How Can We End The Compliments?

by: Chris Bowers

Mon Sep 08, 2008 at 15:55


On the front page, top headline section of Obama's campaign website right now, there are four rotating top stories. The first one is a link to a video entitled "Barack Responds." Here is the video:


Here is my transcript of the first twenty seconds of the two-minute video:

You wouldn't know that this was such a critical election by watching the convention last night. I know we had our week and so the Republicans deserve their's. But it's been amazing to me to watch, over the last two nights, if you sit there and you watch it, you are hearing a lot about John McCain, and he's got a compelling biography. He's a POW.

Ugh. Again, we have to sit through the plug for McCain before hearing the criticism. This is not a minor plug either, as McCain is basically running on being a POW. What follows from that point is decent, and I am not going to complain about it. However, the first thing you hear when watching the top video on Obama's website right now is Barack Obama himself repeating John McCain's own argument on why John McCain should become President. That strikes me as a big problem, and drowns out much of the criticsm that follows the compliments.

Searching for answers on how to change this in the extended entry.

Chris Bowers :: How Can We End The Compliments?
I am not a paid media expert. You can check out the TV ad that BlogPac ran on CNN and MSNBC in Denver, Cleveland and Minneapolis last Wednesday, and see this for yourself. It was a small ad buy ($5K), but some of the most successful ad buys over the last decade in politics have started small. I don't think what we did worked, and so I probably shouldn't go down that path again.

I am a precinct captain. I can, and have, registered new voters this cycle. I am an online activist. I can, and have, donated to Barack Obama this cycle. I am also a blogger. I can, and have, amplified his campaign's message this cycle. There are things I can and have done to support Barack Obama. However, the truth is that it just doesn't feel like enough and I want to make a bigger impact.

While I am not much for ads, I can read and analyze polls. Right now, the polls are telling me that people really like Barack Obama, but that they like John McCain more. The polls show that McCain has enjoyed a consistent, upward rise in his favorable rating for four months now. At this point, it has moved McCain ahead in the campaign. In order for Obama to win this election, people are going to have to start thinking less favorably of McCain, and fast. It is hard to imagine that Obama complimenting McCain before making any criticism of the man is helping much in this regard.

So, what I want to do in order to make more of a difference is to have Barack Obama and other Democrats stop complimenting John McCain before making any criticism of McCain. I want to end the consistent Democratic repetition of McCain's heroism, sacrifice, and service because ti reinforces John McCain's central message. I want this to stop Demcorats from doing this because I want Barack Obama to win the election.

As a goal, stopping the Democratic compliments of John McCain also feels right. Instead of demanding that Obama vaguely "hit McCain harder," or focus his message on X, Y or Z, this is a specific request that can be clearly fulfilled. Also, I think we actually have a chance of pulling this off. Small, reasonable, well-targeted requests can typically work. Back in February, for example, with only a few hundred emails, BlogPac successfully convinced CNN to change the way they displayed their delegate count. The key is that the request was reasonable, and that it was clear and easy to comply with the request. It worked.

So, I am open to ideas on how we can convince the Obama campaign to stop writing compliments to John McCain into every speech Barack Obama and Joe Biden make. We could go the route of a MyBarackObama.com group, as that had some impact with the FISA vote. However, I don't want to make a national story about this. Such a story would only result in more media repetitions of Obama's praise for McCain, thus defeating the entire purpose of the group. A petition might have the same problem. If we publicly gather a large number of people to ask Obama to stop complimenting McCain, it will draw attention, and thus possibly defeat the purpose of the campaign. We probably need to do something a bit quieter and more under the radar.

Thoughts? How can we end the compliments Democrats in general, and Barack Obama in particular, are paying to McCain? This might seem small, but I genuinely believe if we can pull it off, that it will make a real difference in the outcome of this election.  

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
How Can We End The Compliments? | 101 comments
This is the same conversation that was being had a couple of weeks ago (4.00 / 5)
before the 7 house deal, McCain was controlling the news cycle and framing his opponent.  That is what is occurring now.  McCain and Palin are repeating lie after lie and Obama and Biden...all they can do is compliment her/him (to a certain extent).  It is pretty simple, if Palin and McCain are allowed to continue framing the debate(1.  Against the bridge to nowhere 2.  Obama was for 1B in earmarks 3.  She has more executive experience. 4.  The plane on eBay - I could go on...) they will win.  Nice does not work with Republicans. They should have ads up question both McCain and Palin on their judgment ASAP.  Everyday from now till Nov 4th. Every day, hour that goes by allows the McCain-Palin campaign to continue to repeat the same lies and distortions of the truth.  What is Charlie Gibson going to challenge her?  She'll eat his lunch.  They should not underestimate what Schmitt(sp) is doing.   If they continue to do so, it will cost us this election.  

George

I could not agree with you more

If you're talking (4.00 / 1)
about Palin you're automatically playing defense. Ben Smith is right about this:

It's unusual to see the presidential nominee so focused on his rival's running mate, and a sign that her wattage is changing the race a bit.

We were on offense for 48 hours after the housing gaffe. The amazing thing is that our traction was ended by...our convention!

As for the compliment problem, yes, it would be better if they didn't mention his heroism at all, or, short of that, do what the Repugs do to Obama's strength, damn it with faint praise: as in yeah, his words are pretty, but..

They could say something like, he did something brave 40 years ago, but...

God knows they would've have the bravery to do what Wes Clark tried to do: undermine the rationale for his candidacy at its core.

[ Parent ]
that's why you have surrogates (4.00 / 2)

FInally Rendell is the first one out there on the troopergate thing.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

You need more of this from your surrogates...Hillary did not do this today....for what it's worth...neither did Biden....props to Rendell.  If you want leave Obama above the Fray and leave it to EVERYBODY else to go after her and McCain.  

At this point, who cares what the mainstream media thinks or cares...the this is a conventional election conversation is out the window...the gloves should be off and now prisoners taken...that or see ya in another 4 years...

[ Parent ]
Right on! (4.00 / 3)
I sent an email.

The Obvious:
options off the top of my head. push people to email, phone, fax and report back to you that they have done so. keep a private count and then when you know you have what you think is a lot give the obama camp a call and let them know you know how many have contacted them and that 100,000 dems can't be totally stupid.

idea 2:
Create a subversive anti-Obama ad that uses his praise of McCain. Create a loop which has him and other Dems saying it over and over again - back to back - ending even Dems say McCain would make a good president. Send this video the Obama campaign, howard dean, dem election committees, and whomever else might shit their pants to see it laid out so obviously. tell them this does not look good.

idea 2 bonus:
threaten to send it to Drudge.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare

oh - bonus bonus ending (4.00 / 2)
voice over: "I'm John McCain, but THEY approved this message."

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare
[ Parent ]
Vote Nader and do so vocally (0.00 / 0)


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."
It's stupid to go third party in swing states (0.00 / 0)
but if you were going to, at least go for McKinney.
[ Parent ]
Unless and until the "left" wing of the Big Tent Democratic Party (0.00 / 0)
threatens to walk out of the "coalition", they will continue to be ignored, no matter how much they whine.

"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."
[ Parent ]
Genius! (4.00 / 10)
I believe that is what caused the party to lurch so strongly to the left in 2001-2002, when it voted for the war, right? Voting for Nader in 2000 lurched the Dems to the left, hard.  
[ Parent ]
Nope (0.00 / 0)
Gore/Lieberman igored the movement to the left and lost the election

"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."
[ Parent ]
Right (4.00 / 4)
And like Chris just said, the party never moved. So the "left" wing sitting out did not have the consequence you claim.

John McCain opposes the GI Bill.
[ Parent ]
Losing to Bush/Cheney twice is not a "consequence"? (0.00 / 0)


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."
[ Parent ]
You said (0.00 / 0)
That unless the "left" wing threatened to sit out, they will be ignored. In 2000, the "left" wing threatened to and then DID sit out and are still ignored, but with Bush in the White House instead of Gore. So your premise has already been proven wrong and you can move on to something else.

John McCain opposes the GI Bill.
[ Parent ]
I also said "do it vocally" (0.00 / 0)
That's what was missing in 2000 and 2004.  Vocal support for an alternative on the left.


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."
[ Parent ]
Still, voting Nader does absolutely zero to build any third party infrastrucutre (4.00 / 2)
at least vote for McKinney and the Green party.  Or, better yet, work to build Green infrastructure in Rhode Island or someplace like that, where the Republican party is irrelevant.  

If third parties are going to get built, they are going to get built regionally, at least at first.  There is a reason why there have been more Socialists elected than the sum total of all Libertarians.

[ Parent ]
As proven (4.00 / 2)
by the great success of this strategy in 2000.
[ Parent ]
Ignoring the "left" in 2000, lost Gore the election (0.00 / 0)
and following the same plan in 2004 produced the same result for Kerry.

If you want to talk about success in those elections, look to the party that WON, the GOP and did so by playing to their BASE, the same base that threatened to withhold their votes. The same base McCain responded to by picking Palin.

When is the last time Obama responded to the Democratic Base with anything other than a kiss good-bye?

You want something from Obama BEFORE election day?  You want him to stop praising McCain?  Threaten to Walk Away, NOW, don't wait until Nov.



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

[ Parent ]
it's too late (0.00 / 0)
we had to make that argument earlier.
[ Parent ]
You are probably right. (0.00 / 0)
Course, if such worked during the primary, we might have Edwards as the nominee. Or, dare I suggest, an actual left-wing on the Democratic Party that would see Edwards for the centrist that he is.

"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."
[ Parent ]
Voting for Nader resulted in losing the election, too (4.00 / 1)
Instead of getting at least the lesser of two evils (your view, not mine!), you got horrible George W. Bush. Now, really, where is the advantage in that idiotic "third party" strategy? It has proven to only make things worse. It's bullshit.
[ Parent ]
Evil (0.00 / 0)
The Bush victory in 2004 pretty much set the table for any "trifecta" that the Democratic Party might achieve in 2008. I agree, the two party tyranny does make things worse.

"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."
[ Parent ]
The system is the core of the problem, not the parties (4.00 / 1)
They are simply symptoms of the flaws. Well, there's two ways to overturn the system, by a revolution (Ha! Unlikely) or by constitutional amendments (only slightly less unlikely, given the high hurdles for ratification). Guess for the time being, you will have to arrange with it. Now, while I think that reforms would be good, imho your top down approach with its focus on presidential elections is totally unlikely to yield positive results. All you achieve is alienating possible supporters, who are also aware of the shortcomings, but can still differentiate between the lesser and the bigger evil.

Imho the ground up approach Chris, Matt, and the others here are advocating has much higher chances to produce positive changes. Start at the local level, always support the more progressive candidates, and over time you will come to the point where the progressive movement has reached a critical mass and be able to change the direction and the shape of the national party. Kind of an evolutionary mechanic, as I see it.

Well, just my personal opinion. I'm aware that you probably see the things differently and we won't be able to reach a common ground, so let's leave it at this point.  

[ Parent ]
Yes, the tyranny is systemic (0.00 / 0)
That's why I suspect that, even if the "progressives" manage to "take over" the Democratic Party, over time that power will erode, as the tendency of the system is to "moderate" extreme positions.  Some may see that as a "benefit", as part of the checks and balances, but I see it as a roadblock.  

"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."
[ Parent ]
... (0.00 / 0)
How is it complimenting McCain to recognize the obvious that he was a POW?  He does have a compelling argument to a rather large swath of the population.  

The key to that statement from Obama is you wouldn't know this was a critical election.  That is also true and is the consistent vein of attack by virtually all the Dems, and even some of the more traditional Reps, have been making.

You can discuss this election any way you see fit.  The netroots certainly didn't ask the Dems permission when they mobilzed against Liebermann did they?

GrDavis, you have a compelling way of writing (4.00 / 2)
Would you consider that a compliment?
[ Parent ]
That's irrelevant... (0.00 / 0)
What's relevant is it's foolish in a national election for the middle and try to deny or denigrate the obvious.

Literally every partisan comment I've heard from any anti-McCain is that it's the economy stupid.  That the Reps are not talking about it.  That they have no answers.

Those are really valid avenues of attack as they hit home and they have the added bonus of being true.

8 days ago the McCain campaign was about as boring as you could get.  It's now injected a level of energy Obama supporters have had all along.  The real question is which side's enthusiasm is more real and which one will appeal more to the 10% in the middle.

Sniping at McCain being a POW is not going to win that middle and could very likely rev up the already fired up 45% of hard right to the point of increasing their ground game and competing with Obama's decided advantage there.

It's been a long two years and this is not the first battle and won't be the last.  McCain just won a skirmish by likely reattracting some of those hard right that were registering for Barr or not at all.  It's now up to anyone who doesn't want McCain to win to reincorporate those that would go to Nadar rather than encouraging them in that direction by the constant harping on Obama.

The Obama campaign is readjusting once again, but it can't very well completely desert it's main premise that we can disagree without being smear machines can it?

[ Parent ]
Sniping? (4.00 / 1)
"Sniping at McCain being a POW is not going to win that middle"

Where did I suggest this, exactly? All I said was to drop the lines. You just made that up whole cloth.

Just don't mention McCain's service or biography at all.  

[ Parent ]
EXACTLY.... (4.00 / 3)
I will hand it the McCain Palin people in the past week.  They have not said, "we respect Obama's community organizing efforts"...they trashed it! They have not said " Wow we really respect the ethics reform legislation and the Nuke Proliferation bill...how it was bipartisan"...they trashed that as well.  They are going for the jugular and are using lies and semi-truths to define Obama-Biden.

McCain will rely on all of his surrogates and even himself to promote the POW story line. Why does the democratic ticket feel they need to endorse that? They all need to be busy not just with the more of the same message, but everything else that defines McCain-Palin  -risky, lack of judgment, more of the same...it writes itself...

[ Parent ]
Maybe you didn't... (0.00 / 0)
But certainly others have.

I do agree it wouldn't hurt to drop it altogether, but I don't think including it when you're trying to appeal to the middle to WIN the dang election is all that bad either.

Look at McCain's numbers when it comes to anything remotely construed military.  He's heavily favored in all those areas.  Doesn't that speak volumes to you about where a good part of the nation is on the whole honoring the troops BS?  

We may not believe the BS but many reflexively do.  By mentioning the POW mess it's the least offensive way to pander without really pandering.

The overall objective in this little exercise it to win the dang thing isn't it, which means all people are not going to get all things framed as they see fit, right?

[ Parent ]
At this point the only time I would mention it would be when (0.00 / 0)
referring to the GI bill that McCain failed to support.  I'm not saying that you come out with Machine Guns blazing...but the image of soft Democrats is something that this party has been trying to overcome for over 30 years...not all democrats are wimps...not saying that obama is a wimp...but stop accentuating McCain's positives as much.  
[ Parent ]
What is *as much*? (0.00 / 0)
If there's a 10 word phrase used carte blanche throughout the Dems out of 1000 word said, is that so much?

So when Obama shouts at the nation ENOUGH and goes on to castigate McCain and his campaign for questioning anyone's patriotism and rips the economic theories of the entire right as destroying the fabric of the nation doesn't count?

It sounds to me that an awful lot of people are not listening to what the entire left is saying...we're falling apart at the seams but rather only listening to selective phrases that grate on their fragile nerves.

I'm not saying the 10 word phrase is necessary, all I'm saying is all this hyperventilation over it is really reactionary.  

[ Parent ]
ok....then how about none (4.00 / 1)
ZERO, Zilch, NADA compliments...

that's decisive.

[ Parent ]
Obama as Rudy (4.00 / 1)
Why has Obama, the great orator, lapsed into a noun, a verb and POW? I thought McNoshame owned that distinction.

I'm working on ideas to address your question about how to get the word out. I haven't come up with anything printable as yet. Maybe the hint would catch on to the Obama camp, but go over the heads of the McCain camp, if we were to tell Obama and Biden to stop doing their Rudy imitation.  

[ Parent ]
Inverting your mother's old , polite admonishment (4.00 / 7)
Chris

For the last 4 years I have said to almost every politician I have seen in small venues...when they would say something nice about John McCain...the following

If you can't something bad about John McCain
say nothing at all.

"Incrementalism isn't a different path to the same place, it could be a different path to a different place"
Stoller

[ Parent ]
Does it strengthen the argument to mention the POW thing? (4.00 / 4)
Couldn't you just as easily just say "They spent the whole convention talking about me, and talking about their candidates' biographies.  What they didn't talk about was you."  No need to explicitly mention the POW thing.
[ Parent ]
I agree with that... (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
When did you last see .. (4.00 / 1)
McCain or Palin say a nice thing about Obama/Biden?
[ Parent ]
Even if they were to say something nice (4.00 / 4)
That doesn't make it any better than Obama is doing so. We shouldn't stop complimenting McCain because McCain refuses to compliment Obama. We should stop complimenting McCain because it is helping McCain win the election.  
[ Parent ]
That's just nonsense. (4.00 / 1)
The Dems recognizing that the only thing the Reps are talking about is McCain being a POW is not winning McCain anything.  It's hammering home the guy is nothing more than a POW.  It's a really smart way to keep saying over and over that McCain talks about nothing other than the military, past or present.  It is always followed by a reminder that this election is about us, not who's next on the list of military targets.

The POW comments stick out to you because you're looking for them.  They're white noise to everybody else, at most reinforcing the idea that there's a big margin of folks in this country are sick to death of us yelling at each other.

[ Parent ]
You have a point there (0.00 / 0)
but so does Chris. I wonder can the points be combined.
[ Parent ]
It would be fine (4.00 / 1)
If Obama said "McCain just gave an acceptance speech and all he could talk about was being held captive by the North Vietnamese."

2 differences: First, cast McCain's experiences in a neutral, factual, light rather than positively as a "complelling POW biography". Second, start off with the criticism rather than dawdling around with praise for the enemy before you get to the important message. With persuasive speech or writing 99% of the time you have to start with the point so people know what you're talking about and can organize in their heads what you're saying. If you start off talking about McCain's "compelling POW biography" watchers will try to frame what you're saying as supporting McCain as POW, war hero, blahblahblah. Only after you put enough enough negative comments that they have to abandon that frame will they start perceiving the criticisms as significant but by then they'll have missed a lot and become confused and annoyed at the presentation.

[ Parent ]
Exactly. (4.00 / 1)
The rules are something like:

1) Tell them where you're going
2) Go there
3) Tell them where you went

By praising McCain before anything else, they only muddy the water.

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
your kidding right...If I hear one more time that they respect his service (4.00 / 1)
I will throw up.  OF COURSE everyone respects his service, you would have to be Al Queda to not.  To continue to praise him is not defining the differences between the candidates.  If we are going to win this election, stop wasting your time with the obvious and accentuate the differences...and even more so.  That is what McCain and Palin and doing.  And no one is calling bullshit on their lies.  They continue to spew and it is acceptable.  That went out with Dukakis and Kerry.  They need to grow a spine and quick...or it over and done with and McSame and the Ms. Earmark will win. It's really that simple.  
[ Parent ]
I don't respect his service (4.00 / 1)
McCain's abused it too much to abuse the country. And he was pretty reckless with planes too. He wrecked so many planes they called him a "reverse ace" (and no, he wasn't a test pilot).  Once he even flew into power lines!
[ Parent ]
I think the ad is a very good idea (4.00 / 1)
It is inexpensive to produce, and can be done quickly. I also think it plays into the narrative we need to use in this election, as well as in future elections--that if Democratic candidates fail to heed us--the Democratic netroots base--their will be consequences to pay. This is how the conservative base got control of the Republican Party.
How does a brief POW compliment drown out criticism? (0.00 / 0)
I'm sorry, but I have trouble with the premise of this post, which I guess is that, when Obama (and others) begin by complimenting McCain for being a POW, that somehow dilutes, minimizes or overshadows any criticism against McCain.

I just don't see that.

At this point, it's hard to imagine any voter not knowing damn well that McCain is a POW and war hero.  So acknowledging that is hardly going to eliminate a talking point for us.  Further, I don't see how this kind of comment really drowns anything out.  The media has heard this POW-compliment so frequently that they barely report Obama uttering it anymore.  At worst, these comments seem merely unnecessary, not deleterious.

What strikes you as more effective? (4.00 / 8)
"John McCain is a war hero who I deeply respect, and who has voted with Bush 90% of the time."

Vs.

"John McCain has voted with Bush 90% of the time."

You seem to be arguing that these two statements have equal utility for Democrats. I diagree. The second one is clearly better.  

[ Parent ]
But that's not how the line is usually used (0.00 / 0)
The way I hear it come across is more like, "sure, he's a POW, but that doesn't make him right."

And while my personal view is that such a statement is basically harmless, I can see one arguing that it is affirmatively better, for a couple of reasons:

(1) It makes Obama sound gracious, which helps counter the claim that is arrogant;
(2) It innoculates him from the claim that he is somehow disrespectful of veterans, unpatriotic, etc.

[ Parent ]
the Hillary supporters called him arrogant...he won (4.00 / 1)
The arrogance of power..

"Incrementalism isn't a different path to the same place, it could be a different path to a different place"
Stoller
[ Parent ]
It's like McCain saying, 'Obama represents change, (4.00 / 5)
but he's going to raise your taxes and surrender in Iraq.'

WTF is that first phrase doing there? Why bother reinforcing the Obama campaign's strongest argument before criticizing?

"George W. Bush has kept this country safe, but invaded Iraq based on lies and destroyed the economy."

[ Parent ]
In a nutshell (0.00 / 0)
Well put.
[ Parent ]
Don't assume... (4.00 / 2)
That voters know anything. Since McCain is running as an ex-POW, it is his campaign's job to inform voters of this fact, not Obama's. Even if one voter learns from Obama that McCain was a POW, that is one voter too many.

In addition--and this complaint has become a broken record over the past eight years--despite the Democrats continuous focus on issues, many people vote based on whether or not they like a candidate, or perceive that they have a personal connection to a candidate. The Republicans are good at convincing enough voters that the Democratic candidate is some combination of an elitist, white-wine drinking, liberal, non-patriotic traitor, thus convincing a percentage of low information voters to vote Republican, instead of for the evil Democrat. By constantly praising McCain, Obama is not giving these low information voters--who, let's be honest, are mostly the classic undecided/independents we always hear about--any reason to distrust or dislike McCain on a personal level, meaning that the Obama campaign is hoping that issues will rule the day. If issues ruled the day, this election wouldn't even be close.

[ Parent ]
its like sales... (4.00 / 5)
If your customer starts to make your sales pitch for you...you have got the sale.  There is ZERO benefit to continue to compliment either McCain or Palin.  All it says is "wow, they are nice guys."  Nice does not win elections, framing and defining your opponent before they do is what does.    
[ Parent ]
This video isn't the best example. (4.00 / 2)
Watching the whole thing, I think Obama does a great job, and the compliment probably does little or no harm. But that's not Chris's point, seems to me. The point is that the Dems have made the compliments a drumbeat that reinforces McCain's only real talking point: that he's a hero, a patriot, and a dedicated public servant.

Biden (USA Today): "The fundamental issue in this campaign is not whether John McCain is a good man and a hero, which he is," Biden told a gym full of supporters.

The obligatory bow to McCain's virtues is helping establish a claim as the truth. It's arguable at best that McCain is a hero, a good man, or a dedicated public servant, so why make a point of saying he is? It's obviously a defensive move designed to fend off attacks about Obama's "patriotism", but that sure hasn't worked. Maybe there was some point in saying what they know ain't so once or twice. There's no point in turning it into a litany. When warm and fuzzy is your opponent's best card, why help him make it a winner?

I much prefer Harry Reid's approach: "I've served with the man 26 years," Reid said. "Do I have the ability to speak with experience about someone who has abused everyone he's dealt with? Someone who does not have the temperament to be president, who's wrong on the war, wrong on the economy, wrong on nuclear waste. What am I supposed to do? Walk around talking about what a great guy he is? I don't believe that. .... "

Maybe what's needed is to make sure the Obama/Biden folks see Reid's statement juxtaposed with their own worst excesses of collegiality.

[ Parent ]
Questions For Chris (0.00 / 0)
1-In your opinion, why does the Obama campaign compliment McCain

2-If you were an independent voter would you look at Obama more favorably if:
  a-he complimented McCain then went on to point out major policy differences
  b-said nothing positive about McCain just pointed out major policy differences
  c-referred to McCain as old and bad tempered

3-does McCain ever compliment Obama or just come out swinging

4-have you spoken out to anyone at the Obama campaign as to this strategy

5-how heartfelt are these compliments or in basketball terms is Obama feinting right, going left

McCain rarely compliments Obama (4.00 / 3)
and when he does, it's completely snide--it's something like, 'our opponent can sure give a speech, but speeches aren't going to ______"  
[ Parent ]
I'll bite (4.00 / 1)
Since I'm trying to use this thread to work out my thoughts on the subject, I'll bite:

1--All Demcorats do it, not just Obama. I think they do it because they want to go out of their way to not appear to be attacking troops. Which is silly.

2--B. Just point out the differences. But to the chase.

3--As I wrote above, it doesn't matter. The point is not that we stop complimenting McCain because he doesn't compliment Obama. The point is that we stop complimenting McCain because it is helping McCain win the election.

4--Nope. My contacts are only in the new media department anyway. They have often taken weeks to get back to me.

5--Who cares? Stop repeating McCain's message and stop complimenting him. That doesn't help us.  

[ Parent ]
B&C (0.00 / 0)
I'm pushing it with C but I can dream and at the very least - surrogates should be pushing C
[ Parent ]
... (0.00 / 0)
Add 2.d) You respect Obama for behaving like an adult and understanding there's a difference between serving in the military and having good judgment about national leadership.
[ Parent ]
My answers (0.00 / 0)
1.  As I said above, they compliment him to look gracious, rather than arrogant, and avoid a charge of being unpatriotic.
2.  If I were independent, I'd think, "he's being gracious" when I heard that line, and if he didn't say that line and I was uptight about military service, I might be offended.  If I'm not uptight, then I wouldn't care.
3.  McCain DOES sometimes compliment Obama, though not often.
4. n/a
5.  I think Obama is being sincere, though he's also making the comment for a calculated purpose.
[ Parent ]
I'd rather win ungraciously than lose graciously (4.00 / 3)

  I'm sure you've noticed that the McCain campaign has been nothing but an avalanche of negativity and lies towards Barack Obama and the Democrats. Obama wrings his hands and expresses "disappointment" at McCain's behavior, and McCain is so chagrined at his lack of graciousness that he just keeps on doing it.

  And I'm sure you've noticed that McCain's opened up a gap over Obama in the polls.

  I'm with Chris. You don't have to trash McPOW's military service. But there's NO marginal utility for the Obama campaign in praising it. It sends mixed signals at best -- and that kind of thing is fatal to a campaign's messaging strategy.

  The Democrats really could stand to stuff a sock in that praise of McCain. How does this help us in November?  

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

[ Parent ]
This elelction will not be won on the issues but on character (4.00 / 2)
2.  If I were independent, I'd think, "he's being gracious" when I heard that line, and if he didn't say that line and I was uptight about military service, I might be offended.  If I'm not uptight, then I wouldn't care.

And whenever Democrats vouch for their opponents character...unless it is to jiujituu into a character attack.....then we are helping them win the election.

The Republicans are only going to muddy the water when it comes to issues.

They are clear that,  to them and how they intend to sell this elelction, this contest will be about character....the good chatracter of John McCain.  we keep agreeing with that John McCain is a man of good character.  

Now I don't think a man with such right wing views or pretending to have such right wing views can really be a man of good character.

And it does matter that John McCain doesn't ever compliment Obama.  It means he stays on message,  and frankly it projects strength and toughness.  The vassal praises the master...not the other way around.  It asserts his power and independents admire that....very, very much.

and as I said upthread....If you can't say anything bad about John McCain, (many Dem politicians seem to be in that position) then say nothing at all.  At least you aren't furthering their own campaign over ours.

"Incrementalism isn't a different path to the same place, it could be a different path to a different place"
Stoller

[ Parent ]
D) (4.00 / 2)
None of the above. Obama should refer to McCain as a flipflopper trying to lower his taxes by saddling your children with massive government debt and ignoring bin Laden to get us into pointless and immoral wars while he blocks investigation of massive financial misdeeds bringing down our financial system. THEN talk about the policy differences that back it up. Basic persuasive writing: First, say McCain would be a horrible president. Then back it up.
[ Parent ]
D) (0.00 / 0)
None of the above. Obama should refer to McCain as a flipflopper trying to lower his taxes by saddling your children with massive government debt and ignoring bin Laden to get us into pointless and immoral wars while he blocks investigation of massive financial misdeeds bringing down our financial system. THEN talk about the policy differences that back it up. Basic persuasive writing: First, say McCain would be a horrible president. Then back it up.
[ Parent ]
whoops sorry about the double post. (0.00 / 0)
Not sure what I did.
[ Parent ]
this bugs me too but... (0.00 / 0)
I hate sitting through litanies of praise of McCain before getting to any real discussion as much as anyone.  But don't you think they do this for a reason?  Wouldn't their response be something like it insulates them from accusations of not respecting his service, or his sacrifices as a POW? I know it's all B.S. but isn't it just part of playing the game?  

I thought during the convention they were getting closer to a framing that made a little more sense.  Something like: "*As* someone who knows and respects John McCain, I have been even more appalled at his pandering to the right, inability to take our country in the right direction, etc."  Would this kind of framing be more palatable?  Is this something we should be pushing them to do-- rather than just dropping the praise altogether?

In that case, it's the verbal equivalent... (4.00 / 1)
of cringing in anticipation of a punch.
[ Parent ]
Yes, sure... (4.00 / 3)

 ...the Republicans have completely eased off on the Democrats when it comes to which party "supports the troops". That line of attack is no longer used, thanks to Obama's graciousness. Victory is at hand.

  The Republicans are LYING BULLIES. Being nice to them DOES NOT WORK. It NEVER WORKS. I thought Obama understood this. But he apparently doesn't.

  I guess he can boast all about how he took the high road as he attends McCain's inauguration.  

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

[ Parent ]
here here... (0.00 / 0)
I second that...
[ Parent ]
Hear, hear. (0.00 / 0)
I second that.
[ Parent ]
that's how you win (4.00 / 1)
The Republicans are LYING BULLIES. Being nice to them DOES NOT WORK. It NEVER WORKS. I thought Obama understood this. But he apparently doesn't.

Why aren't we? I'd much rather fight dirty and bloody a few noses anyway, the fact that it's more effective just seals the deal.

Who here wouldn't like to see McCain and Palin's careers trashed after the election, with the smears we slapped him with giving some fresh faced Arizona Democrat an opening to take grandpa McCain down when he's up for relection in 2010? We all remember what it was like for Gore and Kerry.

Of course it's harder to do when you're not on the side of the wealthy, powerful and privileged, but the fact that we have the truth on our side doesn't mean it's the only thing in our arsenal.

[ Parent ]
I dunno. We need someone to tell Obama that all he says (4.00 / 3)
is "a noun, a verb, and 'I honor John McCain's service'."

Maybe count the number of times that Obama's said this vs. the number of times George Bush said he honors Kerry's service? Splice together a video every single time Obama said this--how long would that run--and send to the campaign?

Down the line, someone's gonna need to get their hands dirty. John Kerry is a war hero. John McCain is a war victim. I've got nothing against victims, I wish them all the best, but the confusion between the two things feeds into the worst of the right-wing mythology. They imagine themselves victimized by everything; hence they are unassailably heroic.

We could have people who want to end the compliments show up at campaign (0.00 / 0)
rallies with signs that could say:

End the compliments
MAKE ME NOT WANT TO VOTE FOR MCSAME

For Every compliment you give McSame
You give them a VOTE

Question everything about John McSame

That's about as under the radar as it gets -

BTW, I was at an Obama appearance at Mac' Apples in NH and a guy in the audience held up a sign that simply said had a number on it that referenced the number Russert used in the debate about pulling troops out of Iraq

Obama noticed the sign and told the guy he was 'clever'

He registered the displeasure.

If these start pooping up across some rallies maybe they'll get the point.

I honestly don't think much else would register anyway.

I think they are running the campaign they want to run - compliments and all

Speaking of... (4.00 / 3)
Where the hell are the new Obama ads?  It was my understanding that, not only did they have a shitload of money before, but Palin seemed to get people to donate even more (hell, I donated an extra $100 over my monthly $100).  McCain comes out with a new ad that continues to trumpet lies and we don't even have a response ad or, from what I can tell, a new ad that is simply a response to the RNC even.

What the hell is going on?  Is the Obama campaign flush with money or not?  Do they care about creating/changing a narrative or not?  Right now the narrative seems to be "Wow, Sarah Palin... pretty crazy! What an inspired choice!  She's a hockey mom, which is so cute!  Problems?  What problems?!"

How about a just an ad that uses the apparently Taboo "l" word like the campaign has been saying in press-releases and e-mails (that no one outside of political junkies see).  Just say something like "Why is John McCain lying?  Because after 8 years of disastrous policies that he would continue, there's just nothing good he can point to."

How about an ad or a series of them detailing all the hypocrisy of the ticket?  McCain says he hates lobbyists, but they're running his whole campaign.  Palin says she hates earmarks but lobbied for and received more than anyone, left her town in debt, and actually campaigned for the Bridge to Nowhere."  Hypocrisy, especially with the Palin pick, should become the theme of the Republican party now.  Yet, I don't think I've heard this from anyone, and it certainly hasn't been in an ad to my knowledge.

Honestly...  There has been basically zero response to the RNC so far.  I DO think that we're in sort of a post-RNC "glow" right now for the Republicans that should fade, but if Democrats are not going to do anything to change it, that glow may just continue long enough for McCain to pull off a win.

yay... (0.00 / 0)
New Obama ad... wooo...  From Ambinder:

"A new Obama ad out tonight calls out both John McCain and Sarah Palin....with McCain's sin being that he votes often with President Bush and Palin's sin being that she flip-flopped on the Bridge to Nowhere.

Developing....."

Maybe they can make it as boring as their other ones, so no one will talk about it.

[ Parent ]
This ad? (4.00 / 1)

[ Parent ]
"Politicians lieing about their records" (0.00 / 0)
well, Chris you have to admit, them's fighting words.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare
[ Parent ]
I could not agree more (0.00 / 0)
I have seen 10x more McCain ads then Obama ads - and I live in CO, supposedly a critical swing state. Putting money into the ground game is great - but at this point he's just helping people get to the booth to vote R.
[ Parent ]
As for ending the compliments... (4.00 / 2)
We won't.  I know, that's not helpful, but the Democrats are just fucking scared to death of somehow, in any way, being associated with being negative around McCain's service.

My guess is that this is because McCain's counter argument for everything, and as you say basically the entire argument behind his campaign, is that he was a POW.  So, my guess is that complimenting McCain's POW status before every criticism is an effort to neutralize the "But I was a POW!" argument.  It, as you said, probably has the opposite affect, as it basically makes undecideds take Obama at his word on one thing (John McCain = War Hero) and questionable about another (McCain = Bush).  So you've now established that McCain is a war hero... is a war hero like Bush?

That's the question Obama wants you to answer affirmatively.

Yeah (4.00 / 3)
if they were willing to do this, they also would have been willing to stand up for Wes Clark.  They must have clearly seen the consequences of throwing Clark under the bus like they did.  I still am completely baffled by their willingness to do that.  

If Obama goes on to lose, the Clark thing will probably be the campaign's turning point.

[ Parent ]
Not sure any more... (0.00 / 0)
I think lots and LOTS of credit will end up going to Palin, deserved or not.

But that's what will probably be reported ad nauseum.

[ Parent ]
running GE like it was a primary (4.00 / 1)
How many times did Obama comment on Hillary's compelling story or salute her public service? Oh, right none.

Too bad he won't attack McCain the way he attacked Clinton.

"You're likable enough, Hillary" (0.00 / 0)
was the only one I remember.
[ Parent ]
Yes, let's have that debate again (0.00 / 0)
Thank you for trying to divert back to Obama vs. Clinton.  It's been a couple weeks since we've passed that threshold.

Sheesh.

[ Parent ]
If Dems HAVE to compliment McCain (4.00 / 2)
If Dems HAVE to compliment McCain put it toward the end of the speech or ad. The first line tells people what you are going to say so don't make the first line a McCain compliment.

If Dems HAVE to compliment McCain put it in the past like Kerry did at the convention. Senator McCain said something admirable but Candidate McCain betrayed it. Bring up all the reversals, paint the political creature with no principles that McCain is now.

If Dems HAVE to compliment McCain take the attitude of regret and loss .. Good 'ol McCain used to be honorable, now he's cranking out lies and smears like sausage, what a shame.

I don't know why Dems HAVE to compliment McCain now, they've done enough and he doesn't compliment Obama's historic achievements or Biden's honorable record. It makes McCain look like the wise elder and Dems the wannabees.

I'm coming around to agreeing (0.00 / 1)
This is the point you and many others have been arguing for quite some time and a point I've never really agreed with.  But I'm coming around.

To me, when someone admits one good thing about someone before criticizing many other things, it adds believability.  But the reinforcing of McCain's message really is worse.  To those barely paying attention -- the real swing voters -- it adds to McCain's narrative.

see it's shit like this that there should be an ad about (0.00 / 0)

http://news.yahoo.com/story//a...

More distortions, more lies more of the same...shit it writes itself, put in a couple of quotes from the Republican Senate president from Alaska on how Palin is ready to lead Alaska, much less the country...

Challenge For Chris (0.00 / 0)
Ok, I'm with you.  

For you, for us, hit McCain, hard.  Short, to the point, zingers if you got em.  Show us how to do it.  It will help you focus your thoughts, rally the troops, and who knows.  

Let's not be a blog of, as Phil Gramm would put it of Chardonnay drinkers.  Let's do on to them as they do to us.

I'm going to go have a mental recession while awaiting you response.

I'm not sure we can (4.00 / 1)
but since it won't go away, we can spike it with poison. Associate his service with the corrupt Republican he's always been. An ad I'd like to see:

Say something like like "In 1973, John McCain returned home after serving his country" over the picture of him shaking hands with Nixon, suggesting the crazy old man thing. Then talk about all of the things he's done since then have hurt normal Americans - voting to end the minimum wage, voting against unions, standing with Bush 100% on the war

Cut to Bush talking about his constituency of the haves and the have-mores and Phil Gramm's Nation of whiners. Maybe add McCain freezing when asked how many houses he owns.

End with something like "John McCain once served his country with pride. Now, he only serves the wealthy and the powerful."

or (4.00 / 4)
Get VoteVets out there with an ad with a fellow POW saying 1) he won't vote for McCain, 2) being shot down and tortured 35 years ago doesn't qualify you to be president and 3) McCain's record in the Senate, voting for the war, against the Webb GI bill, etc. has hurt our soldiers.

Obama in that clip was defensive and not playing to move voters. People don't respond to "you haven't heard a word about the economy and we need a new kind of politics," christ McCain's speech was nothing but meaningless slogans and I'm a POW and I love my country and my opponent is an opportunist. And people loved it. And it's been like this for years.

[ Parent ]
You might consider... (0.00 / 0)
making an ad about supporting the troops and showing all the Vietnam vets living on the streets or talking about how we need to reinforce the VA so it accommodates the mental illness that was neglected after Vietnam or some such as a subliminal implication that many didn't come out of Vietnam whole mentally and since McCain came out of Vietnam....
[ Parent ]
What's so annoying about all of this (4.00 / 2)
is that they have the right idea with their post=convention response--the Republicans have nothing to talk about, they have no solutions. All they have is personality and smearing.

There's no need to have a clause about, well, isn't that personality great, though?  

They can complement him -- just like McCain completements Obama -- (4.00 / 2)
but they need to start hitting him harder after they do it.

They need to make America afraid of him. Afraid of him because he will run our economy into the ground. Afraid of him because he will push into wars we don't need to have, risk the lives of our sons and daughters because he is too senile to remember who are real enemies are. Or because he's having a fit of pique.

They can't just criticize him. They need to stigmatize him. And Palin.

John McCain soiled whatever respect he'd earned by  forgetting his principles and selling out to the hard right and the crazy-eyed neocons. He'll do anything to get elected.

Sarah Palin needs to be demonized. Imagine an ad with a look alike wearing a hockey mask looking "slutty" and nuts, skating around a rink, savagely knocking down cardboard hockey players whose jersey names say things like "balanced budget", "sound foreign policy", "fiscal conservatism", "lobbying reform", "ending the national debt", "green energy," etc . . .

We need to paint her as a crazed PTA mom run amok.

These are ugly things to posit, but the reality they figuratively represent is real. It's just that the packaging that gives cues to the level of contempt a reasonable person should have toward figures like McCain and Palin as candidates.  

The GOP is the Party of Freakshows and Losers. (4.00 / 2)
We cannot make this point often enough, and Palin does all the heavy lifting for us.

We should be running ads with images from the Terry Schiavo affair, and Rev. Fred "God Hates Fags" Phelps, asking the question, "Is this the America you want to live in?" Maybe dredge up some footage of Buchanan's 1992 convention speech.

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
yes (4.00 / 1)
And Jews for Jesus, Hagee. And Mark Foley, Larry Craig, I'm sure there are a couple photos of McCain with those two.

And Cindy. Seriously, I'd love to see a poll of how many people even know how McCain dumped his first wife and three kids for her. If everyone who'd heard of Wright knew about that McCain would be done. Get that, along with video of her talking about not releasing her tax returns, or about how she absolutely loves her private jet, and cut between it and "uh uh I'll have my staff get back to you on that one" ad nauseum.

Remember how much fun 2006 was? There's no reason we shouldn't be having that kind of fun all over again.

off-topic:
This community is overflowing with ideas. How do we get them out there? We certainly can't rely on the corporate media, or even the Obama campaign it seems, to help us. I guess the few active 527s are probably the best route, but what I really wish is Robert Greenwald, or OpenLeft or Daily Kos would buy airtime.

[ Parent ]
send this whole thread to them... (0.00 / 0)
God I hope they go on the offense soon on the both of them.
Compliments (4.00 / 1)
These comments from Democrats come across as qualifiers, which are only added to a statement if the speaker herself/himself believes what they are about to say may be perceived as "mean" or overtly harsh.  It's what you do if you are about to break bad news to someone with a thin skin.

This is most definitely not the line of attack that will help us win this election.  In the video linked here, it's almost as if Obama feels bad for what he is about to say (which obviously isn't the case, as he's telling the truth).  It's not the message you want to convey.  We shouldn't be saying "what I am about to say may sound cruel..." because McCain is running as a POW, we should simply be saying "What I am about to say is true..."

As for strategy in pushing this message into the campaign without creating a media extravaganza by proxy, what about pushing donations to the Obama campaign, with each donation tagged with the simple message: "Stop Complimenting McCain, Start Defending Democrats" or a similar message?  The donation is our own qualifier, followed by a blunt message denoting a lack of satisfaction in the messaging of a campaign we still intend to support, but would like to see tweaked so that our money is not in vain.

Shameless Blog Plug: The SideTrack

Sry, but this sounds a bit lame, imho (0.00 / 0)
"What I am about to say is true..."
Uh, really, if you think you have to say THAT, that's a sign of missing faith in your own message, if not of a lack of self-confidence. Why not simply start with "McCain is wrong!"? Followed by a short (!) statement why a certain McCain policy (say, healthcare, or taxes) is WRONG for the US in general. Don't make it confusing by juggling with details, concentrate on hitting him hard. And when asked about your view of McCain as a person, respond by "this election isn't a popularity contest, this is about finding the best leader for the US in the difficult times ahead. And McCain is the wrong person for that job.". No more praise, no more balderdash! Nothing can be gained by losing in a gentlemanly way. Too much is at stake.
[ Parent ]
Where is the Hate of McCain? (4.00 / 5)

Yea, I said hate.

Chris, it's not just a messaging problem, it's a mindset problem.

What's missing is the fire-in-the-belly aggression that comes from having a visceral dislike for your opponent. You'd think being repeatedly called an unpatriotic, treasonous, elitist snob would get their dander up but...

They desperately need to redefine John McCain as a lying, untrustworthy, reckless, lobbyist-loving insider, 26-year GOP loyalist. The mindset should be to ruin him. Completely. And enjoy doing it.

They simply cannot do it while thinking/saying "my friend John" the "POW Hero"...

"The White House obviously has a loser mentality - but America rallies around winners."

They COULD do it to Hillary, though (0.00 / 0)
Not Biden, of course, but Obama and his followers. Speaks volumes about their mindset, imho.
[ Parent ]
Why not an email campaign? (0.00 / 0)
Chris, if you want to get through to the campaigns, you (and any other prominent bloggers who were of the same mind) could organize a letter-writing campaign, just like you would for any advocacy issue. You could even draft suggested text.

I sent an email to Joe Biden (because I think he is the worst offender) this weekend saying the exact same thing--please, please, please stop praising McCain before you slam him. My email alone probably won't get a lot of notice, but if their offices get a couple of thousand emails saying the same thing, maybe they will get the hint. And it has the benefit of not being as "public" as a MyBarackObama.com page.

How Can We End The Compliments? | 101 comments





Donate to Open Left




blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
LIBERAL INSTITUTIONS
STATE BLOGS
USER MENU

QUICK HITS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2010, Powered by SoapBlox