors of lesbianism (and yes, she’s Jewish which wouldn’t go over well with the fundies), but she’s younger, a comparatively successful governor, certainly experienced in government (in various offices since 1980) and much better versed on economic issues than McCain.
August 30th, 2008 at 2:02 pm
As someone who use to really admire McCain, it’s sad that he’s choosing to end his career as such a laughingstock.
August 30th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
If she were caught with a live girl, McCain could get a 3:1 fundraising advantage over Obama by selling the DVD. Just sayin’.
August 30th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
To be fair to McCain, Romney would have been an even worse pick. People just don’t like him. I actually see the Palin pick as fairly shrewd considering where McCain stood. The ostensibly most qualified pick (Romney) was political poison, and a number of other high profile “qualified” picks were not much better. Pawlenty would have been a safe pick and might have given McCain a vital foothold in Minnesota, but he’d still be playing defense.
Its clear that during the convention, the Obama campaign signaled a willingness to blast McCain on the association front, so McCain had to change the game. That’s why I think the stories about last minute arrangements were true. They had to see what the opponent’s moves were.
I mean, its not a good pick in a vacuum. Its a pick of political necessity. If Clinton was Obama’s veep (if she even wanted it), you bet your ass Palin would still be eating moose pudding in Alaska.
August 30th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
Just because Eagleton was a fiasco doesn’t mean this would be, nor does it mean it won’t be. Who knows! Not me, and not you, we’re just dudes on the internet trying to make sense of this seemingly irrational pick.
Right! Those who remember the past are condemned to… Wait, how does that go again?
Also, the pick is perfectly rational, from the standpoint of getting media attention and throwing a hail mary pass for the Presidency. It’s only irrational from the standpoint of picking a good VP.
August 30th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
Matt’s on target in talking about Palin’s potential appeal to male voters distrustful of or gut-averse to Obama. There’s a Waylon Jennings-Ted Nugent wild-ass blue-collar vibe to Palin; you can imagine some country or metal song being written about her. On that score, she seems to be a more genuine article than the faux-bubbas normally thrown up by the GOP. Question is, whether she’ll actually motivate workin’ men who otherwise wouldn’t bother to vote, or just make those who are already committed against Obama more committed to McCain. (His POW creds haven’t locked that down?)
And will that group be outnumbered, in states where it really counts (Ohio, Michigan, Colorado, Virginia, Florida, Nevada, Montana, North Carolina) by those who think that the stakes of this election are too high for them to stomach such a palpably unqualified next-in-line-to-the-presidency?
The Obama campaign came perilously close to blowing it in its initial reaction to Palin, and will have to be very careful how it deals with her from here on. Their guy has drawn a disproportionate share of supporters who back him because he’s cool, charismatic, not-the-usual, etc., rather than for his policy stances. Obama and Palin also rate about the same on the eye-candy scale, albeit to very different crowds and tastes. So progressives aren’t in a position to be too condescending toward Palin on the basis of her buzz-worthiness.
It’s doubtful that she’ll perform with Obama’s consistency; but she won’t need to, given the tighter time frame – two months vs. the 18 months he’s been campaigning – and her subsidiary role as a VP candidate.
You can be sure that Palin is being locked and loaded with focus-grouped sound bites and a 15-minute stump speech, from which she will not vary. Major-media access will be sharply limited, probably concentrated in the week to 10 days when she’s still a fresh face and when the campaign can count on the bulk of questions being biographical. Afterward, her role will be optical, small-market and down-market retail. Her fall itinerary will be places like Akron, Grand Rapids, Roanoke and Colorado Springs, with lots of state fairs, auto shows, fishing tournaments and the like. That far below the radar, she may not self-destruct when any bigfoot media are there to notice. Maybe some YouTubes…
An anti-Palin campaign will need to function much like the harder-edged anti-Obama campaign has: semi-underground, with viral e-mails and word-of-mouth on her more outrageous positions (creationism in schools, shoot the wildlife, anti-abortion absolutism), targeted to receptive audiences and insulated from Obama’s above-ground operation. We’ll see how good Dems and progressives are at this sort of covert campaigning, long since mastered by the GOP and its surrogates.
August 30th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
We’ll see how good Dems and progressives are at this sort of covert campaigning, long since mastered by the GOP and its surrogates.
They’re finally being helped by the media, who seem to have no qualms calling a spade a spade.
August 30th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
Palin’s inexperience reflects negatively on McCain’s character in another way: it makes him look like he is afraid of rival intellects and prefers to surround himself with yes-men. In the Gore & Cheney model, the VP has become a source of wise & private counsel to the President, someone who can respond with authority behind closed doors, “No, Mr President, I wouldn’t do it that way.” Biden clearly can and will play such a role. In contrast, McCain’s staff says Palin plans to “learn at the feet of the master.” As a full-time pupil she could hardly be expected to help much in running the government. Obama’s pick highlights his self-confidence; McCain’s does the opposite.
A good question for McCain at this point would be, “What help in governing to you expect to receive from Palin?” See what answers he could manage to give with a straight face.
August 30th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
“Petey, pray tell, what’s the secret “heart of the rationale” that Matt is missing here?”
Sure. Here are four biggies:
- She pulls in the Clinton vote.
And I don’t mean this in Matthew’s sense of extending the PUMA news story. PUMA’s are Clinton activists, not Clinton voters. And with the convention over, they’re mostly on board, not to mention we’re at the point where Democratic activists aren’t the story anymore.
But if you look at the Clinton vote that Palin helps pull in, you’re looking at overlapping groups of women, working class white votes, rust belt votes and rural votes. Given the latter two groups are crucial in OH and MI, and to a lesser extent, PA, it’s a good pick for this reason alone.
- She brings back McCain’s “reform” message.
The McCain brand in ‘00 was far better electorally than the McCain brand in ‘08. As the Palin story plays out, it’s going to bring the ticket closer to the “attacking the deathstar” thematics of ‘00 than anyone thought McCain was going to be able to achieve.
- She blunts the heart of Obama’s candidacy.
A commenter above writes: “What Palin does is take “historic” away from Obama and takes “experience” away from McCain.”
It’s obviously a bit more complex than this, but one shouldn’t underestimate just how much of the core “change” message of Obama’s candidacy is connected to the identity politics at play.
On a non-policy level, Palin helps gives voters who want to vote for “change” another option in a change year.
- She a fucking star.
Armando had the best line on this one: “The Q rating is high in this one.”
Some unnamed Republican op who’s been working on her talked about her “teflon”, and I can already understand what he’s talking about because of just how powerful her package is – both her presentation and her story.
She scares me well beyond this election. Girl’s got raw talent.
August 30th, 2008 at 3:09 pm
Shorter Petey translations into English:
Petey: “She pulls in the Clinton vote”
Translation:
Working class voters are primarily interested in how much the candidate likes fishing. Because the world’s biggest problem is our grotesque lack of fish.
Petey-language: “She brings back McCain’s “reform” message.”
Translation:
Apparently, some form of untranslatable idiomatic expression in Petey-language. Our scholars are still working on the closest approximation in English. So far, their suggestion is: “Doooooooooood, I’d spank her ass! Milfie!”
Petey-language: “She blunts the heart of Obama’s candidacy.”
Translation:
Only reason why people votin’ for that uppity Negra Osama is cuz they pinko fancy-pants commies and they’s want a Negra or a cunt in office.
Petey-language: “She’s a fucking star”
Translation: Tiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiits!
August 30th, 2008 at 3:17 pm
Obama is already crushing McCain among women, doing much, much better than Gore or Kerry. If Palin cuts that lead in half, McCain still loses. Obama’s only weakness is with women over 50, and Palin doesn’t help much there whereas an older, more seasoned women would.
If McCain tries to run a campaign based on reform and change, he gets trounced. No way he can beat Obama on his own ground. Focusing on experience, steadfastness, patriotism is McCain’s only chance.
August 30th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
The McCain team fully intended to select their version of Harriet Miers. She will quit in disgrace in three weeks, followed by a John Roberts-caliber replacement, a massive bounce, and momentum that will carry them to victory.
Mavericky!
August 30th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
“Petey-language: “She’s a fucking star”
I appreciate you adding the apostrophe for me, burritoboy.
August 30th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
“If McCain tries to run a campaign based on reform and change, he gets trounced. No way he can beat Obama on his own ground.”
Prior to the past four years, “reform” was McCain’s ground.
And for a couple of reasons, Palin allows him to reclaim it to a degree I didn’t think possible prior to the pick.
They’ve already started pivoting in that direction over the last 24 hours, and I expect them to make it central going forward.
August 30th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
McCain = Tactics
Obama = Strategy
Campaign and governance both I suspect.
August 30th, 2008 at 3:41 pm
“The McCain team fully intended to select their version of Harriet Miers. She will quit in disgrace in three weeks, followed by a John Roberts-caliber replacement, a massive bounce, and momentum that will carry them to victory.”
If Palin does wind up withdrawing, McCain could do worse than to select John Roberts himself as a replacement.
However, I agree that this scenario would kill the campaign. Voters want a basic level of competence and credibility that is inconsistent with blowing the VP pick that badly.
August 30th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
They’ve already started pivoting in that direction over the last 24 hours, and I expect them to make it central going forward.
It’s an interesting theory. It’ll be interesting to see how they carry off centralizing that theme in the context of their national political convention. Conveying “we will kick out the corrupt legacy of the last 8 years!” is a bit at odds with celebrating the party’s accomplishments, given that the corrupt legacy in question is their own.
August 30th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
The McCain team fully intended to select their version of Harriet Miers. She will quit in disgrace in three weeks, followed by a John Roberts-caliber replacement, a massive bounce, and momentum that will carry them to victory.
Do you actually think Miers boosted Bush’s approval rating? Stop it, stop it, stop it.
August 30th, 2008 at 3:54 pm
Right! Those who remember the past are condemned to… Wait, how does that go again?
You’re right, everything is exactly like something that came before!
While we should certainly be informed by Eagleton, we shouldn’t take it for granted that it would play out the same. I really don’t see why pointing out the potential trap should be controversial.
August 30th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
“Conveying “we will kick out the corrupt legacy of the last 8 years!” is a bit at odds with celebrating the party’s accomplishments, given that the corrupt legacy in question is their own.”
Sure. But if they embrace Bush/Cheney, they’re going to lose in a landslide.
Palin-ism gives them a path to distancing themselves from the current administration without pissing off their own base in the process. That’s part of why it’s so smart.
August 30th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
All this bickering about trivia. by a country mile, this is the best summation of the approach of the two campaigns, explaining exactly how McCain arrived at the pick.
Pearls before swine.
That said…. I too agree that this could well be ‘a crippling blow’, but then it may not be. Progressives would be better to be cautious; McCain’s campaign has shown itself to be a lot more capable than anyone expected.
August 30th, 2008 at 4:11 pm
“McCain’s campaign has shown itself to be a lot more capable than anyone expected.”
Team Chicago has the high ground for this election, but Team Sedona has the better generals. And good generals can win a battle from a lousy position.
August 30th, 2008 at 4:17 pm
The VP doesn’t do much historically to draw in votes from outside their home state. They can make someone mildly supporting a candidate feel more confident in their choice, but they do little to persuade. Did anyone vote for Gore because of Lieberman or for Bush because of Cheney? Not really. A VP pick can do more to harm a candidate (Eagleton, Ferraro’s husband’s scandals, etc.) than help in general. As for Palin in particular, I’m not sure someone who sounds like they completely lack an opinion on Iraq (at least McCain has his own opinions, they’re just wrong) and has admitted on camera about a month ago they don’t know what the VP does is going to bring in working class men who are worried about their economic situation.
The fact that Petey thinks this is smart just shows how dumb this pick really is. Go read Taylor Marsh. She has never sounded so pro-Obama. She thinks McCain is showing he thinks women are stupid.
In general, the Obama campaign should just thank the McCain campaign for admitting that they think Obama is experienced enough and attack McCain head-on while ignoring Palin. Treat her like a non-entity. Instead, they should talk about things like Biden’s leadership on the Violence Against Women Act.
August 30th, 2008 at 5:16 pm
This reminds me so much of Bush’s Harriet Miers pick for SCOTUS, which never seemed serious from the beginning, and never was. I think McCain is simply waiting to exploit the media’s inevitable scrutiny of this PTA mom, which will then give the campaign a political opportunity to “stand up” for women voters. This is not COUNTRY FIRST, it is CYNICISM FIRST.
August 30th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
“They’ve already started pivoting in (the “reform”) direction over the last 24 hours, and I expect them to make it central going forward.”
The GOP convention schedule has come out, and they have “Reform” as the Tuesday theme, with Palin as the headliner.
And if you want an illustration of how big Team Sedona’s balls are, check out the theme for Thursday, the night of McCain’s speech…
August 30th, 2008 at 6:35 pm
That schedule has been superceded by one that puts Palin on Wednesday, where she (now) should be. Not too inspiring that an obviously obsolete one got sent out, but whether it’s the RNC or AP to blame I can’t say.
August 30th, 2008 at 6:42 pm
Thx, DonBoy.
I thought having her speak on Tuesday was pretty damn remarkable. Veep always goes on Wednesday. I figured they were trying to quickly and dramatically change the topic from Bush/Cheney on Monday.
But ain’t that final night’s theme pretty incredible?
August 30th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
Yes, and if he were running against a Democratic incumbent, he could pull it off. But we’re at the end of 8 years of Republican governance behind a President whom McCain has made a point of embracing in recent years to bolster his support in the party, against a Democratic challenger who has made change his primary raison d’etre. McCain is outflanked on that front, and Palin can’t change that.
August 30th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
Re: Crazy pick utterly stomps on the Democratic Convention as a news story.
The GOP is about to be stomped on hard by the news cycle too: Hurricane Gustav is set to drive Sarah Palin and the upcoming RNC off the front page and the lead story at 6. Tropical storm Hannah may well provide a sequel, keeping the GOP buried.
Re: But if you look at the Clinton vote that Palin helps pull in, you’re looking at overlapping groups of women, working class white votes, rust belt votes and rural votes.
Hillary Clinton’s voters are not pro-Life voters. They are people like my (michigan) step-mother who have serious qualms about Obama, but who can’t stomach the thought of going back to the coat-hanger era or seeing some shill for the Religious Right in power. Palin appeal to the GOP base. Her appeal outside that is limited.
Re: As the Palin story plays out, it’s going to bring the ticket closer to the “attacking the deathstar” thematics of ‘00 than anyone thought McCain was going to be able to achieve.
Unless McCain and Palin start running hard against W Bush and all his evil works that will be a hard stunt to pull off.
Re: What Palin does is take “historic” away from Obama and takes “experience” away from McCain.”
We’ve had a woman VP candidate before– who by the way also failed to deliver very many votes that weren’t already locked in by her party.
August 30th, 2008 at 8:57 pm
Matt: “busting it out constantly undermines the asset and creates a powerful negative counter-narrative.”
To who? You? Me? We have already dismissed the POW crap.
Do you have some POLLS that say the US electorate has done so? Or does the fact that the polls show McCain closing the gap on Obama show the opposite?
If you don’t have any evidence of the POW effect you’re promoting – and a few critical comments from people in the MSM don’t count until they become consistent – you’re talking through your hat as usual.
August 30th, 2008 at 11:35 pm
Sure. But if they embrace Bush/Cheney, they’re going to lose in a landslide.
Mein gott, man, that’s the whole point. How can they NOT embrace Bush/Cheney in their own f’r cripesakes Republican National Convention? Or to put it the other way, how do they dis-embrace them at their own convention when they constitute the face, soul and identity of their party for the last 8 years?
Sure, Hail Mary Sarah is an attempt to somehow square that circle, but the operative word is attempt. You seem to think this is some brilliantly planned Grand Strategy. It’s not. It’s a desperate attempt to avert a catastrophe. They may succeed in the attempt, given a supine and groveling CorpMedia. They can parade Sarah as the emblem of their newly discovered Mavericky reform, but there’s no way around the fact that it’s THEMSELVES they’re talking about reforming, and no matter how you slice and dice it mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa is not a position of strength from which to launch your final election push. This is something that has been forced upon them by their own failure and they’re trying to make the best of it. But as my rabid rightwing Pop used to say, “he did his best, but his best was none too good.” Unlike you, I don’t think there IS a best good enough to turn this into some kind of victory romp for the GOP. “Pay no attention to that little man behind the curtain” is all they’ve got to work with now, so that’s what they’re working with.
August 31st, 2008 at 1:11 am
“This is something that has been forced upon them by their own failure and they’re trying to make the best of it. But as my rabid rightwing Pop used to say, “he did his best, but his best was none too good.” Unlike you, I don’t think there IS a best good enough to turn this into some kind of victory romp for the GOP. “Pay no attention to that little man behind the curtain” is all they’ve got to work with now, so that’s what they’re working with.”
No doubt.
My basic read of the race is that Team Obama holds the better cards, but Team McCain is playing their hand better.
Dunno which way it ends.
August 31st, 2008 at 4:31 am
“3 Crazy pick confuses Democratic oppo research and gets into Obama OODA loop.”
Matt, this is the most intelligent thing you have ever written. John Boyd was crazy yes, but his OODA loop was one of the many very insightful things he came up with.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Boyd_(military_strategist)
I guess I’m crazy too, because it appears Petey is the voice of reason on this thread. Palin is clearly a superior human being– A mother of 4 (soon to add a 5th) with no family political connections becoming her state’s youngest governor is impressive enough. But it takes serious balls for a small town mayor to take on her own party’s machine and serious talent to kick the incumbent governor’s ass and take his job in the process. Incidentally, that’s why Harriet Miers comparisons are so off base. Miers was simply a Bush courtier, she achieved power simply because she kissed W’s ass. Palin actually won statewide office in her own right.
If she can make it through the next week without making a Quayle-style gaffe, its inevitable she’ll be president someday.
August 31st, 2008 at 6:20 am
“If she can make it through the next week without making a Quayle-style gaffe, its inevitable she’ll be president someday.”
I wouldn’t go to inevitable, but if she survives the baptism by fire, she’s got a damn good chance at the WH at some point later or sooner.
And if you care about policy, that’d be a nightmare. A doctrinaire right-winger with popular appeal is a baaaaad combination.
—–
The irony of this is that after going to a helluva lot of trouble to cast himself as JFK reborn with the stadium show and the moonshot promises, Obama missed the essential part of the JFK story: taking the party rival you really don’t want as your VP to ensure you, y’know, win the election.
Now, instead of JFK, he’s at risk of turning into Adlai Stevenson – cerebral guy from Illinois who loses to a war hero, and still gets his party’s nomination again four years later just to lose a second time.
If he’d done things the JFK way, he’d have won easily and made history, there’d be a Dem administration, and none of us would ever have had to figure out who Sarah fucking Palin is.
August 31st, 2008 at 8:00 am
Obama does not have to attack Palin directly; he merely needs to turn to Joe and say that he picked him because he is fully qualified to assume the Presidency.
August 31st, 2008 at 8:16 am
From Wikipedia:
Total number of vote in primaries:
* John F. Kennedy – 1,847,259 (31.43%)
* Pat Brown – 1,354,031 (23.04%)
* George H. McLain – 646,387 (11.00%)
* Hubert Humphrey – 590,410 (10.05%)
* George Smathers – 322,235 (5.48%)
* Michael DiSalle – 315,312 (5.37%)
* Unpledged delegates – 241,958 (4.12%)
* Wayne Morse – 147,262 (2.51%)
* Adlai Stevenson – 51,833 (0.88%)
Wait, where exactly is LBJ in this list? LBJ was brought on to win Texas. Where would Clinton help win, New York? VP picks generally don’t bring in votes outside of their home state and even then that can be muted (think Edwards in NC in 2004). People may vote against a presidential nominee because of VP issues – McGovern after the Eagleton fiasco – a lot more than they vote for them because of the VP. LBJ was the Senate Majority Leader through much of the Eisenhower years. Biden is one of the most experienced Senators out there and chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Meanwhile, Clinton is just on her second term. Your analogy fails on so many fronts that one has to assume you’re either an idiot or arguing in bad faith.
August 31st, 2008 at 5:53 pm
Re: Or to put it the other way, how do they dis-embrace them at their own convention when they constitute the face, soul and identity of their party for the last 8 years?
Over in France Nicholas Sarkoszy managed to do exactly that: run against his (very unpopular) predecessor despite the fact said predecessor was a member of his own party. I figured McCain would pull a similar stunt once he was secure in the nomination. Oh, he’d keep the pro-Life, anti-gay marriage brand both because he is on board for them personally and because he needs those voters, but on other issues he’d part ways with Bush totally: come up with some Nixonian plan to Bring The Boys Home and have Peace With Honor; emphasize his differences with Bush on matters like Global Warming and tax cuts, maybe even embrace some sort of Heritage Foundation, Romneyesqe form of universal healthcare. The guy likes to pose as Teddy Roosevelt– well TR flipped off the Powers That Be in his GOP a century ago and governed as a progressive. I’m wondering if McCain has gone senile or something for failing to realize how he could win the election hands down, transform the GOP is a way that puts Bush forever behind it, and secure a place in history for hismelf.
August 31st, 2008 at 6:10 pm
“From Wikipedia: Total number of vote in primaries … where exactly is LBJ in this list?”
You might be interested to learn that the open primary era did not begin until 1972. Up until then, the primary results had almost nothing to do with delegate selection, and the leader in primary votes was more often the nomination loser than the winner. To take an example, Estes Kefuaver was easily the primary winner in both ‘52 and ‘56, but Adlai Stevenson easily got both nominations.
In the spring and early summer of 1960, the Dem nomination race came down to a JFK vs LBJ race, despite the fact that LBJ had not competed in the primaries. There was even a high-stakes televised debate between the two on the eve of the convention that JFK won, and is pretty widely credited as giving him the nomination over LBJ.
If you want to look at the numbers for any nomination race before ‘72, look at the delegate count, not the primary vote count. And beyond the numbers, I’d guarantee you that 100% of observers in the summer of ‘60 thought it was exclusively a JFK vs LBJ race.
August 31st, 2008 at 9:56 pm
Exactly, meaning your whole point is bullshit. What made LBJ and JFK rivals was their time in the Senate and fighting for elite support, pitting the seasoned Master of the Senate against the charismatic up and comer who wasn’t willing to show that much deference to seniority. What made Obama and Clinton rivals was competing in an open primary that revolved around personality and media spin due to the lack of policy details between them on many issues. They were both relative newcomers to the Senate (both having served less than two full terms) who had national profiles above in part from appearing in the media. The very nature and impetus of the two set of senators’ rivalries are too difference to illuminate anything useful. Clinton wasn’t an old Senate hand. She was barely in her second term. Comparing Clinton in 2008 to LBJ in 1960 is borderline functionally retarded. Your entire point is laughably stupid. The nearest equivalents of LBJ in the primary race were Dodd and Biden. The last time I checked, Biden was Obama’s VP pick. You have nothing intelligent to add.
August 31st, 2008 at 10:05 pm
Also, LBJ was almost entirely put on the ticket to win Texas – not because he was the runner-up, but adhering to the old CW of using the VP to pick up a state. Clinton could not be thus any real parallel to LBJ in this regard because no Democrat in 2008 would appoint their VP just to win New York State. If a pick was made using LBJ logic, which you seem to favor, that would mean choosing someone like Strickland or Rendell. 2004 showed how picking the primary runner-up doesn’t do anything necessarily to help the ticket.
March 1st, 2009 at 6:11 pm
cialis
Incredible site!
March 22nd, 2009 at 6:05 am
tramadol
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
March 22nd, 2009 at 10:25 am
buy viagra online
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:10 am
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
buy cheap viagra
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:07 am
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right
cheap brand pfizer viagra
April 9th, 2009 at 5:24 am
I bookmarked this site, Thank you for good job! viagra
April 20th, 2009 at 5:45 am
Very nice site!
cheap viagra