Obama is not Dukakis

[RoyGBiv]

This is a re-post of a comment I made in another thread that a couple people suggest I offer as an original post, so I'm doing so. I would like to preface it with a few more words.

I'm starting to see this comparison of Obama to Dukakis in the manner they are running their campaigns a lot. I think reasons for this exist out of our view and that some of us are responding to it out of a sense of dread that we're going to see a repeat of 2000 and 2004, that we are in danger of becoming self-defeating because we just don't think we deserve to win. After all, if our candidate won't fight, why should we?

I submit this is precisely what the opposition wants to happen -- they want us to stop believing, to stop seeing how our candidate is fighting by blinding us with withering racism and outright lunacy that simply screams for an equally venomous response. That's what they've always wanted to happen, for us to lose hope. That's why they mock it. They know, clearly, that Democratic candidates rely on heavy turnout, and heavy turnout requires inspiration. Voter apathy is an even bigger danger to this nation than election fraud. (We've always had election fraud. We have not always had apathy.) I ask, simply, that those of you who truly are concerned and who are not terminally self-defeating think clearly of the comparison being made, understand that the thrust of Obama's message is that "change" is about "us," not him, and that is we who must work hard to elect him President and have any hope of beginning to turn this country away from the course it has followed for far too long.

Regarding Dukakis's Presidential Campaign:

I was heavily involved in that campaign, and the "concern" then was not that Dukakis wasn't fighting back but that all he was doing was responding to criticism and not working on his own message. Further, his defensive maneuvers were horribly mismanaged, hastily put together, and in the end opened Dukakis up to more and more criticism. This later morphed (or merged really) into Dukakis sitting on his hands and doing nothing, which is precisely the opposite of what he did. His problem was that he played all-defense, all the time and did so extremely poorly.

Examples:

The fabled "tank incident" was a response to a criticism of Dukakis being soft on defense, not ready to be commander-in-chief. So, some genius thought up making him look like Snoopy while riding around on a tank. The campaign at the time, somehow, saw this as imagery that would paint Dukakis as a tough guy who was going to run that tank straight down Bush's throat. Well, we all know how that turned out.

Taxachusetts: An early front for the war of words, going back to the primaries even, was Dukakis and taxes. George Bush came out with his "read my lips" bullshit and hammered away at Dukakis's record on raising taxes as governor. The facts of the matter didn't support the assault at all, but never mind that. Dukakis went on the offensive, claiming there were good reasons for the tax increases he signed and suggesting that Bush would find the need to raise certain taxes as well. (He was right, but that was a piss poor way of putting it.)

Sewage Bay: In an attempt to attack Bush where Dukakis thought he was weakest was on the environment, so he went all-out ... and then had to turn around and wither under the assault by the Bush team that point out how polluted the water in Dukakis's own state was.

The Horton Ad: The way Dukakis responded to this was inexplicable. He defended it, then he turned around and went all intellectual and claimed he wouldn't want someone who killed his wife to be executed. Yeah, it was a bullshit question that had no "right" answer, but there were better ways to do damage control, and even once he'd given the answer he did, there were better ways to address it later.

The point here is not to suggest that Obama is in full-on attack mode himself nor that Dukakis ran even a competent campaign (he didn't), rather to highlight the problems with fighting back the way so many seem to want Obama to do. Every last one of these attacks on him are being offered by people who know what they're doing and know well the damage they can cause. That's why all the "concern" is out there, right? If the ads were so ineffectual, no one would care, but they aren't ineffectual. They're pulling Obama down a bit.

The problem, though, is that the manner in which Obama returns fire must be carefully considered, not shot off the hip. Dukakis walked around with his gun on his hip, never took aim, and shot himself in the foot more often than not. Meanwhile, while Dukakis spent all his time responding to attacks, the Bush team defined the campaign entirely. All of the assaults on Dukakis were traps, and all of the assaults on Obama are traps, some of them so intricately woven traps that he will not be able to devise a way to get out of them completely. But, he can minimize their damage by not addressing them the way his opponents want him to.

[dkf]

1. McCain's machine gun is working much better than Obama's carefully considered and aimed

shot.

Obama has to be more aggressive. Dems have always been painted as wimps and if he doesn't step up to the plate, so will he.

[RoyGBiv]

5. How do you know this?

What's your objective standard?

We've got a supposed 9 point drop to a tied race in one poll and all the associated arm-chair analysis written by people are aren't statistical analysts. What none of them bother to mention (or even consider really) was that the sudden jump that brought you the poll from which the 9 points can be subtracted in the first place is what those in the business call an outlier. A lot of people said that at the time it came out, but in the DU manic-depressive world, many were too busy enjoying their high to take a closer look and come back to reality.

Then you've got another poll, on the same day, showing Obama up 7 points. You've got numerous state polls showing states in play that were written off in 2000 and 2004 before the real campaign even got started.

You've got other polls showing Obama's support among *veterans* increasing and that the only major issue on which McCain holds any kind of advantage is foreign policy, which is not among voters' top concerns at the moment except as it relates to gas prices.

There is a lot of good poll analysis out there. You won't find it on CNN or MSNBC or any of the major news outlets. They're not into such intellectual wrangling of numbers. To them, it's a football game, and from the looks of it, McCain just needs to get a field goal, and it makes for good drama, but it doesn't mean anything. Getting into a game of trading attacks at this point isn't going to do anything but make certain the last person holding the ball is going to win, and when you start down that road of attack for the sake of an attack, you don't always get to determine that. What Obama is doing right now is playing the clock to make sure he does get that ball when he needs it.

Whatever the case, I think you miss the larger point, as most people miss it. Obama's campaign is going to do what it's going to do, and you and I have very little influence over that. We do, however, have a great deal of influence on those around us. That's how Obama got to where he is right now ... by encouraging people like you and me and those around us to work on this thing and not sit back with our remote controls and web browsers and do little but devour what everyone else is telling us we should think and do or not do.

I agree with the other poster who said a 527 needs to work on the attack angle more heavily, but Obama doesn't get to (directly) determine that, and he can't be made to seem as though he does.

[dkf]

7. I've been complaining for days that Obama's surrogates are nowhere to be found.

And it was obvious to me for quite sometime that Energy/economy was going to be the biggest thing in this election.

Obama got beaten to the punch and even when he is right, like on tire pressure and tuneups, he is a lone voice who gets wiped out and ridiculed.

Being a leader means getting all this stuff lined up and having strong voices telling everyone how right you are.

I heard Mitt Romney attacking Obama today and even he sounds stronger than anyone for Obama.

So I'm not talking about polls, I'm talking about what I see and what I hear and I'm mostly watching our favorite MSNBC. I can't imagine how bad Obama looks on CNN and Fox.

I'm getting really mad that even when we are right, we can't defend ourselves.

[RoyGBiv]

13. "We"

I gather, though, that you're pretty good at defending yourself and you ideas.

I don't watch network news, so I have no idea how he is playing on the teevee. I'd say I don't care, but I do. However, I settle for the summary, and you're right, it's not very good, but then it's not very bad either.

I spend my time gathering news from written sources, and then I and a few politically like-minded people surround ourselves with people who are largely politically ignorant, and we don't shut up ... ever. You don't even have to talk to them. Having a conversation about Obama and how horrid McCain is *near* someone who can hear you makes more of an impact than trying to argue directly with a person. Their defenses are lower, and they don't feel "preached" to.

I'll say it again. If you want change, make it. Obama's message of change is not that he's a messiah. That's what his opponents want you to think. It's that for real change to happen, *we* must make it happen. This is how he won the primary. Few really wanted him. The media derided his changes. In the beginning, the "left" didn't want him. They wanted Kucinich. The DLC didn't want him. The Republicans certainly didn't want him. But, we got him, and we got him because he inspired a lot of people to go out and start working for him, talking in a lot of people's ears from off to the side, and making people really take a look.

As I said below, I'm cautiously optimistic. Of course Obama has made and will make mistakes. His opponent will also. The immediate impact of any given attack ad or round of surrogates rarely translates to a long-term trend by itself. It's a large picture, and I think Obama sees it and has a very good idea of what he's doing.

[FKA MNChimpH8R]

32. Where are the surrogates - apart from Kerry and Biden?

Hillary, or John Edwards, or Chris Dodd or someone, for chrissakes, should be out there kicking McCainus' ass every fucking day. The dumb bastard is showing himself to be nearly as incompetent with the English language as His Chimperial Majesty and sticks both feet in his mouth every time he opens it. The klown is a walking malaprop - why isn't he getting pounded for it? Where are the other Dems apart from John and Joe?

[Cosmocat]

18. I agree with that, and IMO, the response is S I M P L E ...

this can be turned around with a "carefully considered and aimed shot" ...

B U S H ...

They did it in the ad to start this week off, they need to keep doing it ... Put EVERY possible picture of McCain with Bush ...

The anniversary of Katrina - do the clip of McCain saying he would NEVER let Katrina get away from him as president followed by the picture of him and Bush on the air way with McCain's birthday cake - four days into Katrina ... Repeat ad on McCain's birthday ...

Do a clip of McCain blovating on about how he has MANY differences with George Bush, then use 10 different clips of him defending the dolt ...

Do a clip of McCain blovating about how he has MANY differences with George Bush, then use that PATHETIC clip of him giving Bush a bear hug with a childishly loving smile on his face, with Bush gleering over him to the audience with that "this guy is my byitch" look ...

Do a clip of Rove calling Obama a country clubber, then show the clip of McCain in Poppy's golf cart, with Poppy wearing his turtleneck ...

ALL BUSH, ALL THE TIME ... There is PLENTY of ammo that McCain has given, and it is ALL for real, for fact ...

[dkf]

24. That is what is driving me crazy. There is so much ammunition

and we aren't doing anything with it. Isn't that weak?

McCain is using this time to define Obama, and Obama isn't doing the same when he ought to be.

Soon we will be wrapped up in the Olympics and opinions will start to set.

Obama is leaving it too late.

[benEzra]

29. Respectfully, I think McCain's machinegunning is making McCain look like an idiot.

Like Obama's response to McCain's "Paris and Britney" comment. Had Obama responded in kind ("Oh yeah? Well if I'm Britney, you're ____") would have merely gotten Obama involved in the mudslinging fest that campaigns too often are. Instead, he responded with respect, grace, and reason ("they are talking about Britney, when here are the real issues facing this country..."), and in so doing made the McCain campaign look both shallow and desperate.

Or like the email I got recently about Obama painting over the North American Airlines tail logo on his plane (which was a stylized flag), which shows that he is just so anti-American...



Because if you look at McCain's plane, you see the giant flag on the tail that shows McCain is a Great Patriotic Leader...



Oh, wait...

Stooping to petty-ness won't help Obama at all. McCain's attacks just make McCain look bad, IMO.

[cbc5g]

2. My advice to Obama is somewhat ignore the attacks and create his own

That is, unless a 527 totally smears him or McCain does, then call his ass out.

[JoFerret]

16. Sounds good but it doesn't deal with the drip

drip drip of being defined by McCain's operatives.

People vote on their gut. Those operatives know how to churn them.

[Skittles]

3. Obama could come up with controversial, energetic ads on McCain

that would be nothing but the TRUTH. HE SHOULD DO THIS.

[RoyGBiv]

9. Yes, but that's the key ...

Whatever he does to criticize McCain directly, it cannot come off like a defensive maneuver, which is what the immediate, all-out assault some people so desperately want will look like. After the Paris/Britney fiasco, after The One idiocy, how is any withering attack, true or not, going to play?

Dukakis found out how that plays. Following that road the way some want him to follow it *will* turn Obama's campaign into a repeat of '88. That's what Republican operatives are desperately trying to do, baiting him to do, begging him to come down and let them frame whatever Obama says as a weak defense.

I'm just gonna go ahead and say this:

I think a lot of us want Obama to go out there and give McCain what-for because we want him to say what *we* have been wanting to say to Bush's face for 8 years, what we would like to say to McCain right now, what everyone who has one ounce of sense left wants to say to these bastards. We want him to call them bastards. We want him to stand up there on a stage in full view of 200,000 people and give the current administration and its wanna-be heir-apparent a big, fat middle finger.

My head would explode in rapturous joy if I heard Obama tell McCain to take his race-bating bullshit and shove it up his fat, dumb ass, and every last one of us would be positively thrilled, tears of joy type of thrilled ... for about ten seconds (okay, maybe a full minute) until reality set in. The moment he flips off John McCain, he's lost, we've lost, and all we'll have is the memory of that ten seconds or minute when someone finally said what we want to say and got noticed.

And, yes, I'm exaggerating, but a lot of what I see here these days is exaggeration. "Look at *this* poll! There's no way we can lose!" followed closely by "Oh god, look at this poll. All is lost." Well, both those positions are wrong. We're all tired of it. We've been tired of it for about 10 years ... more for those who felt it all going to hell in '94. We want that visceral experience of the big Fuck You to the Republicans, but we're simply not going to get it in the way we think we want it.

[MrModerate]

4. For what it's worth . . . watching this through the lens of the foreign press . . .

and what I see on cable and online (I'm in Australia right now), McCain is increasingly looking like a decrepit buffoon and Obama looks like The Next President.

I preface this observation with the FWIW disclaimer because I think watching this from afar does two things for my perception: 1) it strips away the noise and blather and lets me see how a rational person might view what's happening and 2) it strips away the noise and blather, hence blinding me to how important noise and blather are going to be to the outcome of this contest.

From this I extract the (qualified) assessment that McCain has shot his bolt. His nasty ads show only that he's not dead yet, not that he's suddenly taken a weak campaign and turned it into a strong one. Instead, he's taken a dying campaign and shocked its heart back into thready, weak rhythm.

Rational people (a higher proportion of the electorate than we might acknowledge) can see that McCain is losing it -- even rational people who might trend "conservative" (whatever the hell that means these days). Red-meat 'Licans are maybe a bit more stirred up than they were, and moron-Americans who were wavering toward Obama may be wavering toward McCain (just because he hasn't collapsed in a heap), but day in and day out, McCain's life force is leaking away.

Obama is not Dukakis in the most important way possible: HE'S NOT DUKAKIS! He's Obama, with an entirely different range of strengths (and weaknesses), and is not making the same mistakes. I, too, watched the Dukakis campaign self-destruct and see no signs of that happening here. Instead, Obama is keeping on message, responding not-perfectly-but-well, and heading toward the first peak (the convention) and the second (the last two weeks of October).

I'm cautiously optimistic.

[RoyGBiv]

6. Cautiously Optimistic ...

That describes me pretty well also.

Regarding the noise a blather, you have a very good point there that needs more exploration.

One of the things I am somewhat reluctantly coming to understand is that a good measure of that noise and blather is coming from us, not the "DU" us necessarily, but the "us" that so desperately wants these bastards that have run us into the ground over these long years.

We're somewhat hysterical about it all. Every bit of good news is PROOF that we're going to win, and the slightest negative is the end of the world. It's a war of extremes, all or nothing, with us or ag'in' us. That's the biggest noise machine right there, imo, regardless of political ideology.

[MrModerate]

20. And I'm just as vulnerable to attacks of the vapors . . .

As anyone else out there who wants to live to be a hundred solely to have the opportunity of crapping on George Bush's grave.

I was *crushed* by Obama's FISA backdown; *bitch-slapped* by his softness on offshore drilling; *outraged* that his European World Tour didn't just make McCain pack it in; and *ready to rend my flesh with my broken nails* to see a closing of the gap between Obama and McCain.

But I'm trying to chill, bring my blood pressure down, remember that the campaign isn't about Obama, but about America. After a deep breath or two, I feel better.

We could lose this thing. The American electorate gave Schimpanski enough votes in 2004 to make the election stealable. If McCain is within 5 points on Election Day, he'll "win."

And we'll be facing a disaster of Bushian proportions, because McCain'll be dead in two years anyway, and his Veep (Mitt Romney?) will be pres. And completely owned by the people on Karl Rove's speed-dial list.

But I don't think so.

And anyway, I'm not ooming back to America for a few years yet and I can always pretend to be Canadian.

[dkf]

8. People don't vote on the rational. They vote on the emotional.

Sad but true.

[Drunken Irishman]

12. But McCain's attacks seem too over the top.

They're not realistic attacks.

They don't have the same sting as the swift-boaters, or the Willie Horton ads. They're childish and I think in that case, the American people will be turned off by them.

[RoyGBiv]

15. The One ...

That thing is gonna bite McCain in the ass.

Comparing him to Moses? Really?

I see the deeper themes involved and who it speaks to, but I've even got hardcore Republican fundie types in my family (who will never vote for a Democrat for any reason) saying, basically, "What the hell was that all about?"

[dkf]

21. They are trying to minimize Obama and make people laugh at him and disrespect him.

That is why it is even worse to passively sit by.

I think McCain's calculation is that Obama won't fight hard so they can do whatever they want, especially if Obama feels he is above it all.

[geek tragedy]

22. No one has ever lost a Presidential race because

they treated American voters like morons.

[Cosmocat]

19. I can't agree ...

It all comes down to how the MSM relays them ...

The overall tact has to been to legitimize them by talking about them nonstop - which even worse has helped to propogate them ... They have then been used to support the "horserace" meme, and to add to the theme that Pat Buchanan started to advance a couple months left in the primary - BO can't close the deal ...

They are keeping it close, and make no mistake, this media will have NO problem creating at least one or two more "Reverand Wright" issues ...

THAT is the plan ... Tear BO down as much as possible, keep it tight, and hope to sneak McCain in under the wire with some hyped up "issue" with a couple weeks to go ...

BO HAS to do three things:

1) Make EVERY effort to connect McCain to Bush ... ALL THE TIME, EVERY POSSIBLE WAY ...
2) Do what he is going VERY effectively that is not being reported - GROUND Game ...
3) Do what he did in the primary, where he did not play for national polling, instead being strategic in going after states - which again he is doing every effectively, to win electorally ...

[geek tragedy]

23. Americans love buffoons.

They elected Bush twice.

[FKA MNChimpH8R]

33. That's because the Australian and (I presume) Euro

media are not tying themselves into the most impossible contortions trying to cover for, and in some cases actually doing so, Grampa McCainus. Were Obama given fair coverage, the gap in the polls would be 20% at minimum. Part of it is the privately owned (by gigantic corporations) doing the ideological bidding of their corporate masters, and part of it is a desire to maintain the illusion of a close race to boost ratings and profits.

It is truly ironic that state owned media in other parts of the world are so much more objective than the corporate media in the supposedly free US.

[Drunken Irishman]

10. Thank you!

[RoyGBiv]

28. FWIW ...

Just to follow-up on this a tad, the main reason I don't often bother starting original threads is exemplified in this one ... that and the fact I feel responsible for threads I start and that I should respond to those who have some kind of counter-point. Unfortunately, in most threads, I get the impression a lot of people never read the original post.

I don't have the time or the energy to pick nits with arm-chair quarterbacks concerned about everything and never seem to have any suggestions for *themselves* about providing solutions. I get better results at the local pub with people who don't spend half their day cruising the Internet looking for things to be concerned about.

[FrenchieCat]

11. I don't see a Dukakis campaign at all.

In fact, watching Larry king tonight (Energy discussion and then T. Pickens)

and reading the New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, Newsweek and the WAPO, I see an effective defense sprouting up on the attacks on Obama.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/02/opinion/02herbert.htm...
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-onthemedia4-...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/08/05/b... /
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/05/us/politics/05flip.ht...
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0808/Another_squ...

In fact, Obama appears to be winning the energy debate.......and the ball is in McCain's court.

In reference to typifying Obama, I don't see it happening. Even Paris' mother and McCain's mother aren't buying it.

I don't know where you guys are hanging out, but where-ever it is, I don't want to go there. Sounds like you are from the panic wing of the party. Certainly some are doing that, and actually donating to the fear factor with those who worry about everything all of the time.

Sure, to some degree the cables are still swiping at Obama (don't count on them ever stopping, unless we write massive emails).....but then, I don't watch Fox.

Bill Clinton's comments were not helpful, but we will have to deal with that.

[RoyGBiv]

14. Thank YOU, Frenchie ...

I'm way too sleepy at the moment to go looking for links, so I appreciate your doing so.

Just to make clear, I'm not the one saying these things regarding the comparison, but I've run across it in more than one thread on DU over the last few days, and it was starting to chafe a bit. I'm not from the panic wing, but it keeps flapping around near my house, so I wanted to take a moment to try to shoo it a way for awhile.

I wanted to nurse this thread just a tad, but I gotta go get a nap now.

Thanks again.

[BlooInBloo]

17. It's only Clinton supporters who think/hope he is. No worries.

[RoyGBiv]

25. Obama Mocks McCain ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[depakid]

26. Michael Dukakis made an explicit decision to "take the high road"

against the advice of damn near everyone in his campaign- who were just as frustrated as some who have been about Obama's refusal to go after McCain, using his and his crony's own statements.

Thus, he was left on the defensive for months- responding (to the extent he did or could) to scurrilous attacks by Atwater's (now Rove's) pack of jackals.

That (one would hope) is the sort of thing we'd like to avoid this go around.

[flaminbats]

27. Mondale and McGovern are not Dukakis..

but both ran sucky Dukakis-style campaigns. Obama isn't Mike Dukakis and unlike Dukakis, Obama has won my vote. but anyone who wants to win in November needs to get their hands dirty, and love every minute of it!

Obama's campaign needs to be attacking McCain around the clock without hesitation. Then Obama's campaign needs to predict what McCain's people will say to defend him, and prepare responses to make McCain look even more foolish. If Obama doesn't go on the offensive against McCain, then he'll always be responding and only drawing more attention to McCain's political attacks. Not going on the offensive has only reduced the media coverage Obama needs on issues like healthcare reform, bringing peace to Iraq, and reducing deficit spending.

[Danger Mouse]

30. That's not for Obama to do PERSONALLY...

that's for 527's and surrogates.

[anonymous171]

31. K&R

Nice piece!