Today John McCain is unveiling a sassy TV commercial with his 96-year-old mother to remind voters about his good genes and American values. Iffy as it may be to call attention to his age, the ad underscores the diversity of motherhood in this campaign.
Roberta McCain, who gave birth to her son at a Naval Air Station in Panama, where her husband, the son of an Admiral and a future Admiral himself, was based, radiates the aura of a strict, no-nonsense parent out of a bygone era. John McCain always knew exactly who he was.
Barack Obama’s mother was a dreamer with, in his words, a “combination of being very grounded in who she was, what she believed in…but also a certain recklessness…always searching for something. She wasn’t comfortable seeing her life confined to a certain box.” Her travels and exotic marriages produced a unique bi-racial man who has spent his life finding and creating himself.
Somewhere between these extremes of certainty and self-invention is Hillary Clinton’s biographical journey from a well-to-do suburban childhood that took her to college as a Goldwater girl, transformed her into a Eugene McCarthy protester against the Vietnam war and eventually the first woman within striking distance of the presidency.
In this post-Victorian, post-Freudian era, motherhood comes in all shapes and sizes, producing remarkable diversity in the generation that will define the 21st century.
The gas tax holiday which many experts and politicians say is an ineffective idea and could make things worse is now forefront in the battle between Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama for votes in the Indiana and North Carolina primaries.
“One must question how Clinton would stand up in a campaign against McCain. Her argument is that she would draw more of her opponents’ core-voters. But Obama does something that Clinton no longer wangles: he mobilizes new voters. The Clinton camp wants to take a slice of McCain’s pie, while Obama wants to bake his own.”
“And this is precisely what Clinton seems to want to prevent with her war of attrition. She has never offered a new perspective - only tried and tested ones. That was supposed to be enough. But then came Obama, who turned her into a zombie-candidate. If you’re not attractive enough, one must paint your opponent as even uglier. Unfortunately, Obama has begun to display certain Clintonesque properties - the bitterness of the primary elections has left its mark, transforming he, too, into a political zombie.” Read the rest of this entry »
April 24th, 2008 by JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief
There was an “I told you so” in some Democratic anti-Obama quarters about a North Carolina Republican political ad blasting Democrats who supported Senator due to his links to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright — an ad that ran highly inflammable footage of Wright. Now Senator John McCain’s camp is reporting the ad has been pulled at McCain’s personal request.
The ad was the latest negative skirmish in a political campaign where manifestations of negative campaigning are becoming as frequent — and as attractive — as festering pustules on a dying smallpox victim. And the ad provoked a slew of stories and theories:
Was this really an ad really put up and/or instigated by national Republicans so they could hide behind plausible deniability?
Was this an ad by Republicans who fear Obama more than Hillary and were working to weaken him in the primary so they could advance the cause (articulated by Rush Limbaugh) of getting Hillary as the nominee?
Were the Clinton people finding their work was being done for them by the GOP?
And - most importantly — were McCain’s assertions that he wants to run a more positive campaign just a bunch of hooey that would be proven to be just that when the North Carolina Republicans refused to pull the ad?
But now the ad is being pulled – and look for McCain to walk away with some image enhancement due to it:
Despite vows by North Carolina’s Republican Party to press on with a TV ad slamming Democratic candidates for governor for their support of Barack Obama, in turn for his association with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, the McCain campaign is reporting that the Tar Heel Republicans have agreed to shelve the ad.
McCain senior campaign adviser Charlie Black has told Steve Holland of Reuters that he has been informed by the Republican National Committee’s representative in North Carolina that the state party has agreed to withdraw the ad. McCain personally had called on the state GOP to can the ad.
The ad plays on Obama’s association with the pastor who led the Chicago church that he has attended for two decades. Wright, now retired, has drawn criticism for statements about the U.S. government and about race and power in America.
The 30-second ad in question attacks Democratic gubernatorial candidates Beverly Perdue and Richard Moore for their endorsements of Obama, challenging the Illinois senator’s “judgment” in supporting Wright and calling him “too extreme for North Carolina.” North Carolina is one of two states holding the next crucial Democratic primaries on May 6 in the race between Obama and Hillary Clinton for the party’s presidential nomination.
There are still several interpretations to this latest flap:
(1) McCain really didn’t want to get it pulled. The damage was done when word of the ad got out to North Carolina’s residents (and to the world) with the ad being played in news stories — in other words getting lots of free advertising for the ad. This would mean this was a tried and true tactic: have someone throw the mud out there, then denounce it and remove the mud…but splattered clothes still remain splattered. Note how even in the news story above it recounts the story of Wright — shoving it back into the news cycle forefront.
(2) McCain really means it and there are going to be limits in his campaign.
No matter which interpretation you give it, the bottom line is this: no matter what, McCain is still walking away with some more image enhancement while Clinton and Obama work feverishly to destroy each other’s images.
Even before her win tonight, Hillary was pointing out that a Hillary win in Pennsylvania demonstrates the fallacy underlying the ‘Obama is inevitable’ argument.
Hillary Clinton said if Barack Obama does not win Pennsylvania despite his huge campaign war chest, people ought to ask the question, “Why can’t he close the deal?”…
Clinton went to say that if she wins Pennsylvania, she will have accumulated wins in key states that Democrats need in order to retake the White House in November. She seemed to be speaking directly to superdelegates when she tried to raise doubts over Obama’s ability to win. “With his extraordinary financial advantage, why can’t he win a state like this one if that’s the way it turns out?” Clinton asked. “Obviously we have a long way to go before people are finished voting and the votes are counted. This will be one more in a long line of big states, states that Democrats have to win.”(CBS News)
At Political Punch earlier today, Jake Tapper also wondered why the much better-funded Obama can’t win over Clinton’s constituents.
“New tools” can mean many different things these days and often involve social media of some type.
But in a conference call today, Democratic National Committee chair Howard Dean described “the rollout of a new field effort and Neighborhood Volunteer organizing tool” as one that emphasizes face-to-face contact between neighbors. (Also referenced was a new ad called called, “Better Off,” which you can view here. It aims at Senator John McCain.)
I didn’t get to ask a question during the call but I did e-mail DNC Communications Director Karen Finney immediately after the call ended:
“…who is setting the benchmarks and what are the benchmarks re: the numbers hoped to be achieved per state and nationwide with the organizing tool.”
Her response, which was extremely prompt: “Our political department, working with the state parties will set the state by state benchmarks. We are not discussing them publicly yet.”
I promised that I’d improve my *1 skills for the next conference call so that I can see if they’re discussing those benchmarks publicly yet (let’s hope I get asked to be in on the call again).
Other info from the call had to do with not allowing John McCain to re-invent himself and meeting him everywhere he goes to remind him and the voters of that fact, so that they don’t, as was said, “get bamboozled.”
Dean re-stated a couple of times his belief that setting up field stations now ensures that not having a nominee does not cripple the Democratic party because “we’re so far ahead of where we’ve been” at this stage in past races. It was stated that there are 50,000 individuals who have agreed to talk to their neighbors.
I’ve been on a few conference calls this year and this was the first one during which I actually tried to ask a question so I was a bit bummed that when I tried, for whatever reason, I didn’t get a chance. I temporarily had a complex - imagining that it was because I’m a blogger, or female (no questions from women were fielded though Karen Finney wrote me that there were other women in on the call) or the equipment was broken.
Though I’m sure none of the above were true, next time, I am going to practice my “star 1″ skills between now and the next time. Maybe I’ll even call on two phones at once to improve my odds.
For years Democrats have SOUNDLY condemned any attempts by the White House or GOP to use bin Laden images to suggest that Democrats are soft on terrorism. But now a Democrat does just that — and there is silence from many Democrats.
So in 2008 if some Republicans use the same “Vote for us or die” suggestion and Democrats condemn them, people need to keep in mind that the use of these tactics — coming on the eve of a vote so the other campaign really can’t mount a quick response — has now been validated by many Democrats who applaud or look the other way when anything is used to help their side win.
Are the pro-Obama forces seriously trying to get their troops outraged over this latest ad from Hillary Clinton? Just because it contains a ten-second sequence of presidential crises (Depression, Pearl Harbor, gas crisis, Katrina, etc.) and flashes a half-second clip of Osama bin Laden as part of it? Spare me. Are Democratic political ads no longer even allowed to mention the fact that the next president is going to have to deal with the war on terror?
I politely disagree:
1. If you go back and look at the blog, progressive talk show, etc. outrage during the Bush administration there has been one constant. Democrats of all types soundly condemned any use of bin Laden footage or a suggestion that if you didn’t vote for the Republicans your life might be in danger. Now it appears in an ad for a Democrat — and it’s no longer something to condemn.
2. It isn’t only Obama forces that could react this way. The last time I belong to a political party, I registered as a Republican in California to vote for John McCain in the 2000 Republican presidential primary. A new book on Arnold Schwarzenegger quotes me and describes me as a typical California independent voter. If it’s wrong when one side does it, it’s wrong when the other side does it. Not all independent voters react this way (independent voters are not monolithic) — but this one does.
April 15th, 2008 by JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief
Senator Hillary Clinton has a new hard-hitting campaign ad aimed at continuing to keep rival Senator Barack Obama’s comments about people in small-towns being bitter alive as a potent “wedge” and “electability” issue — but NBC Political Editor Chuck Todd points out some intriguing things about it:
Question: How often do you see a politician — who’s leading a contest in high single digits — launch a negative TV ad? Well, that’s what Clinton (who’s ahead in Pennsylvania but trailing in the overall nomination race) did yesterday, when her campaign unveiled a man/woman-on-the-street TV ad in Pennsylvania that criticized Obama over his comments. “I was very insulted by Barack Obama,” says one person in the ad. “It just shows how out of touch Barack Obama is,” adds another.
This is a gamble in this respect: It means the Clinton camp is going for the political kill on this issue, both with PA voters and undecided superdelegates.
If Clinton doesn’t win Pennsylvania by bigger margins than, say, where polls have things now, will supers deem this tactic as having failed and pressure the Clinton camp to stop the constant hits? Expect Obama to respond on the paid airways in some form today. Meanwhile, the Obama camp has launched a Web ad (i.e., no money behind it) that slams Clinton on her ties to lobbyists. And don’t miss the fact that liberal (“elite?”) op-ed writers have begun coming to Obama’s defense.
Here’s Clinton’s ad which could well get her more votes and halt some Superdelegates who might want to jump ship…and make Obama suppporters more….”bitter.” (Uh, oh…will TMV now be denounced on the stump??)
The Righteous Republican cosmeticians have started to work their magic and, as in the women’s magazines, a natural-looking person may end up resembling an aging tart. To borrow from Gloria Steinem, McCain would do better to brush them off and say, “This is what seventy and self-possessed looks like, get used to it.”
The first ad is a tipoff, harking back to those days at the Hanoi Hilton over a quarter of a century ago, echoing his advice to fellow prisoners: “Keep that faith. Keep your courage. Stick together. Stay strong. Do not yield. Stand up. We’re Americans. And we’ll never surrender.”
We’re all prisoners of George W. Bush in Iraq now, and it may not be in McCain’s best interests to remind us that he wants to keep us there, if not for a hundred years, until some of the troops there are his age now.
William Kristol is advising the candidate who admits he doesn’t know much about the economy to offer “a broad reform agenda–education reform, health insurance reform, tax reform, government reform, Wall Street reform. He could start by outlining an up-to-date, capitalism-friendly and transparency-requiring approach to regulating the credit markets.”
Biography isn’t enough, Kristol reminds McCain. You have to start doing a George Bush impersonation, throwing out all kinds of voter bait that you can sweep aside when you get into the White House.
By the time Conservatives finish remaking McCain, his nonagenarian mother won’t recognize him and, if he looks in the mirror, neither will he.
Via memeorandum comes the first general election ad of the season. America, meet John McCain — war hero, former POW, and patriot extraordinaire:
No doubt we will all know his Navy serial # (624787) by heart before this is all done… and why not? He was a hero indeed; I, for one, admire his service and courage enormously. And he’s gonna need all those laurels to support his position on the Iraq war. (Good luck with that.)
And while he could have run this ad without subtly targeting anyone, he most definitely has singled out Barack Obama as his expected opponent. Evidently he, too, sees the writing on the wall for the Clinton campaign.
So — Obama now knows (rather than simply suspects) the tone and direction of the general election’s early stages. Basically McCain’s line is, “I’m the best candidate because I’m more patriotic than my opponent (… who can only talk the talk”).
I think it’s wasted ammunition against Obama (who, despite some rather flagrant misinformation and spin to the contrary, is plenty patriotic) — but it’s the logical starting point for John McCain, and the strongest ground he can stake by far. Furthermore, as an opening shot, it’s pretty far off Obama’s front bow. In fact, compared to what’s going on in the Democratic primary, I’d say it’s downright gentle.
Have Democrats - and Europeans - become too comfortable with the inevitability of a Democratic President in 2008? Financial Times Deutschland columnist Thomas Klau writes in part, ‘The dramatic struggle between two exceptional Democratic politicians has drawn attention away from the fact that McCain’s candidacy is also a turning point - a break in the position of Republicans which, as far as party politics is concerned, could mean a historically and culturally deeper break than the Democratic Party’s nomination duel. … The reproach so often repeated by Obama - that McCain offers only a sequel of the failed politics of George W. Bush - misses the point: McCain has contradicted Bush’s policies so often, that no one can embody calls for change the way he does.’
By Thomas Klau
Translated by Julian Jacob
March 6, 2008
Germany - Financial Times Deutschland - Original Article (German)
The saga goes on - the epochal battle for the Democratic Presidential nomination. Once again, the voters have resisted the pressure of the media, which was so quick to choose a favorite candidate.
In the U.S., people love quick results and clear statistics and a fast declaration of winners and losers. But Americans also appreciate the courage of those who don’t give up. Hillary Clinton has fought on after being written off and has gone on the attack when many were urging her to clear the field for Barack Obama. On Tuesday [Mar. 4] , the voters didn’t abandon her.
The senator’s tenacity and her steadfastness in times of great stress could be her best argument, if in Denver in July it comes down to drawing party delegates to her side. Clinton will need arguments because despite her victory yesterday, the numbers continue to speak against her. In terms of the number of delegates, Obama is out in front and will be almost impossible to catch - the arithmetic and dynamics of the approaching primary dates work in his advantage.
Now the battle for the Democratic nomination will become harder and perhaps dirtier. Clinton’s revitalized election team will make every effort to keep the Illinois senator on the defensive. Obama’s squeaky-clean image will suffer if for the first time, the press keeps its klieg lights on the senator’s more problematic contacts. It is here that he is vulnerable to attack. He’s member of a Black church congregation in Chicago, the leader of which has maintained contacts with Black racists. And the corruption trial against a former Obama supporter, building contractor Tony Rezko, is imminent.
DEEP-SEATED PARTY CRISES
With the withdrawal of Mike Huckabee, the Republican primary battle has ended with the formal selection of John McCain. The dramatic struggle between two exceptional Democratic politicians has drawn attention away from the fact that McCain’s candidacy is also a turning point - a break in the position of Republicans which, as far as party politics is concerned, could mean a historically and culturally deeper break than the Democratic Party’s nomination duel.
Politically, Clinton and Obama are conventional Democrats, located in the middle-left of their own party. But McCain is the first Republican presidential candidate in many years who has ascended in spite of the resistance of the culture warriors - that aggressive nationalistic wing of the Party. Unlike the leading figures of the present U.S. government, his TV is not tuned to Fox News - the propaganda channel of the right - but MSNBC - and anyone who knows the United States understand how much that says.
READ ON AT WORLDMEETS.US, along with continuing translated foreign press coverage of the U.S. elections
It has become quite common in some parts of the world to wonder whether American democracy continues to be head-and-shoulders above Russia’s. But according to Patrik Etschmayer of Switzerland’s Nachrichten newspaper, Russia’s recent presidential ‘election’ and America’s ongoing presidential race should put any such chattering to rest. Etschmayer writes in part, ‘American democracy undoubtedly suffers many shortcomings, like voting machines that can be manipulated, smear campaigns, and the fact that apart from the two parties, there is virtually no chance for a candidate to establish him or herself. But American democracy is not yet completely ruined. Last weekend however, Russia’s took another step toward self-imposed dismantling and its rebuilding into a Potemkin democracy - only a facade.’
By Patrik Etschmayer
Translated By Ulf Behncke
March 3, 2008
Switzerland - Nachrichten - Original Article (German)
The world media and election observers are all in agreement: Russia’s presidential elections were a farce. The Russians held an election without a choice, and the President was chosen by his predecessor Putin, who as prime minister will keep his new “boss” Dimitrij Medvedev under his thumb.
Some still hope that the Putin saga will play out again with Medvedev. Because even the strongman from Moscow was initially regarded as a predictable, weak president - merely a stooge in office. But today the arrangement is quite different. At the time, Putin took over from the sick, alcoholic Boris Yeltsin, Read the rest of this entry »
I just received a very distressed phone call from someone running errands this morning in NE Ohio. His first words were, “Someone is making a lot of money.” He went on to say that,
It’s one political ad after another on the radio - even 107! Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones hawking this one, Barack Obama telling us about hope in the other one - it’s insane and it’s not even Tuesday yet!
I received four or five phone calls yesterday, and Friday night, during Shabbat, after I’d received two or three afternoon calls, from live and robovoices, I made my son pick up the phone (wouldn’t you know it was a person I actually needed to talk to?).
My favorite ones so far: Cuyahoga County Judge Stuart Friedman’s robocall. I’m paraphrasing:
Hi. This is Judge Stuart Friedman. I know. You hate these calls. And I really hate these calls.
Judge Friedman has been a judge for at least 18 years, because when I was clerking during the summer of 1990, while in law school, he was on the bench. And he says his spiel with such real-toned exhaustion. I hung up on him, but I was laughing in a goodhearted way. (Hmm - just looked at his picture - might be a different Stuart Friedman than one I remember.)
Then, there was the call yesterday where they tell me to “push 1″ if I’m a woman and “push 2″ if I’m a man. You know which one I pushed? Yup - 2. And the call says a couple of things about voting and hangs up on me! Anyone guess who paid for that call? It starts out saying it’s some analytics group.
It’s going to get worse before it gets better and I’m rounding up a big batch of posts and news and polls to prove it. Stay tuned.
Shout out to Texas, Vermont and Rhode Island - is it like this there too?
In a classic case of political jiu-jitsu, Democratic Senator Barack Obama has a campaign ad parodying Senator Hillary Clinton’s controversial “red telephone” ad.
We wrote about that controversy HERE and also included an early Obama campaign response. But now this ad is airing in Texas — laid out like the Clinton ad but with a decidedly different message:
My DD’s Todd Beaton thinks that in the end Clinton’s ad was a “gift” to Obama because it showed that he could respond swiftly to an attack and it also gave him a forum to lay out his own argument that he has better judgment, as Obama does here.
The question — that Tuesday’s voting will answer — is whether Democrats in primaries are as influenced by ads and campaigns that raise the fear issue when it comes to alternative Democratic candidate opponents as the American electorate in general has been during the Bush administration. Will raising Obama’s war vote be enough to trump the original Clinton ad? And will Texas Democrats feel that Obama’s wrong-from-day-one stance on the war is what they want or will some share Clinton’s view that they originally supported the war based on information they believed was corrected because they trusted the government?
No matter what the answers to those questions, you can conclude:
–The Obama ad shows quick campaign response.
–If Clinton’s ad hammered home the idea that experience not only matters but could be good for your child’s health, Obama’s ad flatly comes out and make the case judgment matters — bolstering it with specific stands (that have as the assumption that Texas Democrats will agree with them).
–The Obama ad’s use of parody showed a stylistic nimbleness since this kind of parody (which you often see in comedy shows and on cartoons such as Family Guy) is highly popular in 21st century (and still can be seen in the still thriving Mad Magazine, which was born in mid-20th century America). The duplication of the look, feel, pacing and even camera-work of the original Clinton spot is done seriously here, of course, but it displays the campaign’s quick and creative push back.
