« Georgia on their mind!
Douglas A. Blackmon on “the age of neo-slavery” »



Obama’s Rovian Roleplaying?

June 20th, 2008
By JAZZ SHAW, Assistant Editor

Print Print

You know, no matter how jaded some of us have become with the current two party system and American politics as usual, we may still find ourselves getting sucked in when the media continually paints a narrative. One of the current classics seems to be the idea that John McCain is following the usual GOP path, with shadowy 527s conducting smear campaigns on the Illinois Senator and his wife while Obama floats serenely along above the fray, preaching a somewhat vague but highly luminous message of hope and change. I received a bit of a slap in the face, though, while reading this article from the ABC News Political Radar blog. They posed a question which might give you pause: Is Barack Obama running for George W. Bush’s 3rd term and McCain running for John Kerry’s first?

Not on policy, of course (not that Team McCain would much mind that perception these days). But in approach, in temperament, in stability, in take-no-prisoners mindset — inside which campaign would Karl Rove recognize a piece of himself?

In the one with tightly controlled access, the jugular-aiming (drama-free) political shop, and the temerity to cast aside a fundraising pledge en route to breaking all campaign-finance records?

Or the one with rolling press conferences, scattershot messaging (with missed zingers), and complaints about the other side not playing fair?

We have found the new politics — and it can spend half a billion dollars to win an election.

The question seems farcical, of course, if you’re already thinking in terms of the “conventional wisdom” of the media. But they do raise some interesting questions. McCain’s team, short on cash and national organizational infrastructure, keeps pushing for more debates and decrying their own supporters who perpetuate stories about his opponent’s wife, his suspicious sounding middle name, etc. Meanwhile, Obama has received widespread - if not heavily covered - praise for the “clinical” way that his team managed congressional districts to win primary states, wrangled a national fundraising effort never before seen, and demonstrated the will to simply walk away from a signed pledge regarding campaign finances while blaming McCain’s team for the failure.

If we didn’t know the names of the candidates being described, you might suspect the latter was an organization under the guidance of Karl Rove, no?

I will take this opportunity to point out once again that McCain’s failure to fully capitalize on the Obama finance flip rests squarely on the shoulders of his own campaign. On Saturday, June 7, Hillary Clinton stepped off the stage. If McCain’s handlers were half as clever as people accuse them of being, they would have had the Arizona Senator on every Sunday morning show saying the following:

I would like to congratulate Senator Obama on securing the Democratic nomination, and I look forward to the spirited debate which lies ahead. And I will also take this opportunity to invite him to make good on his signed pledge for both of us to accept public financing for our campaigns. I’m directing my staff to contact his people about that today to finalize the details.

Instead, Team McCain let the horse get out of the barn and Obama was able to get out ahead of the story. He made a pitch about people “negotiating in bad faith” and clouded the issue until the media turned it into a massive case of “he said she said.” Had McCain locked this down on June 8, Obama would have had no choice but to swallow a bitter pill and give up massive amounts of campaign cash or risk being labeled a flat out liar. But now the moment is gone and the story will be flushed down the memory hole.

Well played, I admit, and it will likely work in Obama’s favor. But it certainly does have more of the scent of Karl Rove to it than anything the McCain team is cooking up.



This entry was posted on Friday, June 20th, 2008 at 8:25 am and is filed under Newsweek Blogitics, John McCain, Barack Obama, 2008 Elections, Politics. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Viewing 17 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    You're trying to say that Obama's campaign is anything like the smear campaigns Karl Rove ran for GWB?

    Neither Obama nor McCain have been completely pure in this campaign, but so-far both have been MILES away from anything like the Rovian campaigns of 2000 and 2004. It's still early and we'll see who's campaign really smells like Karl Rove's work this fall.

    Besides, McCain already lost the high-ground when he opted out of Public financing during the primary: http://themoderatevoice.com/at-tmv/newsweek-blo...

    Show me where McCain promised Obama that he'd run on public financing for the general election BEFORE Obama's announcement yesterday?
    • ^
    • v
    Not so much in the smears, no. Obviously not. More in the - again - "clinical" approach to the hard math and the rather daring moves of doing something as flat out dangerous as bailing out on the campaign finance issue while pinning that particular tail on the McCain donkey as they walked away. I must admit... impressive. :-)
    • ^
    • v
    Running a smart campaign was not invented by Karl Rove, running a smart & slimy campaign perhaps could be pinned on Karl.
    • ^
    • v
    I kind of see what you're saying, Jazz, but as Rambie points out, if you pull the slime and deceipt out of the Rove-run campaigns, you just have an organized and well-run campaign. Oh, and I will hold in my heart the hope that Obama will not resort to disenfranchising thousands of likely opposition voters in swing states (read: out-right cheating) in order to win, which was another of the "clinical" tactics used in the last couple of elections.
    • ^
    • v
    Jazz, am I catching a recurring anti-Obama theme in your posts? Let's remember that "figures can lie and liars can figure" or some such homily. Each campaign and every opinion columnist spins the "facts" the way they want it. For example, the ABC piece says Obama can outspend McCain 3 to 1. As Obama pointed out in making his announcement, the RNC can outspend the DNC 3 to 1. So both sides can claim they're up against awesome fiscal power. And both are right.

    Then there's the Rove bomb, which is the new Hitler bomb. Every despot, even the pathetic Saddam Hussein is continually likened to Hitler, and now every time we don't like some aspect of a campaign, it will be "Rovian".
    • ^
    • v
    Should anyone read an "anti-anyone" theme into my writings, I would suggest they are projecting a bit. I just like covering politics and I call the stories as i see them. I've written flattering things about all the candidates and less than flattering, depending how I saw the story. In cases like this, I'm making observations on the editorial comments of others. The "rovian" label came from the original ABC article, not yours truly, but I did find their questions and comparisons compelling.
    • ^
    • v
    I'm surprised (though not much) that in all the hoopla about opting out, some crucial facts are being swept under the rug, perhaps on pirpose..

    During the primaries McCain played a very complicated game of opting in, out, in, out. When The Rep. head of the FEC warned him that he was breeking the law, McCain (read: his lawyer) came up with a lot of squirrely counter arguments, the punchline being that the FEC itself was unconstitutional.
    That sounds uncomfortably like Bush's lawyer Yoo finding reasons why the law and international agreements don't need to be obeyed. This is why many people believe in the possibility of Bush's 3rd term

    One can make a good case for McCain's campaign funds behavior forcing Obama to opt out. Only an idiot would trust Mccain after the primaries, and Obma is not an idiot.

    While everyone is making political hay over this, Obama has a bill to try to fix the public financing law. Again, McCain talks , people swallow what he says without researching the background, but Obama acts in an effort o fix the problem.

    The most Rovian aspect of this is the go-for-the-jugular reaction, without a moment's effort to look into it beyond flashing headlines and panting commentary..

    McCain is faulted for not attacking Obama more? What if that resulted in more scrtutiny of McCains own campaign finanicng and in-out-in history?
    Maybe McCain just recognized his own vulnerability when he saw it.
    • ^
    • v
    "Running a smart campaign was not invented by Karl Rove, running a smart & slimy campaign perhaps could be pinned on Karl"

    Yep, politics was a high-minded pursuit of Gentleman-Scholars, dedicated to Public Service, prior to Rove. No one would have even consider casting rumors against one's Respected and Chivalrous opponent, nor packing a ballot box. he invented push-polling and innuendo, and is so obviously the Anti-Christ (or for us athiests, the Anti-Non-Deity)

    Oh, to return to those glorious yesteryears of Civil Discourse and Debate in our Politicians.
    • ^
    • v
    Rambie, I agree with you on your posts... but I'd like to make a correction (or perhaps further explanation?) on your statement about McCain "opting out" of the primary public financing....

    McCain did't "opt out" of public financing for the primary. He accepted the public financing when his campaign was in trouble (and the concomitant responsibilites and restrictions). McCain clearly benefited from the public financing arrangement because he was able to get on ballots in states (such as Ohio) that he did not have the resources to to do so on his own. He then dumped the public financing when it held him back without getting FEC approval. Admittedly the FEC did not have a quorum to make a determination, but McCain clearly went back not only on his word, but what he agreed to do and what he participated in.

    As runasim points out McCain (through his lawyer) used squirrely arguments to exit the public financing... including calling the FEC/system unconstitutional.... For a guy who has championed public financing in the past, that's a pretty bold (and Rovian) statement.

    I really think McCain is receiving a free pass on his public financing shenanigans, especially given how some in the press is spinning Obama's opt out as him going back on his word (I haven't seen any evidence to the contrary).

    What McCain did in the primary for public financing is a crime, punishable with prison time (up to five years, if I recall correctly). I'm sure McCain is glad the FEC does not have a quorum to hear McCain's actions on this matter.... Wouldn't it be delicious if McCain became president but served his term in prison?
    • ^
    • v