Here's Why Obama's Strategy This Week Was Spot On....

[writes3000]

Obama absolutely knows what he was doing this week. What is the story of the week?

McCain went viciously negative. He attacked and attacked and attacked. Three ads all aimed at cheap slime.

And what did Obama do this week? He turned the other cheek.

Now, I'm sure half of you are screaming "That's what Democrats always do and they lose because of it!"

But here's why this race is different.

1) Obama is a black man. If he is seen as overly aggressive or sleazy or cheap, he's got a problem because it will be used against him.

2) John McCain is an old man. Who is a war vet. Who was a POW. Who has survived cancer.

Re-read that last part. The country has had HUGE sympathy for John McCain.

Do you think the Obama team realizes this? OF COURSE! That's why they've spent months constantly complimenting McCain. Because they want to subconsciously show the world just how reasonable Obama has been.

So again, what's the story we're seeing now?

McCain has tarnished his own image.

McCain lied about running a high road campaign.

McCain is putting out cheap, sleazy ads beneath the conversation we need to be having.

And Obama has shook his head and laughed it off.

Obama stockpiled good will this week.

And now, Obama has a FREE PASS TO KICK MCCAIN'S ASS. Obama has a free pass to put out ads showing McCain's mental lapses, his flip-flopping, Keating Five, etc. He will put out these ads when they will have the MOST impact.

And it's already deep in people's minds that McCain started this dirty fight, not Obama. It's been documented all week that McCain went "there" first.

Obama NEEDED to turn the other cheek this week. He may need to turn it a second time.

But remember that NYT's article and the Nation article about what kind of politician Obama can be?

Big picture, folks. Obama will take a few lumps in July because he can afford to.

But make no mistake, Obama will absolutely kick McCain's feeble ass to the curb this fall.

And now, he'll have most of the country saying "Yep and John McCain deserved it."

[silverweb]

1. Agreed.

Well said.

:kick:

[WeDidIt]

2. People talked about how Obama needed to attack Clinton

all last year.

Markos was all over how awful it was that Obama didn't take it to Clinton.

Obama bided his time and went on the offensive only when he needed to go on the offensive.

I trust Obama. I've watched how he handles this stuff for years now.

[writes3000]

3. And when Obama does go on the offensive, Republicans will scream "He's attacking a war vet!!!"

They will try to rip Barack Obama's lack of honor.

They will try to convince the country that Obama is beneath the lowest of the low.

But now, they're going to have a problem because John McCain himself has said that he's proud of these kind of attack ads.

Checkers versus chess.

[me b zola]

40. Or go-fish versus high stakes poker

:)

[PolNewf]

9. And after he went a little negative

and had things locked down he was contrite about his momentary lapse of negativity. He came out of that with his Obambi image pretty much intact. I expect he will have a relapse early-mid September when it will matter much more than now.

[writes3000]

10. Ding. Ding. Ding. n/t

[Jackpine Radical]

14. Hey, ya goofy Newfie--

I think you're calling it right on the money.

[caledesi]

31. I agree! NT

[Union Thug]

4. I hope you're right. n/t

[cbc5g]

5. I hope you're right

The Obama team knows how to stick things in peoples minds. Remember "getting shot down is no qualification for president"? The Obama team knows how to play this field and perhaps you are right that they are just waiting for the right opportunity. McSame going negative early on, and everyone knowing it, just may be the signal that he can start to trash McCain in the near future. He needs a good catch phrase for his commercials. Maybe like the names Bush and McCain coming together to form McBush with them hugging in the same frame.

[writes3000]

8. Obama needs to keep the mantle of being a better kind of politician.

But now he's got the justification to put out a few attack ads of his own.

And you know they got them stockpiled. Obama already said "Keating Five is not off limits."

As close as they watch the media, you know that they got John McCain's flip flops on record.

If McCain has a mental flub in one of the debates, it will be the perfect spark for an endless stream of other McCain mistakes.

But Obama couldn't start off with these. Especially when he's ahead.

Now that McCain has gone to the gutter first - especially in such a tawdry way - Obama can do the same AND keep his head held high.

[Cha]

6. Another awesome big picture

thread! Thanks!

[madaboutharry]

7. That is a very interesting analysis.

You make very strong points here.

[Jackpine Radical]

11. Very interesting. What occurs to me as I read your comments

is that timing is everything. If Obama hits hard too soon, the media will have time to slaughter him before the election. They will paint him as an attack dog--regardless of the fact that McCain went vicious and rabid earlier. But it takes time for them to build up a false image, a false story line like that. If Obama hits hard (not dirty, not personal, just hard, laying out McNutso's obvious disqualifications and the problems with his positions) right before the election, then the press won't have time to spin it around & bite Obama with it.

[FrenchieCat]

12. Here's why I think you are right.......

I think that many, even those who don't care for McCain's policies, still saw him as a reasonable person. Some had sympathy for him from the Bush 2000 smearfest. Others remember him as the bipartisan Maverick.

After today, he looks like the same ol' politician that will do and say whatever it takes to win....and he did it way too early. The young folks who don't know him haven't had a chance to even start liking him.

That's how I see it.

[rusty quoin]

20. And on top of what you said, it is too early in the game to go that negative.

I think the McCain campaign went after their own strong point, without any help from the Obama campaign.

[cliffordu]

13. Well said. Kicked.

[AlinPA]

15. Good points, but there are a finite number of voters in the US and many of them are being

swayed now with all this defining of Obama with the sleazy ads. Chances are we will never get them (Independents) back. Our only hope is to register more voters and GOTV. No different than any other election, but this is pretty early to go so clearly negative. We have to remember 'murca voted for Bush** in large numbers in '04.

We have a long way to go. Don't forget that the Rpigs still have "terra" to play. Orange, red, alerts and all that fear.

[dansolo]

29. McCains sight recent boost will evaporate

Obama will not lose the Independents. Once they've had time to think about what McCain has done, they will be completely turned off by him. The only reason that McCain has been so popular amongst Independents is because of his "straight talk" reputation. Once that is gone, they will leave him in droves.

[calimary]

34. I HOPE everybody here is correct. In my heart, I think not.

Look at the polls. The negative campaiging is working. Obama's overseas tour bump is all but evaporated. They kicked it to the corner in a week.

I fear we'll look back on this week as the week Obama lost the election, because he let the swiftboaters run on and he took the high road.

And I would hope we'd have learned by now that the high road takes you straight over a cliff. This is politics. This isn't Mother Teresa-ville. The time to be nice and take the high road is immediately after you win. And ONLY then.

Again, I hope I'm wrong. I hope and pray I'm wrong!!! I want VERY BADLY to be proven wrong on this. I'd MUCH rather you guys be correct about this. Because we need to win the White House back and start undoing all the damage that the GOP schmucks, thieves, pirates, and war criminals have done.

I SO want to be proven wrong about this.

[azmouse]

36. Please read NanceGreggs post, if you haven't done so already.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6573678

Let's all put our energy into postive things to help the Obama campaign.

[JustAnotherGen]

16. I think

Obama needs to place a call to Samantha Power. Seriously.

She'll come right out and say it - and since she's no longer with the campaign. *sniff* *sniff* I'm just saying you know . . .

[27inCali]

17. In warfare

timing is everything.

[DearAbby]

18. For the most part

I agree with you...but I believe Obama hit the nail on the head. McCain is insulting the intelligence of the American people with these kinds of attacks. McCain isn't addressing what is most important...the Britney Spears ad doesn't address the war, the failing economy , the Morgage crisis, energy costs...on and on...he (mcCain) mocks us.

Obama knows what he is doing. I am very impressed with his campaign and responses.

[KittyWampus]

19. edit- I'm too tired

[donco6]

21. Deleted

[FrenchieCat]

22. And for the cherry on top!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6574054&mesg_id=6574054

[pansypoo53219]

23. mcinsain

is looking crazier by the commercial. keep digging asshole.

[kurtboss]

24. I hope you're right

It just galls me to think there are kids who are following politics for the first time and THIS is what they get. For me the first one I remember well was Reagan-Mondale, I was 7 or 8. I can't imagine what I'd think of the politics if I had been exposed to this utter stupidity and lies.

[Unsane]

25. Obama has to walk a thin line. He can't let McCain define him.

To add to your analysis, I believe Obama does have to fight back, but just in a respectful and factual manner.

[MindMatter]

26. McCain is wasting ammo early

The GOP always goes negative, but they usually wait until after Labor Day because the risk is that the public will get really sick of it. 8 weeks of negatives has always been about right for Atwater/Rove. It is really surprising to me that McCain went so dirty so early, especially since he had staked so much on a theme of being a straight talker.

The negatives will work. They always do. But McCain could pay a big price because going negative so early really undermines the message he had going. And if the public perceives the negatives are a one way street, this could really bite McCain in the ass.

So why did they decide to do it? Probably not the result of a great, well-conceived strategy. They panicked when they thought they had Obama on the ropes about lack of experience on the world stage, and then Obama turned the tables on him by dominating the world stage for 2 solid weeks.

I believe this will prove to be a real blunder by the McCain team. They should have remained positive through the two conventions.

[FrenchieCat]

27. Yep. Timing is everything.

Too much time for the mediawhores to have to confess that this is too much over the top even for the LIVs....who only look at the pictures anyways.

[Blue_Roses]

28. thank-you for the voice

of reason:hi:

I totally agree:D

[Demi_Babe]

30. agreed

[FrenchieCat]

32. Kick!

[azmouse]

33. kick

[BlooInBloo]

35. Additionally....

http://www.americablog.com/2008/08/why-mccains-personal-attacks-on-obama.html

I've been talking with Chris about whether we should be worried or not about McCain's ongoing personal attacks on Obama. (McCain's latest is an ad comparing Obama to the Messiah, which might cause some problems with Christians who don't appreciate McCain using God in a TV ad). And there are a few significant differences between the Swift Boating of John Kerry and McCain's sleazy attacks the past week or so.

George Bush had nothing to do with the Swift Boaters (at least putatively) - they were an outside group he was able to disavow any connection to. John McCain, on the other hand, has heartily endorsed the ongoing attacks against Obama, and is actually coordinating them - they're McCain's own statements and McCain's own ads. I think this matters for a number of reasons.

First, the degree to which the media, and the public, reject the ads and attacks as too negative and inappropriate, while the Swift Boaters' tactics wouldn't necessarily taint George Bush, John McCain will take full blame or credit for his attacks. /blockquote]

[Eyes_wide_ open]

37. Right on. n/t

[TexasObserver]

38. True. It's hard for a young, healthy man to win if he beats up a short, old, unhealthy man.

[me b zola]

39. I agree completely

Voters--and the press--are seeing that this McCain is not the same guy they liked and admired in 2000. McCain (or his evil twin, McCad) is looking like a bitter jerk (reminiscent of bush*) and not a person who could--or should--be running the country. Now when McCain tries to tamp down the ugliness of his campaign using a soft, condescending voice, he appears to be bipolar--or Dr Jekyll & Mr Hyde.

McCain has used up what ever sympathy people had for him by being an arrogant,idiotic ass-hat.

[GoesTo11]

41. The old man can be despicable even if the young man shouldn't attack him

If I was in a nursing home and saw someone like McCain, war vet, cancer scars, confusion, I'd certainly assume that any decent person would just leave him alone. But if he stood up and started yelling at the black man in the room and yelling at me, and wanting to break things and insisting that we let him take charge of the place ... Well, let's just call the orderlies quietly and help Sen. McCain back to his room.

[Phx_Dem]

42. Cheers to you!

:toast:

[chknltl]

43. Keeping mCcain close ala rope-a-dope fashion for a reason:

IMO it is so the GOP won't feel inclined to throw mCcain overboard by picking a tougher opponent leaving us no time to effectively campaign against him or her.

For example, had we been beating up on mCcain strongly at this point the gop could have easily pulled this stunt: 'At the worst possible time mccain who has been sagging in the polls bows out due to illness... his VP selection (perhaps the mittster), a far tougher opponent and nothing like bush, steps in leaving the Dems little to no time to mount an effective campaign against him'.

Wouldn't you do that too in their position? Seek out what was hurting mCcain's chances, find a replacement who did not share those weaknesses and plug that candidate in late in the campaign. The media would be cheerfully saying that the 'poor old war vet went down fighting' but here is an even stronger guy who has his own plans, plans that are not exactly like mCcain's OR bush's. (Throwing out everything that was working plan-wise against mCcain and gaining a heaping slice of sympathy pie as well)

What I am saying is that I can not see anyone out there who would be easier to beat than mCcain...by keeping things close, mCcain's VP pick will get turned into a mCcain clone by the Dems. Our campaign will then be one utterly against 'mCcain/VP pick-bush' because as we all know, the biggest arrow in our quiver for defeating mCcain is to keep him tied to bush's failures. Sen. mCcain's VP pick will have little to no time to wiggle out from under that rock and paint himself as anything other than 4 more years of bush because he will be hogtied to mCcain!

The possibility of mCcain dropping out and letting the VP pick continue on in his stead will have been rendered moot with this strategy...well that's my tin-foil hat theory