GOP Nominee
Former Candidates
Mark Halperin has an fascinating list of 16 things that John McCain can do against Barack Obama in a general election, that Hillary Clinton couldn’t do against him in the primaries:
Nomination fights are tribal matters. There are certain lines candidates from the same party cannot cross when trying to win. In general election battles, there are fewer rules and constraints.
If Clinton is not able to come back and beat Obama, there will be a fair amount of (to borrow one of her phrases) coulda-shoulda-woulda on behalf of her campaign: things she could have done that she chose not to do -– or was not able to do.
The McCain campaign is staffed with savvy, experienced operatives who have closely watched the rise of Obama, and they have learned from Clinton’s failure to take down her Democratic rival.
Things McCain can do when running against Obama that Clinton has been unable to do well or at all:
1. Play the national security card without hesitation.
2. Talk about the Iraq War without apologies or perceived contradiction.
3. Go at Obama unambiguously from the right.
4. Encourage interest groups, bloggers, and right-leaning media to explore Obama’s past.
5. Make an issue of Obama’s acknowledged drug use.
6. Allow some supporters to risk being accused of using the race card when criticizing Obama.
7. Exploit Michelle Obama’s mistakes and address her controversial remarks with unrestricted censure.
8. Play dirty without alienating his party.
9. Dismiss Obama’s brief national tenure from his own lofty platform of decades in the Senate – there will be no ambiguity about who has more experience as conventionally defined.
10. Use his sterling war record to reinforce his image of patriotism and valor – and contrast it with his opponent’s.
11. Emphasize Barack Hussein Obama’s unusual name and exotic background through a Manchurian Candidate prism.
12. Employ third party groups like the NRA to hit Obama on issues that might turn off general election voters. Perhaps an ad such as this will run in Ohio: “So, what do you really know about Barack Obama? Did you know he supports meeting with the head of terrorist states? Do you know he wants to get rid of your right to own a handgun? Do you know he is calling for the repeal of the law preventing gay marriage? Do you know he is for a trillion-dollar tax increase? What do you really know about Barack Obama?”
13. Face an electorate less consumed with “change change change” (the main priority for Democratic voters) and keenly interested in “ready from day one” as an equally important ideal.
14. Link biography (experience/courage) and leadership (straight talk) to a vision animated by detail – accentuating Obama’s relative lack of specificity.
15. Give Obama his first real race against a credible Republican. (Clinton has always asserted that Obama would wilt before a fierce Republican assault.)
16. Confront Obama with a united, focused campaign absent of second-guessing, which hits the same themes and message every day.
February 25th, 2008 at 11:20 am
I disagree that McCain can make hay out of Obama’s drug use.
He can definitely, if done in a tact manner, contrast the patriotism of the candidates. Make Barack and Michelle look like self-aggrandizing, America-is-just-another-country elites; contrast it with the POW service and sense of patriotism McCain evokes.
How the H can McCain emphasize Barack’s name and ‘Manchurian Candidate’ status? That is ludicrous.
February 25th, 2008 at 11:34 am
I would like to note that some of the items in this list fall into the category of:
a) stuff that HRC would like to have done/is doing, which would be unsavory for McCain to do, if for no other reason that he is not a Clinton;
b) stuff that would backfire on him (likewise…)
February 25th, 2008 at 11:36 am
McCain should hit Obama on the issues. All those other things are distractions and are not necessary. This guy has taken many positions that are far outside the mainstream. Expose them and he’s history.
February 25th, 2008 at 11:51 am
1, I agree with TLG, about McCain making an issue of the drug issue. A lot of people have done in their youth, and for the party to make an issue of it is for the party to come across as unforgiving and drive away alot of swing voters who can relate to having gone astray in their youth. If he was still using the drugs it would be one thing, but as it is he can play it as his having turned around - and thats there’s still hope for those enslaved by drug use to change for the better - it could backfire big time.
February 25th, 2008 at 11:52 am
RJV #3,
Yep!
February 25th, 2008 at 12:00 pm
McCain leads Obama 47 - 43. http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
February 25th, 2008 at 12:00 pm
mccain attacking obama on drugs will bring the knee jerk response criticizing cindy’s drug use
February 25th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
“While I was running for Congress, my opponent was doing crimes.”
February 25th, 2008 at 12:07 pm
7, It shouldn’t. What a spouse of the candidate does is different than what the candidate does himself. That said I still say its not a good idea to attack on the drug issue.
February 25th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
The drug use thing won’t stick. It didn’t work with Bill 16 years ago, and the people most likely to be offended by drug use aren’t voting for Obama anyway.
The name thing and “exotic” background is petty, stupid, and will backfire.
For moral reasons, I would NOT allow anyone in the campaign to “play the race card.” Not only is it wrong, but I think in 2008 it is bad politics. At any rate, this country does need to add a race war ontop of its myriad problems. Playing the race card will play right into Obama’s wheelhouse as the post-racial uniter, while McCain will come off as some Sun Belt segregationist from the distant past.
February 25th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
BTW, if Obama’s drug use is on the table, then McCain’s divorce and marital infidelity go into play as well.
Bad idea. Obama’s voters don’t care if he did drugs back in the day. A lot of McCain’s voters would certainly be turned off by the circumstances surrounding his second marriage.
February 25th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
OOOPS!!!!!
#10 reads “At any rate, this country does need to add a race war ontop of its myriad problems.”
It SHOULD read “At any rate, this country does NOT need to add a race war ontop of its myriad problems.”
I think that would be clear in context.
February 25th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
McCain needs to hammer two themes:
1. Obama is ranked as THE most liberal member of the Senate by a well respected non-partisan group. But he needs to go beyond the “liberal label” which Republicans have used for years, and give examples of extreme positions Obama has taken in the past; for instance, his opposition to protecting babies born alive from infanticide.
2. He is four years removed from the Illinois Statehouse.
Both points can be combined in a single ad or stump speech. “Just four years ago, when Obama was an Illinois state legislator, he opposed attempts to protect babies born alive from infanticide.” …..or words to that effect.
February 25th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
I agree with MWS the race card and the name issue are things that also shouldn’t be used - both for moral reasons and political reasons. McCain should come out and strongly condemn anyone using Racism. And I’m sure they’re probably will be. I imagine McCain will be quite sesnsitive about racial attacks considering his adopted girl and the attacks he recieved about her.
February 25th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
On McCain’s afair, that’s something that would backfire for Obama to attack McCain on. Most people aren’t going to be judgemental about someone having marital problems when they have caused by five years of forced separation under extreme situations - its hard to imagine better circumstances for growing apart.
February 25th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
Halperin may well be out of a job after that list. To actually propose a racist smear campaign has to be as offensive as asking whether Chelsea was being “pimped out.” I think its also a bit of a stereotype of the GOP to insinuate that the McCain would use dirty tatics.
February 25th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
The whole notion of playing the race card is immoral and stupid.
That said, the MSM will be looking for it, even if it isn’t there.
I GAAAROOOONTEEEE we will see at least one story this fall openly questioning if Obama’s image in some ad was “intentionally darkened.”
You know it. I know it. So even if McCain runs a squecky clean campaign in that regard (which he should), it won’t stop the media- which loves conflict and hates Republicans- to openly speculate if he is, has, is thinking about it, etc….
February 25th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
Yeah, the Kos crowd is already claiming that McCain’s campaign is behind the Clintons’ racist attacks
on Obama….unbelievable!
‘
February 25th, 2008 at 1:54 pm
Perhaps the McCain campaign ought to use Michael Steele as the voice in the ads that attacks Obama’s lack of patriotism and his extreme liberalism.
It’s quite amazing the Democrats thought they could get away with nominating a politician so far out of the mainstream on the issues.
February 25th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
EGS,
“Perhaps the McCain campaign ought to use Michael Steele as the voice in the ads that attacks Obama’s lack of patriotism and his extreme liberalism.”
I can see the logic there, but I think that makes the McCain campaign looks transparantly terrified of race, when they should be indifferent to it. The obvious question will be “Why did they come up with a black guy to attack Obama? Oh, that’s right! Republicans are scared of being considered racist. Why would people consider them racist? Hmmmmmm…..”
No, I think the McCain camp should be indifferent to race. And picking spokesmen in large part because of their race, doesn’t help the situation. Remember that part of Obama’s appeal is that he is supposed to represent “post-racial” America.
February 25th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
Most liberal Senator = Socialist
Lack of Patriotism in speeches and gestures by he and his wife seems plentiful.
DON’T even think about playing the race card.
February 25th, 2008 at 2:57 pm
I don’t get Halperin, unless he just wants to recycle some of his older reporting with some modified dates and names.
The whole Obama phenomenon, according to the old media stalwarts, is based on the idea of rejecting the very type of campaigning Halperin suggests. Getting personal on a superficial level is what is backfiring on the Clinton machine as we speak. A campaign based on pandering to people’s baser instincts is certain to rally the many otherwise apolitical people Obama is currently attracting to defend their iconic candidate. Cheap shots using thinly disguised bigotry would be a horrible idea.
I have to agree with most of the commenters here. JMac should stick to criticizing Barry’s past politics and question whether he can justify those positions or, failing that, be brought to repudiate them.
Besides, there’s no indication that mud would stick to Obama in a general election any more than it does now.
There might be something in the drug use issue to exploit, but the fact that Obama has already distanced himself from that fact has to be taken into account. Yet there’s still the issue of the downstream implications of drug use — the international organized crime that is strengthened by careless, lackadaisical casual drug use which is too often portrayed as a victimless crime in popular culture. Forcing Obama to go defensive, repudiate, or apologize would mean that Mac at least controls the debate.
February 25th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
MarkG,
“Forcing Obama to go defensive, repudiate, or apologize (for his past drug use) would mean that Mac at least controls the debate.”
Perhaps. On the other hand, it could come off as high handed and mean-spirited; two accusations which have dogged McCain. Americans pride themselves on forgiving sins of the distant past, and I think your plan there would strike many as self-righteous. Pressing Obama to do public penance for distant sins within the context of a solemn debate would look absolutely Pharasaic.
February 25th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
MWS, I guess I’ve got something more subtle in mind: bringing up the issue with out mentioning Obama’s name or confessed youthful transgressions. I’m thinking of making reports such as this from today’s WSJ into an issue requiring some sort of renewed awareness campaign of what casual drug consumption can mean across international boundaries.
Even though I normally tend towards the libertarian, the issue of illicit drugs is a legitimate left-right contrast issue with real substantive implications for law enforcement and civil society/civic order.
February 25th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
If the GOP’s hopes depend on teenage drug use (that the NYTimes claims was exaggerated) its in deep do-do. Also, the media is not going to let McCain ask about Obama’s drug use 20+ years ago without asking about McCain’s infidelity a long time ago - and that bleeds into the recent NYTimes story.
February 25th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
I have the impression that the Obama’s hopes depend in large part directly on teenage drug use, if you know what I mean.
February 25th, 2008 at 7:28 pm
[...] WRONG for America…, Hillary Responders Play Flag Games While Obama Focuses on Constitution, What McCain Can Do Against Obama, Bill Kristol Previews GOP Attack On Obama: He Thinks He’s Better Than You, The Times [...]
February 25th, 2008 at 8:24 pm
[...] culturallyconscious wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptMark Halperin has an fascinating list of 16 things that John McCain can do against Barack Obama in a general election, that Hillary Clinton couldn’t do against him in the primaries:. Nomination fights are tribal matters. … Read the rest of this great post here Posted by [...]
February 28th, 2008 at 9:57 pm
Any of the points are FAIR GAME. Certain candidates think
they are above reproach; well most Americans are FED UP with
the arrogance of Obama. It is NOT o.k. for him to smear everyone
from candidates on both sides and a sitting president–Obama is REPULSIVE in his attacks. His drug use doesn’t seem to be just
in youthful times–delve into his background–connections to the Weatherman Underground, connections to Farakan– why would anyone want to vote for any candidate with these skeletons in his
closet let alone INEXPERIENCED on day one!!