Results 1 to 14 of 14
09-11-2008, 12:49 AM #1
How the Obama campaign is different from the Kerry campaign
Today (9-10-08) was a brilliant day for the Obama campaign. The first day I think he won since his DNC speech which was so quickly overshadowed and then basically buried for two weeks as America circle-jerked it's way around the little ditty from Wasilla.
Today was a political chess match of moves and counter moves...predicting how your opponent will react to your move and thinking 2 moves ahead at all times. Today Obama moved Mccain into chessmate...if just for the day but for sure, around an important campaign issue.
I am sure Karl Rove is sitting back tonight thinking, "damn, I didn't see that coming"
In political campaigns, political sides "own" certain ideas as their own. For example, "Republicans will lower your taxes", it doesn't matter if it is true or not it is what people have been lead to believe. Another example, Democrats take care of the less fortunate". These are classic examples. More current is the idea that "Republicans are tough on terrorism", "Democrats are for the rights of women". These might be true and they might not be but for campaigning purposes they are generally ascribed to one of the parties.
In 2004, Kerry was "the flip-flopper". He probably didn't flip any more than anyone else but he was given that label and couldn't shake it. Obama is an "elitist" a "celebrity" Mccain is a "maverick", a "hero", "another Bush" etc.
One of the titles that has been floating around out there in the campaign universe is who is the most belligerent and attack oriented campaigner. Both sides say it is not them and accuse the other side. The American public is getting fed up with it and it is lining up to be possibly an election maker or breaker but what side will get the label?
This is where Obama's brilliant play comes into view today. It surrounds the "lipstick on the pig" comment. It was a very calculated move on Obama's part and don't think it wasn't intended right directly at Palin...an attempt to reframe her but that is secondary.
More importantly and the primary reason for the comment was to incite Mccain and did he ever. Obama's move was to make the volatile comment knowing that Mccain would come out and pull the "gender card" and "sexist card" and then Obama's 2nd move was to accuse Mccain of "false outrage" and begin the process of framing him as the cynical campaigner...in short give him that title like Kerry was given the flip-flopper title.
It was a brilliant move by Obama as he fed the bait and Mccain in his predictable way, took the bait and couldn't back up his claim. First of all, Obama was clearly referring to republican economic policy and more imoprtantly, Mccain has been see on tape 4 times using the same line, once directly against Hillary! How could Mccain think he had a leg to stand on here ??? Really John??? Is this your judgement???
Hey Mccain! Obama set you up brother and you couldn't resist! It gave Obama an opportunity to revisit his historical campaign speech with the single word you will hear a lot from here on "Enough". What a slogan...it is short and to the point and people understand what it means. Enough Mccain...stop it! It is a call for issues and the republicans after eight years of "nada' have just that "nada"
Obama had to get to the "Enough" slogan again though and he played his chess match to get there. Brilliant. Let see now if he can reinforce it and indisputably reframe Mccain as the cynical, unethical, dirty, Rovian politician that he is.
And to think that Palin gave Obama his "in" with her corny joke about pitbulls and hockey moms. Obama should thank her....when it is all over.
If Kerry could have done this four years ago against Bush...how things might be different.