Finding The Right Attack On McCain

by: Chris Bowers

Tue Aug 05, 2008 at 09:48


Obama has released his second attack ad on McCain in two days. Like the first one, this is still probably inadequate when it comes to driving the debate and establishing the elite narrative. Unlike the first one, it has a promising new avenue that could do just that, if used more boldly:


The part I find intriguing is the very first line: "John McCain: he's been in Washington for 26 years." The rest of the piece is pretty much the same litany of small-bore policies listed over rising music that we have come to expect from Democratic campaign ads over the past decade or two. While the latter won't do anything to change the debate or the narrative, which is really what a successful attack does, the first bit has potential. Here's why:

  • It's not entirely rational: In order to grab pundit and media attention, sometimes the straightforward, deductive arguments need to be left behind in favor of something more vague, more emotional, and more identity-based. The "been in Washington for 26 years" line attacks McCain as a long-term Washington insider, and hints, but does not state, a wide range of other attacks. These include cynicism, connection to special interests, connection to Bush and the Republican Party, and even possibly to McCain's age.

  • It will probably piss McCain off: In order to change the narrative, you need to get your opponent to personally respond to your attack. Given that McCain has been itching for Obama to attack him based on age, this line of attack his probably implies that just enough, without actually saying anything, in order to get an age-based identity backlash from McCain. If played correctly, such a backlash has the potential to change the narrative by creating a discussion about whether McCain has been in Washington, D.C., too long in order to make any significant changes. And, as I noted above, having this debate would bring along implications about McCain's cynicism, connection to special interests, connection to Bush and Republicans, and even to his age.

  • It is specific to McCain: While the attack connects to long-standing Democratic attacks on Republicans, like connections to large corporations, it is also specific to McCain. He has been in Washington too long, he is too old, etc. This is why it is a superior attack to "they" will try to scare you about me. It connects to regular anti-Republican narratives, but it is specific to McCain's identity.

Overall, I don't think that this attack is exploited well enough in this ad, but it has potential. If used with the proper level of rhetoric, the "McCain has been in D.C." for too long, could change the narrative, and start directing the balance of attacks toward McCain. It is also probably something that Obama personally believes about McCain, so I imagine we will see more of it. It is better than the "McCain is a flip-flopper" attack, which doesn't make any sense if you want to tie McCain to Bush. It is better than "McCain is a rich dude with $500 shoes and eight homes" attack, which is basically a responsive attack to the charge that Obama is elitist and doesn't change the narrative. It is more in the vein of "McCain is too tied to large corporations" attack, but it takes a less rational, more emotional, more identity-based approach. And that is what you need to do if you want to change the narrative.  

Chris Bowers :: Finding The Right Attack On McCain

Tags: , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
McCain is handing out tire gauges... (4.00 / 1)
...as the 2008 version of purple band aids...  they are running the 2004 campaign all over again...

I say, we take their smear and turn it around on them.  Let's offer our OWN tire gauges and bring ours to the convention, too, just like the GOP will...

I personally think that Obama needs to have commercials where it is just him talking to people in a very casual way... make a joke about the smears they are throwing at him, and explain again why these dirty trick politics are just that... dirty tricks that won't actually change your life for the better...

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!


I like both ads (4.00 / 2)
Watching politics for a few decades has left me with two conclusions:

(1) I cannot evaluate what political ads are effective with the electorate at large;
(2) My opinion about who "won" a debate has no correlation whatsoever to what the rest of the country thinks.

Still, I liked both ads.  And I think that they probably complement each other.  

In fact, I wouldn't mind a concerted, coordinated attack on McCain as a tool of the oil industry with no record of supporting alternative energy sources. Seems to me that this kind of attack could have legs, as it is supported by the facts.


The problem is that you need to (4.00 / 3)
choose between reciting details and telling a story.

I watched the ad ten seconds ago, and I've already forgotten the details. Blah blah, break our dependence on foreign oil, blah blah, promote alternative energy. That's crap. You could lift both those statements whole and plop 'em down in a McCain ad.

The McCain campaign is telling a story. That's why he's not talking about himself. He's telling a story about Obama. It's a pretty good story, too, with conflict and rising drama and all of that. Of course people listen; we like stories.

And in reply, the Obama campaign is describing politics. And most of us (well, maybe not the ones on the blogs ...) would rather watch a movie than attend a political science class.

McCain's story is begging to be told, too. And people are eager to hear it, I think. It's a classic tragedy.

Act I: A young wastrel goes to war, and serves honorably. He's captured, and released: a triumph of the human spirit.
Act II: Except back home, he find that he's still a wastrel inside. He can't stay loyal to his wife and family. He dumps them for an heiress. He struggles to maintain his principles, but over twenty-six long years in the soul-deadening Republican Party, he learns to prostitute himself for power. Keating Five. Abramoff. Lobbyists. Gambling. There's a moment when he can redeem himself--the Kerry campaign--but instead he pledges himself to political expedience, and the young warrior is lost forever.
Act III: Struggling for the highest office, he descends to the lowest depths. He's completely sold himself to the Bush wing of the Republican Party now, and no trace of his better self remains.

Basically, the theme is: McCain betrayed his 'better self' for political power.


[ Parent ]
McCain is certainly "telling stories" (4.00 / 1)
Whatever slight momentum they may have picked up is just from having thrown so much crap against the wall that a little bit of it eventually sorta-kinda-maybe began to stick.  A campaign that couldn't decide whether its opponent was an unprincipled flip-flopper or an incorrigible ideologue (McCain himself pushed both of those "stories" about Obama within a 10 day span before Obama's overseas trip) isn't exactly telling stories with Spielbergian effectiveness.  More like Michael Bay.  

[ Parent ]
I think that's a feature, not a bug. (4.00 / 1)
They're telling a story and responding to audience interest in  (almost) real-time. So if something seems to 'stick', then they elaborate. That's actually a pretty powerful technique.

And one of the strengths of storytelling is that there's no real conflict between 'unprincipled flip-flopper' and 'incorrigible ideologue'. That's completely irrational, right? How can Obama possibly be both?

Easy. I'll explain with a story ...


[ Parent ]
You don't think *everything* is sticking, do you? (4.00 / 2)
They dropped the "Obama flip-flopped on Iraq" like a hot potato when it clearly got them nowhere.  They also don't seem to have gotten any traction with "he'd rather lose a war than lose an election."  

Overall, I don't think we're really disagreeing on very much here.  I'm just saying that while it makes sense to talk about this stuff, we shouldn't overestimate what the other guys are doing.  


[ Parent ]
McCain is merely kitchen-sinking Obama (0.00 / 0)
And maybe in the process, they've found a workable strategy.

But I wouldn't give them so much credit for spinning any kind of consistent story either.


[ Parent ]
Oh, lord, no. Not at all. (4.00 / 2)
I think that virtually nothing sticks. That's why the willingness to keep flinging away is a feature!

I think they're slowly closing in only now on a workable story, because they've done the 'brainstorming'. I actually think the McCain campaign is largely crap, and hobbled by an almost-entirely crap candidate.

But either they understand the power of narrative storytelling, or they get enough assists from the media so it's the same thing. Well, they understand enough to do the 'Britney/Paris' ad, which is nothing but an attempt to form a narrative. I'm trying to think of the equivalent coming from the Obama side,and the closest I see--as Chris says--is the very tentative '26 years in Washington ...'


[ Parent ]
As a Litigator (4.00 / 2)
you learn that you must have your "story" to make your argument.

And one thing the story has to have is a hook.

Right now the Obama advertising is missing the hook.  


[ Parent ]
Please don't make my point (4.00 / 2)
more succinctly and intelligently than I did!

That's just embarrassing. (But no doubt why I'm a novelist and not a litigator--I like the long form ...)


[ Parent ]
I've been arguing for (0.00 / 0)
this kind of populist approach forever, and although I think the ads could be sharper, it's the right message.

The challenge for Obama is to come up with a line of attack that's controversial enough to take on a life of its own and be played again and again for free. Using the visual of McCain hugging Bush might be enough to do it. Broaching the age issue might also do it, although that carries risk of a backlash.


[ Parent ]
Ad Is All About Age... (4.00 / 1)
...from the first image McCain looks, old, tired, and drawn.  Obama is young, fresh, and bursting with energy.  The last line says it all; "A real plan, and new energy."  

I approve of this ad and hope for more.  We can play the same game.

Ps can someone tell one how to directly insert a video in a post like above.


Copy and paste the embed code from Youtube (nt) (0.00 / 0)


[ Parent ]
Got It. Another ? (0.00 / 0)
Tnx Chris.  How does one put a link under "text"?

[ Parent ]
here is a useful reference (0.00 / 0)
[ Parent ]
Age and style (0.00 / 0)
McCain looks gruff, lumbering, and short; all things that were probably always true of him and play in stark contrast to Obama.
       The ad is really 1/3 attack; 2/3 positive ad, which I think is smart  

[ Parent ]
We're attacking McCain's weakness. (4.00 / 3)
This is hard to resist, because he has so many weaknesses.

But you don't restructure a narrative by tearing down someone's weakness; that's already in the narrative. You need to undermine their strength.

I disagree about 'flip-flopping': we simply need to make clear that McCain flip-flops in order to kowtow to Bush. He debases himself for George W. Bush.

You focus on what Josh Marshall calls "McCain's two reinventions of himself over the last decade. From a mainline conservative Republican to progressive reform candidate to Bush Republican."

Long as you end on 'Bush Republican' you undermine the 'principled maverick' narrative with flip flops, and also tie McCain, perfectly justifiably, to Bush.

And the 'flip flop' phrase is completely worn. We need something new, and preferably juvenile, like calling McCain a 'Bush boy' or something. A 'Bush baby,' maybe.

I like that. "John McCain: Renegade maverick ... or Bush baby?" Imagine a series of attacks on McCain showing his Bush-flopping, calling him a 'Bush baby.'

Pushing an annoying juvenile phrase into the conversation is half the battle. (Think 'the blame game' and 'flip flopper'.)

Maybe the pundits weep. 'Is this too much? Calling McCain a Bush baby? Shouldn't the Obama campaign apologize?"

Then the Obama campaign says, "Oh, where's your sense of humor. We don't really think McCain is a baby in diapers, ha ha!" Just like the right does. "We're just pointing out the fact that McCain's record proves he's a weathervane that always points whichever way the Bush is blowing. I mean the wind. The wind is blowing."


John McCain, Serial Flip Flopper (4.00 / 2)
John McCain's greatest asset is his reputation as a Straight Talking Mavericky Moderate -- it's total bullshit, but it is very durable because it is the Traditional Media Narrative, and his Base will defend it to the last drop of BBQ sauce.

Solution -- attack McCain by detailing his serial Flip Flops. If the attacks are factually correct, it forces the Media to acknowledge his policy shifts, which undermines his credibility and erodes his teflon.

Example --  McCain was for Immigration Reform before he was against it. This undermines his credibility with both the GOP Nativists and the Hispanic community.

McCain was against offshore drilling before the Big Oil donations poured in, but the Pocket spot is more effective than a Flip Flop attack. But there are many other areas where McCain has completely reversed himself -- taxes, stem cells and others.

Attack McCain's strength -- his credibility and his moderate image, along with tying him to the failed policies of Bush/Cheney.

 


[ Parent ]
Attacking his "strength" (4.00 / 2)
I think the Rovian ethics of attacking someone's strength are generally heinous, but in this case McCain's "strength" - his "character" - is a myth and should rightfully be brought down.

Also, Howard Dean is way ahead of you on this (and way ahead of everyone, as usual. The party establishment really blew it by throwing a pitbull like Dean overboard for Kerry in '04. Don't get me started.)

Anyway, see how it's done:

Dean: "...Look, John McCain is a flawed candidate. Here's a guy who is a typical situational ethicist, he runs on his integrity, but he doesn't seem to have any. We're familiar with the fact that he got on the ballot in Ohio with what now turns out to be false pretenses. He qualified because he was taking public financing, and now he says he's not going to. He doesn't have the permission of the FEC to do that, and just this week he refused to denounce and reject John Hagee, a militant, anti-Catholic right wing pastor and John McCain has a history of doing what it takes regardless of what the ethics of this are. I think he's going to be a flawed candidate, I don't think people want four more years of what is essentially four more years of George Bush."

This is from March 2nd. Blitzer only wants to talk about all the drama between Clinton and Obama, and Dean is like a pitbull who has latched onto the jugular and won't let go. He keeps bringing it back to John McCain's flawed character and never fails to use this to tie him to Bush. His message is that McCain is just like Bush because he has no character and will do anything.

Click the link and watch the video. He's really relentless. He figured out how to destroy McCain before the primaries were over, while we were all lost in the Hillary vs Barack drama.

miasmo.com


[ Parent ]
Go after "Straight Talk" -- By Name (4.00 / 1)
They should go after and tear down the "Straight Talk" brand -- directly, by name:

"Straight Talk" should be used as a cudgel. It should be converted to be public ridicule of McCain; Should be the butt of Letterman/Leno jokes; Should make McCain's travel on the ST Express disqualify his credibility; Should force McCain to be careful speaking for fear of adding to the problem; Should force the media to scrutinize McCain statements for lack of straight talk.

When the Bush, Rove and the GOP ran against a "War Hero" they tore that image down and ruined Kerry's foundation. Now we're running against a "Straight Talker" who speaks BS. Why isn't the Obama campaign tearing that image and foundation down? Directly. By its name. All the time.

Look, "flip flop" is tired and used. Going after "Straight Talk" by name is guaranteed to generate media coverage. Chris Matthews' leg will tingle. McCain brands himself as credible -- a "Straight Talker" -- yet says different, often conflicting things from day to day and group to group. The ads practically write themselves.

If McCain is no longer seen as a "Straight Talker" what are his chances of winning? They approach zero.

Self-refuting Christine O'Donnell is proof monkeys are still evolving into humans


[ Parent ]
My turn (4.00 / 4)
to play backseat campaign manager: I think you should use his age and his clearly corroding brain against him by linking it to his stance on the economy. The key is to drive home the point that he's out of touch and just plain out of it. In this case, "out of touch" would be a stand in for "out of his mind."

Something like:

John McCain's top advisor says the economic pain of Americans isn't real: it's in their heads.

And John McCain agrees. (Clip of him saying it's psychological.)

McCain says the economy has shown progress under George Bush, and that's why McCain wants to continue Bush's job-destroying policies. (Visual of little Jonny hugging Uncle Bush.)

McCain admits he doesn't understand the economy. (Visual of him in lost supermarket--Clash song optional)

And it shows. (Visual of him stammering, brain-farting, looking ancient.)

McCain wants to giving enormous tax breaks to huge corporate special interests that already avoid paying taxes.

He supports corporate trade deal that hurt American workers.

John McCain: Out of Touch.



Clash song (4.00 / 1)
LOL, good reference.  I'd certainly put that in the ad.

(Reference explained for non-Clash-fans)


[ Parent ]
Obama's attack ads should sting (4.00 / 3)
"John McCain is such a dinosaur when it comes to energy policy, that he wants us to stay addicted to fossil fuel"
An attack along those lines would grab some attention in the news cycle

Does anyone have the Obama (or DNC) Camp's Ear? (4.00 / 2)
I've been thinking about the litany of lies and how the media has trumpeted them all over the place, compared with the deluge of coverage from the Obama tour, and it occurs to me that we are missing the point to some degree.  The media has followed the "interesting" without regard for moral content, and so, the McCain ads are working because they are interesting.  Interesting to watch, interesting for the news to cover, and in the meanwhile, delivering subtly negative messages.  Simple rebuttals?  Bo-o-o-oring...

Obama needs an INTERESTING ad - something that lights up no matter what the content is - something that gives the media something to chase - while subtly sinking McCain's image and elevating his own.

For instance - how about returning the favor? McCain lit up the screen with attractive blond starlets - how about Obama light up the screen with sexy cowgirls from the Sturgis Rally?  Sexy cowgirls and old coots - especially dottering old coots saying crazy shtuff - intersperses with McCain looking like an old coot and saying crazy stuff.  Point of the ad - are you sure you want to trust the nation to this guy?  And concluding with Obama hanging out, sleeves up, on the factory floor.

Or how about a campaign that deals Obama's willingness to compromise to get the nation on track.  Like the "where's the beef" campaign (am I dating myself?) this would have a through line that would be consistent through several commercials "Obama for President of "Getting Sh-tuff Done."

(Yes, I'm spelling stuff that way on purpose.)

The point is - it needs to be interesting and controversial enough that the MEDIA wants to follow the story - and it needs to be able to deliver lots of messages at once.

QT

Visit the Obama Project


WindOnWater.net




Well said, but the history of ads coming from Democratic consultants (4.00 / 2)
is joke leading me to believe that they are incapable of moving beyond the 'laundry list'style of ads which must produce eye glaze in voters because it sure has proven to be ineffective.

An effective ad is or should be like a short story with a beginning, a middle, and an end( future) with a villian and a hero thrown in as well.

A complete narrative.

The number of ads that actually achieve this on the Democratic side one could probabaly count on one hand for the past 8 years at the Presidential level: I can't think of any for Gore and Kerry's ad which had a member of his crew talking about Kerry was effective.( It worked in Iowa for the primary)

The Democratic consultants are seemingly addicted to ads which do not work.

Your advice is spot on and I hope they read it.


Chris, please explain your premise: (0.00 / 0)
it takes a less rational, more emotional, more identity-based approach. And that is what you need to do if you want to change the narrative.  

You may be right, but I don't see it as self-evident. Can you please share your reasoning. I know that Republicans always take "a less rational, more emotional, more identity-based approach." And I know that this works for them. The way I see it is that they use this approach because, being consistently on the wrong side of every issue, it's all that they have. It works, not because of any inherent superiority of the strategy, but simply because the corporate media is biased in their favor and plays along with the bullshit. I just don't think that the media will react the same way to the same style of bullshit from Democrats.

miasmo.com


Well, I agree with Chris on that. (4.00 / 1)
Not sure what his reasoning is, but it seems self-evident to me that emotion and identity trumps rationality every time, at least in terms of narratives.

I'm trying to think of some evidence. How about the annual grosses of documentaries vs. action films?

We use information. We love stories.

And if you tell a good enough story, the media can't really choose not to play along. Not as enthusiastically as they do with the Republicans, but still. If Obama and his surrogates start talking about John McCain's 'fall from grace,' and how sad that this young hero became a shameless Bush-mongering flip-flopper without any moral core ... eventually that'd break through.

I follow the campaign pretty closely, but if someone asks me what I think about McCain, the Obama campaign's given me nothing to say. McCain's busy telling every supporter what to say: he's risky, he can't be trusted, etc.

But all I get from Obama is, 'well, he's an honorable man, but wrong.'

So if my choices are those two--an honorable man, but wrong, or an untrustworthy traitor--what am I gonna pick?

It's not just the media who needs a story, here. Obama supporters need one pretty desperately, too.  


[ Parent ]
It seems hard to believe (4.00 / 1)
But what Chris is saying and its a good insight, is that elections are the answer of one question, and the story of an election is creating the question that voters answer with their vote.

that requires the creation of a narrative a story.

Do you want to save the princess?

do you want this befuddled codger in charge?

is someone this confused gonna lead us?

people do not vote on : 15% increase in personal income abatement will mean a 3% decline in sales in the sector my clients prosper in

not that that means a lack of attention, it means people are trying to put the whole thing together in a gestalt, like trying to ballance all the factors of sailing, wind power, water movement, intended direction, wind direction, trim, etc.. when your ad is very very good it allows the voter to relax having understood the story, the feel of the wheel.


--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky


[ Parent ]
I think you make some good points (0.00 / 0)


John McCain doesn't care about Vets.



I agree with all of the points (4.00 / 1)
This is a change election and John McCain has been in Washington 26 years. Tie him to it. Show the political nature (lack of straight talky) of McCain's moves to the center by noting "If John McCain really cared about climate control, he would have done something by now. He's been in Washington 26 years and gotten nothing done -- Obama08, because America can't wait for Washington any longer.' Something like that.

And Chris is dead right about this - It will piss him off. John McCain will be outraged, OUTRAGED, that he could some how be blamed for being part of the problem of Washington (since the keating 5, that is)

John McCain  just released this ad where he says he'll fix a broken Washington. Obama should retort, Vinny Chase style, "John McCain is broken Washington"

In this vein, I think it is worth mentioning, that in 2007, John McCain missed more votes than Tim Johnson, who had a brain hemorrhage. Again - A guy who suffered a BRAIN HEMORRHAGE was MORE up to the task of being a US senator than John McCain. Can we trust John McCain to lead this nation when he couldn't be relied upon to do his current job?

Can we trust John McCain to lead this nation in the 21st century against the threats of cyber terrorism when he doesn't understand how to use the internet?

I believe John McCain's greatest asset is that he believed to be a known quantity. This allows him to evade scrutiny from pundits because the narrative has been cast. Casual voters see this and assume the gaffes they see must have some explanation, because surely a candidate would be called out on such nonsense if there wasn't.

Thus, if I were Obama's camp, I would start talking about John McCain's Arizona problem. He is much more popular (or idolized) in Washington than his home state, and his home paper doesn't not share the affinity for him that the national press corps do. It will cast McCain as a creature of Washington, not a reformer of Washington This cuts to the core of who John McCain really is, and could cause a reexamination of his candidacy.  


Does McCain really own 8 houses? (4.00 / 1)
If the McCains own 8 houses, some of them in sunny Arizona, and none of them have solar panels, I think a fair attack ad would start out with

"How serious can John McCain be about solving our energy problems when NONE of his EIGHT homes have solar panels? Senator McCain represents sunny Arizona, with some of the best weather for solar panels in the entire United States. What kind of leadership is he showing with his EIGHT homes? Blah blah..."

If  you really want to annoy McCain, it's important to repeat the word "eight". :-)

Even voters who are dummies will not fail to see such a contradiction - however, I don't really know the solar status of his homes.

435 Dem Primaries 2012
Coffee Party Usa
TheRealNews.Com


Gravelesque Ad (4.00 / 2)
Still photos of McCain looking old and confused are shuffled. Occasionally, McCain's voice is heard, stumbling, or singing about aerial bombs.  All silent and the picture is McCain embracing GWB with his head resting tenderly on his shoulder.  

Cut to a close-up of Barack Obama's face.  He shakes his head and walks away without speaking.  Cut to slogan.


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."


USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox