Caution and Change

by: Mike Lux

Mon Jun 16, 2008 at 16:14


Now that, as expected, Obama got a little bit of a bump from the primary fight being over and the Hillary endorsement, he seems to have established a small lead in the 2- to 6-point range, depending on the poll.  While I am pleased that Obama has the lead, I have to admit that this gives me a new worry, which is that the campaign will get too cautious; Democratic Presidential campaigns have a history when they get a lead of starting to get cautious.  It happened to the Kerry campaign when they got a small lead in the spring of 2004; it happened to the Gore campaign when they opened up a lead after the 2000 convention; it happened to the Clinton campaign/White House in 1996 when they opened up a big early lead on Dole, which had less disastrous consequences for Clinton himself, but certainly hurt the Democratic drive to retake the House; it happened to Dukakis is 1988; going way back, it even happened to Carter in 1976 as an early lead of more than 20 points shrunk to a 2-point margin in the final tally.

As I have written in the past, caution seems to be endemic to the last couple of generations of Democratic politicians, and it is natural for a campaign with a lead to want to be careful about making mistakes that blow that lead.  I would argue, though, that the biggest mistake we could make this year is one of caution.  Here's my thinking:

1. What got Obama this far is that he was the change candidate.  If he gets too cautious in his policy and his campaign strategy that makes him look like a typical politician.  The more Obama looks like a typical politician, the more a comfortable old brand name like McCain looks appealing: experienced, independent, a maverick who will challenge both parties, a war hero who's been serving his country since before Obama was born.  In a conventional game with two candidates who seem like conventional politicians, that McCain brand starts to sound pretty good.

2. The electoral college math also trends toward McCain in a conventional game.  Even with a narrow lead in the national popular vote, Kerry states Michigan, Pennsylvania, and New Hampshire are big challenges to win, and none of the Bush states that seem most likely (except maybe Iowa)-Ohio, Virginia, Missouri, New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada-are easy at all.  If Pawlenty is on the ticket, that makes Minnesota tough.  It is only when Obama is making major gains in the overall vote, or when he is challenging the traditional voting patterns, that this race goes from being a tough-to-win nail-biter to a solid victory.  It is hard to make those kinds of gains, or challenge those traditional voting patterns, without having a bold, risk-taking candidacy.

3. The change Obama is promising is not going to come with squeaking out a narrow Presidential win and only picking up a couple more seats in the Senate and House.  If in this year of overwhelming Democratic Party brand advantage, we only squeak by with a narrow win, it's not going to give the big change agenda Obama is promising much momentum.  And with the mood of the public, and the big problems there at our doorstep, if Obama doesn't deliver on his big change promises, there will be massive hell to pay for the Democrats in 2010 and 2012.

So what do I mean by being bold instead of cautious?  I am talking about a campaign mindset that rejects the conventional wisdom both in terms of policy and tactics.  Obama should push McCain hard on the policy debate, propose big policy changes on multiple fronts, push the ideological advantage we now have aggressively, and force McCain to react to their agenda.  And on tactics, think big and gutsy as well.  Spend real time and resources in states like North Dakota, Montana, Mississippi, and North Carolina.  Call for nationwide days of action by supporters on key issues.  Hold web-connected rallies and events all over the country on the same day.  Genuinely deal with McCain on a negotiated series of unusually formatted debates and town halls.  Give speeches in front of hostile audiences.  Run ads that have edge to them, that don't look like every other political ad.

Let's make the campaign-the issues Obama presses forward, the events and tactics and speeches Obama does-be as exciting and different as the country wants the new President to be.  We can win this election by a landslide if we don't get cautious and start playing prevent defense.  

Mike Lux :: Caution and Change

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Caution and Change | 11 comments
Absolutely On Every Point! (4.00 / 4)
McCain doesn't have a prayer against a full-court offense.  He'd be very lucky to hold Obama to 55% if Obama went that route, and the EVs would be well over 330--possibly mcuch more than that.

More importantly, we'd have a very good shot at the 61 Senate seats we need (so long, Mr. Lieberman, it has not been nice to know you).

    "Whatever you can do, or dream you can do, begin it. Boldness has genius, power, and magic in it. Begin it now." - Goethe

Or we can go with more of the McSame.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


Hell Yes, Goethe quote! (4.00 / 1)
Nothing like a little German Romanticism to inspire. I agree totally with this. I am not to secure in my once strong hopes that he would run a campaign as revolutionary as this, being that he has brought on some more centrist-oriented advisors, but I think it is a good sign that he is pushing the voter drive and spending resources in areas as red as Georgia. I still think he should spend in more areas, but its up to him. Hopefully he will take Mr. Lux's advice and really wipe the floor with McSame.

Former Edwards Supporter, Obama Supporter since January 30, 2008

[ Parent ]
Won't happen (0.00 / 0)
A. Change is not going to sell in the General like it did in the Dem primaries. And even saying that Obama Change only sold to half of the Dems participating. That's less than 25% of the electorate.

Clinton also offered change although that was not her message. Hers was one of polices which is what the General will be about and which is Obama's weak suit.

B. Obama is for the most part 'responding' to what McCain is saying. Therefore McCain is controlling what is being talked about. In short - McCain is on offense, Obama is on Defense. That's a loser but it was easy to see it coming.

C. Obama's people are talking about winning without either Ohio or Florida. Right! What kind of talk is that? Nothing like telling the voters of those two states that you don't expect them to vote for you. Could be contagious.

D. Right Mike. Obama is setting us up for massive failure in 2010 and 2012 - along with his own demise in 2012. He can continue the history of 1 term Dem Presidents (except for Bill Clinton). Change was always a losing strategy. Does Obama really think the Republicans are going to help him pass a Progressive agenda? The only thing that will pass is post-partisan triangulating middle of the road policies full of the same old stuff we have seen for the last 8 years. In short - No Change. Goodbye Dems. The Party Brain Trust who ushered Obama in as President will end up in the history books in a not so flattering way.

E. Pretty speeches is not going to get it done. In the primaries the non-thinking activists go all gugu gaga over such empty nonsense but general voters want to know where the substance is. That is not Obama's strength and he can't change that. Advantage McCain.

Writing in a blog about what Obama should do is not going to change anything especially when what is written is a non-starter. What should be written about is what he can do. And short of long empty speeches that sound pretty it isn't  much.

My lord his post Clinton bounce lasted how many days? And his big ideas presented with a road map of how to get there has totaled how many? And his idea of the first 100 days consisted of rolling back Bush's Executive Orders! That will help the economy won't it? I'm sure that got everyone excited.


[ Parent ]
Huh? (0.00 / 0)
"What got Obama this far is that he was the change candidate.  If he gets too cautious in his policy and his campaign strategy that makes him look like a typical politician."

What has Obama done so far that hasn't been cautious?  Specifically, what big change has Obama promised?  What's made Obama electable so far is that he's been cautious in his message and vague in his promises.  So, I'm not sure what Obama's new prevent defense would even look like.  As long as he does what he's been doing, he'll probably coast to the White House.


Huh! (4.00 / 1)
All Obama has to do is aggressively promote the agenda he already has established on his issues page.  Many progressives have been disappointed by the scale of the proposed changes and want much more, but sometimes we let that fact get in the way of noticing this agenda is much more grand than anything aggressively pursued for a generation.

This plan was safe in the primary because all the Democrats had something similar.  The base wants big new changes and the nominees largely delivered.  You can credit Edwards or the electorate or the individual candidates but at the end of the day this is what we've got.

For a while it has seemed like Obama might go wacky and swing left for the general.  Not really, of course, but rhetorically.  Since all the Democrats supported roughly the same stuff the primary was relatively issue free; what few issues we did see front and center tended to be nit-picks on health care differences (mandates), gas tax holidays and exactly what sort of negotiations are necessary to meet with foreign enemy leaders.

But Obama's proposals are radically different than McCain's.  Simply promoting those differences boldly, front and center will do the trick.

The bad news is Obama might very well sit back and play it safe.  The good news is Obama's biggest strength tends to be to counter-punch; as soon as he is attacked for something he'll double down and promote the heck out of what he was attacked for.  I suspect McCain will make strong attempts to attack Obama's "tax and spend" proposals.  If McCain does this and Obama responds as he has in the past, we should get what we want.


[ Parent ]
tone of your comment (0.00 / 0)
The tone of your comment, (i.e. you express your worry which sounds timid), is at odds with your advice to the Obama campaign.  Why don't you just push the points that take it to McCain--be part of the solution, not of the problem.  

As for your proposals, there is a mix of things that can be done by the Obama campaign alone, and some that require McCain participation. The one's for Obama alone are fine, and his campaign which is doing well can keep on trucking. The one's requiring McCain's involvement, after twelves years of Republican "My way or no way" behavior, seem like just more wishful thinking.

When you get to thinking about next year, then with all possibility, the Democrats can work things out from both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue, which is a game that we haven't seen in a generation, and which could be quite different than anything that can be put forth in an election.


Not To Belabor The Obvious, But... (0.00 / 0)
The tone of your comment, (i.e. you express your worry which sounds timid), is at odds with your advice to the Obama campaign.  Why don't you just push the points that take it to McCain--be part of the solution, not of the problem.
 

Making a sober argument for a fire-breathing campaign tends to have more of an impact than ranting about the need for one.

Funny how it works that way.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Here's a thought (4.00 / 3)

 Obama has a national platform now. He can loudly put his foot down on the FISA "compromise", and explain to the public exactly what's at stake here.

 Now THAT would be bold. But it would also be right.  

"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn


Oh And It Would Also Reinforce The Whole "Judgement" Argument (0.00 / 0)
Bold. Right. Political saavy.

What more could you ask for?

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Woo! (0.00 / 0)
Ajax! I just noticed this! Sweet.

Anyways. I agree with you pretty much on everything but one thing. Tim Pawlenty would not make Minnesota competitive. He has never won a majority of votes in our state but Jesse Ventura's party (The Independence Party) has basically turned into the party of concern troll DLC Democrats. In addition to that the Democratic Party here is great at nominating horrible candidates for governor. If our candidate in 2006 had not cursed out a reporter on tape in the last days of the election Pawlenty would have lost.

Minnesota is a lock for Obama, Pawlenty or no.  

John McCain: Beacuse lobbyists should have more power


Stay the course right? (0.00 / 0)
A. Change is not going to sell in the General like it did in the Dem primaries. And even saying that Obama Change only sold to half of the Dems participating. That's less than 25% of the electorate.

This is wretched stuff. Banality elevated to symphonic levels. What should the strategy be? One of stay the course? That's a winner. It's essentially what the Democratic Congress has been doing for the most part since being swept into office in 2006, and rhetoric aside, the Democratic Congress has done very little differently then a Republican Congress would have, and because of this Congress is only slightly more popular then the president. Democrats were swept into power because the popular perception was they would change course on things like Iraq, and on issues of concern like trade agreements. They've been a major disappointment, and the only reason why they won't reap the whirlwind for it, and will in fact see their numbers swell further, is because the Republicans are now, and probably for a generation, or more, saddled with the reputation of astounding corruption, incompetence and ineptitude.

Obama and the Democrats couldn't blow 2008 if they tried, but if defeat were possible, the quickest way to bring it about would be to avoid talk of change. Tell the American people we're going to be in Iraq for another decade in order to protect gas prices, gas prices that could easily reach $7/gal within 18-24 months with a full American military presence in Iraq. A trillion dollars worth in the very near future. You can sell that along with inflation, which is ubiquitous to wars, even with stable oil prices. You can avoid all that change talk as the dollar continues to decline (making American companies like Anheuser-Busch ripe for foreign takeovers, which is already stoking political and popular resentment on both sides of the aisle)

Voters in the general don't want change? You think the voters want an ever increasing national debt financed almost exclusively by foreigners? A national debt which is going to drive interest rates way up in the future, choking off economic growth, and in turn chipping away at the American standard of living? You think the continuing disaster in the housing and capital markets cries out for no change? What exactly are McCain's policies on these matters? Stay in Iraq? cut the corporate tax rate to 25%? bailout the investment banks? bomb Iran? That'll keep gasoline below $10/gal.. Does Obama have solutions to many of these problems? No. But neither did Ronald Reagan have solutions to the many problems he attacked Carter for, and he won overwhelmingly. I hope McCain takes your advice, because it is so clearly aimed at losing the election for somebody, but I realize it's not McCain.  


Caution and Change | 11 comments
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox