Where McCain Can (and is) Going Wrong

How will history remember Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign?

To start, a lot of people didn't start appreciating her until she had practically lost the nomination to Barack Obama.

Though Clinton came across as "cold" and "impersonal," she could give a great speech, bring a crowd to its feet, handle a tough question, and make meaningful connections with those around her. Under the shadow of Obama, however, none of that seemed to matter. To the media and a large group of Democrats, Hillary was merely playing an old type of politics—one that went after Obama and didn't always play nice.

As an ex-Clinton supporter and (though not as a result of Clinton's defeat) a proud fan of John McCain, I see his campaign slowly falling into the traps that sealed Hillary's fate.

For one, McCain's campaign never seems to bring a story or issue to the media or change the dialogue of the campaign. Instead, McCain spends his time in the public spotlight giving good speeches about things that don't surprise us. I could have predicted McCain would talk about his two favorite issues—energy independence and Iraq—in Portland, ME on Monday, much the same way it was no surprise Hillary Clinton gave a very obvious speech about rebuilding America's infrastructure after the Minneapolis bridge collapse last August.

The thing is, both speeches were extremely intelligent, effective, and well-received, but they were delivered in front of small audiences at times when they'd attract little attention. That sounds like where McCain's finding himself right now.

When he should be focusing on creating publicity around his own campaign, McCain has spent most of his time going after Obama. Whether it's criticizing his foreign policy experience, his "anti-troops" remarks, or the media's love affair with him (though this actually does exist), McCain and the GOP are all about Obama. Check out the RNC's homepage this morning:


In 2000 and 2004 the Republicans always seemed to be on message and didn't resort to these silly little jokes about their Democratic opponenets; their attacks used to be mean, serious, and effective. Now, the RNC homepage is little more than a parody of itself.

During his speech in Portland on Monday, McCain repeatedly brought up Barack Obama—how he should of condemned MoveOn.org's "General Betray-us" ad and that he lacked judgment in not supporting the surge in Iraq. Meanwhile, Obama travels the world speaking to presidents and diplomats about issues "larger" than partisan politics.

Whether or not Obama really does transcend party politics is up in the air, but McCain would be wise to get off Obama's case for a while and make a case of his own.

On the Phone, in the Mail

Over the past year I've made my fair share of campaign donations:

$$$ to Hillary Clinton
$$$ to Chris Dodd
$$    to Joe Biden

$$   to John McCain

$      to Mike Huckabee

In addition, I am on the mailing lists for Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Chris Dodd, and Bill Richardson. 

That comes to two points of contact with Republicans and a whole BUNCH for the Democrats.

Despite my numerous donations to Democratic campaigns and the number of Democratic politicians that have my email address in their mailing lists, I've been getting dozens and dozens of letters, surveys, phone calls (on my cell phone too!) from Republicans nationwide asking to "continue my generous support for Republican candidates across the country."

Whether it be a letter "from" President Bush, Mike Huckabee, or the GOP's 'Victory 2008,' the Republican Party seems to treasure my so-called support. On the contrary, I have not received any form of communication from former Democratic presidential candidates, the Democratic Party, or Barack Obama asking for money, etc.

I'm not going to vote for or give money to a Republican just because I receive a mass-email or letter, but I'd suggest the Democrats upon up all channels of communication with potential supporters, if not to help Barack Obama, but to cement unity among their supporters for years to come.

Meanwhile...

...some conservatives are ready to look beyond November and plan for a Republican resurgence AFTER 2008.

Call it a smart long-term plan or the famous (and effective) strategy of lowering expectations, but this coming election is in the Democrats' court.

Taking the Attacks off the Shelf

Barack Obama has had to dodge a few Republican bullets since Hillary Clinton ended her campaign last month, but he hasn't had to deal with what's about to come his way: massive anti-Obama advertising.

Head to head against McCain (debates, town halls, press conferences, etc.) I think Obama can defend himself well enough, but hundreds of millions of Republican dollars will soon be pumped into television sets around the country to try and change voters' opinions about Obama. It is the sad truth of modern day elections, but a large portion of the electorate will vote in November based upon their "impressions" of Obama, not what he actually stands for as a politician.

Some of these ads will be successful (think Swift Boat Vets for Truth...) and some won't be. But one thing is clear to me: negative advertising will be very effective in stopping Obama's inroads into new Democratic territory—Montana, Georgia, North Carolina, Indiana—where unpleasant half-truths about Obama will resonate with a traditionally conservative base of voters.

Insider Access Makes for Great Entertainment (and Concern)

Yesterday, John McCain's official campaign website posted a new video slideshow prepared by McCain's campaign manager, Rick Davis.

Over the course of fifteen minutes Davis presents the data and tactics behind McCain's strategy to defeat Barack Obama. Granted, what you'll see is far from the entire official campaign plan drafted behind closed doors and being quietly executed — in the form of strategic fundraising pitches, event planning, and alliance-building, not to mention VP selection — but this taste of "insider" strategy reveals interesting information nonetheless.

One of the most noteworthy parts of the video is the McCain campaign's identification of its battleground states. It seems the campaign will be focusing highly on two states in the Midwest that I previously pegged as this election's hottest contests — Ohio and Michigan — as well as Wisconsin.


In addition, Davis says the Southwest (including the recently liberal-leaning state of New Mexico) is McCain-friendly due to the Senator's record of public service in Arizona and his "strength with Latinos and his record on immigration."

My guess is the McCain folks uploaded the video to show potential GOP fundraisers that a win in the 2008 election in within reach and the Republican Party is stronger than many might have previously thought; if Davis' remark about over 500 campaign offices opening in targeted states during the next four months isn't an inspiring line for Republican supporters, then McCain has no chance of rallying support.

I believe posting the video was a smart move. A lot of what's in the video is disconcerting for any Democrat and could lead some Democrats to second-guess Obama's nomination and erode their confidence in his candidacy. Take for instance Davis' line that a state like West Virginia — where Clinton defeated Obama by 41% — is essentially "off the map" for Obama because Democratic defectors will now vote for McCain since Clinton's out of the race. If that's the case, McCain picks up an easy 5 electoral votes.


Though the new McCain strategy briefing would lead one to believe McCain will sweep the November election, it's important to consider that a similar presentation by one of Obama's lead strategists would show quite the opposite. It's also worth noting that Obama is already fighting back with a new fundraising effort against McCain. Today, Obama's website sounded a call to arms against indications that the GOP fundraising machine is now stronger than Obama's. The advertisement urges Democrats to top McCain and the GOP's collection of over $45 million in the past month.


If Obama's fundraising totals from the Primary Election are any indication of his strength, his campaign should achieve their June goal.

No matter how many "all-knowing" campaign managers like Davis make predictions, we should take each one with a nice big grain of salt. That's not to say they don't make for entertaining reading (or viewing)...

Hagee vs. Wright

This week's news concerns John McCain renouncing the endorsement of televangelist John Hagee, and the liberal media and blogosphere has been lapping up the story. What I've been hearing is this: McCain's earlier pursuit of Hagee's endorsement shows equally poor (or worse, as one Obama-friendly blogger wrote) judgement than Obama's continued connection (until recently) with the Reverend Jeremiah Wright.

Quickly, before I drop this argument, I have two quick comments, and I'll make them as quick as I can:

— John McCain was NOT a member of Hagee's church, he never spent time listening to his sermons, he never brought his family to Hagee's sermons, and McCain never classified Hagee as a figure inspirational in shaping his beliefs. Obama, sadly, cannot say the same.

— Hagee and McCain have had a very smooth parting over the past few days, and Hagee just today remarked that it was "best for both of us and the country" that Hagee rescinded his endorsement of Obama. On the contrary, the Reverend Wright still stands by the things he says and his done little to get himself out of the public spotlight, only causing more damage to Obama.

Are Hagee and McCain both conservatives in the way Wright and Obama are liberals?

Yes.

Does Hagee realize that it's more important for the livelihood of the Republican party this November if he avoids hogging the spotlight and lets McCain get back to campaigning?

Yes.

Democrats be warned; the Republicans have united behind McCain. 100%

McCain v. Huckabee

Huckabee's wins last night are certainly an interesting story.

Part of his success was the result of a grassroots reaction to the "McCain's the nominee" story that has been everywhere since Super Tuesday. Loyal Huckabee voters (which most of them are) decided to brave the cold of a February night in Kansas to support their man while McCain's supporters likely didn't see the need.

Senator McCain's February 5th victories established him as the man to beat, but he's done everything except nail down that title for himself. Mike Huckabee's wins today in Louisiana and Kansas, as well as his very close (as of 2:07 A.M.) second place finish in Washington—a state far away from Huckabee's South that would geographically change the dynamic of Huckabee's campaign—are a sign that things are not 100% settled on the Republican side.


Huckabee will win counties in Virginia next weekend, and he'll likely win a bunch of them due to his strong support in neighboring West Virginia and the state's Christian population outside of the cities. If Virginia does not go to McCain, or Huckabee puts up a very strong result, Governor Huckabee has no need to drop out of the race, and he could once again have a serious shot of making a stand in the long fight against McCain.

It's an unlikely scenario having Huckabee go head to head with the McCain movement across the country, but he's somehow hanging in there with a level of grace matched only by Senator McCain himself.

A civil, yet contested Republican battle...who woulda thought?


(all photos: © 2008 by Luke N. Vargas. All Rights Reserved.)

Close

The McCain v. Romney fight in Florida is close.

Razor thin.

At the end of the night I see this tipping to McCain, and with that the Romney and Giuliani campaigns are toast.

The Republicans will get a general election head start.

Who'll React First?

The Immigration and Customs Enforcement department issued a statement today saying it would cost no less than $94 billion to remove the 12 million illegal immigrants that live in the United States. That comes to nearly $8,000 to kick out each illegal immigrant--locating and legal fees not included.

That sure doesn't sound like a deal to me!

I can't wait to hear some of the GOP presidential candidates start tossing that figure around on the stump and mock what they're sure to say are the "overly-lenient" practices of the ICE, including the average 32 day incarceration period for each immigrant. I assumed captured illegal immigrants wouldn't cost much so keep overnight, but apparently it costs $97 for each day of ICE detainment.

$97 a night x 32 nights = $3,100+

Since I'm sure a handful of the candidates are looking around for some good price comparisons on that, I headed over to Hotels.com started imagining someone like Tom Tancredo saying the following line:

"It'd be cheaper to put up each illegal immigrants for a month in a Superior Room at the Fiesta Inn in Laredo, TX with satellite TV, air conditioning, a private balcony, and internet access! "

Good point, Mr. Tancredo, it certainly would be cheaper (that room would cost only $87/night).

Enough of me, just listen for the "spoiled immigrant" lines to start hitting the campaign trail soon--I'll make sure to put some of them up here when they do.

In case you were wondering, I'm no fan of illegal-immigration, and I wish we'd wise up and tighten our borders up, but the idea of booting out 12 million immigrants is completely absurd and un-American in my eyes.

Move On and Out

While today's debate over General David Petraeus' Iraq report was sure to be filled with partisan calls for continuing the surge or pulling out ending the war--and many from both sides angling for the most election-savvy position to take--MoveOn.org's carelessness just adds to the mess.


Though MoveOn.org is not the Democratic party, it's easy for Republicans and supporters of the Iraq war to tie the two together as just another example of the Democrats' "surrender" mentality and lack of respect for our commanders on the ground in Iraq. I wasn't too confident that the Democrats would change their strategy based on a positive report by Petraeus (which he more or less provided today), but I hoped they would at least pretend to listen and consider what he had to say.

When the Democrats criticize President Bush for not listening to opinions that contradict his, their words carry less weight when they appear to listen just as little as he does.

MoveOn's actions are so harmful because Democrats never coordinate with each other and because they don't enjoy the modern theatrics now required to combat media pressure. The GOP leadership in Washington is calling loudly for Democrats to denounce MoveOn's ad, and while I think such demands are absurd, it will end up hurting the Democrats in the eyes of talk-radio Americans when they don't condemn the advertisement.

If only MoveOn had held off until tomorrow...