The New Approach to the Negative

[alcibiades_mystery]

Get ready, Obama supporters. The new approach to the negative attacks is now coming into focus.

We already know that the Clinton supporters and surrogates can't go overtly negative on Obama. This has already backfired horribly, and the arguments simply don't work. They've fallen flat time and again, and whenever the Clinton team starts mouthing them, they look bad themselves. It's a distinct rhetorical problem, but there is, apparently, a brilliant solution that fits the occasion.

You will see, over the next week, an increasing number of indirect attacks on Obama that will be laundered, as it were, through the contemplated actions of the right wing. The KEY to this strategy is to distance the attacks from the Clinton campaign by portraying them as something that will come up in a general election campaign should Obama receive the nomination. They will take the following forms:

1) The Ignorant Aunt from Topeka - A right wing caller on CSPAN said X (where X = some long discredited slur): you just know this is going to be a problem in the general

2) Kudlow is on the Warpath - Some right wing pundits said X (where X is some right wing critique of an Obama program); this one is particularly interesting, because the person making the argument can utterly disclaim the position

3) I Wish Everyone Was as Informed, But... - Somebody will mention a long-discredited slur directly, with the proviso that "WE know it's not true, but the country won't know," etc.

4) Here's What McCain Will Say... - Speculation about what McCain will probably say, together with the suggestion that Obama can't face such criticism.

Obviously, I'm not imputing some Clinton conspiracy. The way these things catch on is by planting them here and there, then letting other people pick up the arguments as if they've coe up with them on their own. Two additional approaches bolster this argument.

APPENDIX A: In the coming weeks, you will see a multiplication of references to Hillary Clinton as a fighter, and preferably a "soldier." We've already seen multiple variations of this theme appearing on this board in the last 24 hours. I've personally seen "gladiator," "soldier," "street fighter," "Amazon warrior" (I shit you not), and the term "soldier on" used at least three times. The strategy BOTH attacks Obama indirectly, and suggests that he is too weak to face the attacks from Republicans. The flip side of the Hillary the Soldier theme will be "Obama the Pussy" theme, which we've already seen manifested numerous times, with Halperin's rather pathetic salvo just the spear tip of stupidity. Obama as "effete," and we're back to 2004, this time from our side.

APPENDIX B: One of the stranger sub-arguments in this theme is the rather bizarre notion that "Obama supporters thought he would get a free ride," which is - of course - utter bullshit. It very deliberately conflates the argument that Obama will have SOME Republican support (he will) with the purely stupid notion that he won't be attacked by Republicans at all (he will). It's pure strawman, with the added advantages of implying that Obama has gotten a free ride thus far, a claim I hear made, but don't believe. Obama hasn't gotten a free ride. Obama has gamed the press with a strategy. These are different things. Obviously, the game will have to be stepped up for the general.

So, watch it play out: flag lapel pins and Muslims and pledges of allegiance, but it's not US saying it, heaven forfend, but those ignorant GOPers. Hillary the Warrior Princess. Obama the Wine Sipping Intellectual Snob. The cast of characters is predictable, but it will be fun to see it unfold.

[alcibiades_mystery]

1. One kick

I'll let it die.