Article: Like Dukakis, Obama shrugged

[NJSecularist]

This is a very good article I found while searching the web. While I am a fan of Obama and voted for him in the primaries, this article - rather, an opinion piece - presents a very good case for why Hillary may be the best nominee - and why Obama's naivety, much like Kerry and Dukakis, about what the Republicans have in store for him in the fall may ultimately doom him.

http://www.pahrumpvalleytimes.com/2008/Feb-29-Fri-2008/opinion/20001001.html



I was plopped on this train and granted an interview with the Democratic presidential nominee. I asked Dukakis how he intended to fight back against the charge by Republicans that he was a "pastel patriot" who had vetoed the required recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in the public schools of Massachusetts.

Dukakis replied curtly that his state supreme court had given him an advisory opinion that the bill was unconstitutional. He said no one would fall for such nonsense. He shrugged. I mean literally.

As I walked out of the rail car, an Arkansas Democratic official -- no need to say which -- looked at me and rolled his eyes. I don't think it was about my question. I think it was about the answer.

Sixteen years later, another Democratic presidential nominee, John Kerry, also shrugged -- figuratively, if not literally. It was at the very notion that conservatives could discredit his war record.

Read the rest of the opinion piece for the gist - I can only post 4 paragraphs.

[jody]

1. And Kerry posed with a gift, a Remington 11-87 shotgun, while he sponsored a bill to ban possession

of that type semiautomatic firearm.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

3. Yawn...

......... the gun industry always thinks it's about them and their 'babies'.

[JI7]

2. the problem is the chickenshits who cower anytime a Republican attacks

[NJSecularist]

4. The problem is, these attacks stick....

No matter how untrue they are.. if a candidate won't fight back, or is indifferent to the attack.

[FrenchieCat]

7. I think that Obama will be fine on this.

He is not another candidate.....he is a street wise and has game. Please do not underestimate him. That's what Hillary did.

You must have forgotten what Obama's had to do to get to where he is currently. Unfortunate that you would give such a short rift.

[NJSecularist]

15. I think he might be fine

But we are taking a risk here. We thought that Dukakis and Kerry would be just fine, that they would be able to combat Rethug attacks. Obama has shown us a lot during the primary season in regards to his rapid response team fighting attacks, but he has shown a certain naivety about what or what not is a valid rumor. Who knows whether he understands the damage control that is neccesary during a general election campaign. We all know Hillary and her advisors do.

[FrenchieCat]

26. Life is all about "risk".....but make them well calculated.....

If you think that Hillary has shown you that she is less of a risk, with her underwhelming campaign, you've got another thing coming.

The "Safe" candidate never wins.

Both Kerry and Dukakis, as well as Gore well all "safe" candidates...as was Mondale. can you name a winner in that group? Bill Clinton, on the other hand, was not considered "safe" especially going up against an incumbent President.

Meanwhile, Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton had had a chance to "stew" in Washington, and they are now the safe ones. I also heard that "Lincoln" was a chancy vote....as was Catholic JFK.

I don't know what Hillary and her advisors know, but looking at what they started with and where they are now, I'm gonna take a calculated risk and say, they don't know jack shit nor what in the fuck they are doing. For you to assess Hillary's advisors anyother way, consider the results (when they had all, and I mean all of the advantages) means that you don't know as much as I have given you credit for in the past.

read this. It dissects the Clinton campaign, and what went wrong: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4851912

[JI7]

8. Obama has fought back

and Kerry fought back but didni't have the backing of others in the party to defend him.

Bush never responded when his lack of service in the guard was brought up. but the Republican Party defended him and started attacking the Democrats for bringing it up.

the chickenshit democrats think we should be puppets to the republican attack machine. anytime they attack we should respond as if there is a real issue there. when what we should be doing is calling them out on their shitty political attacks.

[AndyTiedye]

33. The Attacks Stick Because of the Endless (Free) Repitition by the Mighty Slime Machine

The only reason Swift Boating worked is because the media picked it up and ran with it. Ran the ads over and over for free, and devoted entire "news" programs to talk about them. Never offered any opportunity for rebuttal.

Our fundraising advantage completely evaporates when all the free airtime that is given to the Repiglickins is taken into account.

To fight back against the kind of onslaught Kerry faced 4 years ago will cost billions (with a B).

[NYCGirl]

5. And you haven't seen how he's been hitting McCain back? Obama and his

campaign have been doing a fantastic job!

[NJSecularist]

11. What McCain is doing right now is child's play compared to what they have in store

for the Fall.

Obama can't be naive, he can't discredit these attacks as something that reasonable people will simply dismiss. He has shown a tendency to do just that. I'm not saying that he won't fight back come the Fall and that he won't understand how to fight these attacks come Fall, but we all know Hillary knows how to combat these attacks. She's been doing it for 15 years. For all the negatives of her candidacy, this aspect is a glowing positive, one that might launch her to the White House.

[JI7]

14. the Clintons allowed Republicans to take over the congress and impeach

they aren't so great as you think.

[NJSecularist]

24. That is irrelevant to this argument

They are 2 for 2 in presidential elections.

The 1994 Midterm takeover had everything to do with HillaryCare and nothing to do with how they conducted their election campaign.

[JI7]

27. yes, i know he got less than 50 percent of the vote both times he ran

Gore and Kerry got a higher percentage of the vote than Clinton did in 1992.

the first Bush also had a very low approval rating and foreign policy was off the table because it was the end of the cold war.

[Johnny__Motown]

6. The repugs are always gonna try to attack on some "issue". We can't allow that to pick our nominee

if you do that the bad people win.

[bluestateguy]

9. I might have agreed with you three months ago

But he seems to be learning his lesson. While Obama is a new face, his campaign people are old seasoned hands. He responded to Hillary's silly 3AM phone call ad the same day with an ad of his own. I was impressed with their speed.

This is also why campaign spending limits are stupid. They restrict the ability of a candidate to respond to smears.

[lapfog_1]

10. As always, check the source...

The writer is from Arkansas and has authored one book on Bill Clinton, and seems to be a big fan of theirs.

"John Brummett is an award-winning columnist for the Arkansas News Bureau in Little Rock and author of "High Wire," a book about Bill Clinton's first year as president."

[anigbrowl]

19. And his article is BS...

saying Obama has ignored things like rumors he's a muslim, unpatriotic etc. and that his campaign is AWOL in addressing these issues. Anyone who has followed the primary contest can see otherwise. This article would only convince the deeply uninformed.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

12. Obama is already fighting back against both Hillary and McCain.

I think he'll do fine.

[ledvader7]

13. shrugged when?

The most impressive things I have observed about Obama's campaign is that 1) they were more organized and more nationwide than any other and 2) they have responded to every negative or even slightly negative attack (by dems or GOP) quickly and have continued to carry that response through speeches and mailers. Several times I have seen attacks or lines of debate that I thought of the hyper-political type that would not be salient with the general voting public. When I would have thought most would have "shrugged", I saw rapid responses of surprising substance and then noticed these responses woven into the stumps as the campaign continued. So I am not really sure what you are referring to. He has talked about that specific email in at least one of the debates and I have seen several of his stumps mention it. As for the pedantic view of the campaign. I was just discussing that not 10 minutes before I saw this. I was discussing how the Clinton campaign seems to be dismissing the supporters for Obama and even subtly or not so subtly tagging them as mindless or completely naive. I have seen signs of that on this site as well.

[NJSecularist]

17. His rapid response team is very encourage, no doubt.

But I have seen a certain naivety from him about what is or is not a valid rumor. He can't shrug off the patriotism rumors that have been circulating as something stupid or ridiculous: he needs to realize that those are attacks on his record that stick unless he fights them off day after day, through commercials, ads, etc.

Hillary realizes this. Does Barack? It sunk Dukakis, it sunk Kerry, will it sink Obama? For all of Hillary's negatives, she understands this part of the game, and that is damage control and controlling your message.

[blogslut]

16. Let em try

Things are different this time around. Times are different. Michael Dukakis and John Kerry were running against candidates that were like by their party. I love both those men but even I recognized their inability to wrap an answer in a sound bite sandwich.

Barack Obama can fling it back and make the tosser look like a tosser. He is able to turn an attack into another reason to vote for him. That's a special gift. It goes well with a voting public, disillusioned by a crappy president like Dubya.

[fedupinBushcountry]

18. You don't think they will

do the exact same thing to HRC. Sorry you are wrong and naive.

[NJSecularist]

21. Of course they'll do the exact same thing to HRC

I wouldn't expect otherwise. But they understand the rethug attack machine. They've been dealing with it for a long time. They understand that certain rumors, no matter how untrue they are, stick, unless they are fought off. She understands damage control and the extent neccessary to control her campaign's message. Does Obama?

[JI7]

28. so why is she having such a hard time against Obama

[NJSecularist]

30. A primary election is different from a general election.

[JI7]

31. if she can't handle the Primary than you think she will be prepared for GE ?

it's the Clinton camp that shrugged hwen it came to Obama. they thought they would have it wrapped up by Super Tuesday.

[NJSecularist]

32. I think she's a pretty GE candidate than a primary candidate.

[fedupinBushcountry]

29. She isn't in control of her message

all she does is attack Obama and people are sick of that kind of politics.

[Eric J in MN]

20. Obama should do a TV ad in which he directly addresses...

...these rumors.

[NJSecularist]

25. Yup. And he needs to spend a lot of money to combat these rumors

They just don't go away. That was Kerry's fatal flaw in 2004. He thought that people would be smart enough to realize that the Swift Boat ads were completely untrue and utterly false. He didn't invest any significant money in airing ads that combated these attacks. He simply let them fester, and same day press conferences denying the attacks weren't good enough.

[NoBushSpokenHere]

22. I ran across a site by accident recently

regarding speculation to Clinton ties to numerous mysterious deaths. I believe the Republicans are prepared to rip apart either one of our candidates. Remember all the talk of Whitewater and Foster, it was eventually dropped because these were Hillary scandals, not Bills. It didn't take root with the voting public. I heard speculation back then, much of the scandal was being held back for future use. I just hope we can all weather the storm with whatever comes out on either of our candidates.

So, actually, neither candidate has been truly "vetted"

[Lucinda]

23. Actually, I have no doubt that Obama

could handle the Reps easily in the general IF the media stays with him.

I have no reason to think they will though, based upon the coverage so far. They spin and spin. Once McCain focused on Obama, even MSNBC's coverage went negative. Obama's quick, but they have buried candidate after candidate, so he'll have to find a way around them.

If Obama becomes our nominee, I will be very, very happy to be wrong about all of this.