The Media is like Gravity. Inconvenient, but unavoidable.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

It is a candidate's job to get good press.

If a candidate gets bad press, he or she is doing something wrong.

If the MSM is involved in a conspiracy to advance a position or a candidate, then that's what it is. All candidates have the job of operating within the existing environment.

I was reminded of this reading reactions to the Newsweek poll finding 53% of folks think that our candidate has changed positions for political advantage. (If one is concerned about the quality of that poll, adjust that figure down to about 48%.) Many complained that the finding is erroneous because he has not changed positions.

But it's a poll, not an op-ed. It is not about what Senator Obama has done, it is about public perceptions. It doesn't matter whether he is, in reality, a weather-vane or sturdier than Gibraltar; public perception is what campaigns are about.

If you revisit DU in 2004 you'll find a mix of people saying, "Kerry isn't handling these swift-boat ads correctly," and people saying, "Kerry is a genius! He's handled this to perfection."

It doesn't make a scrap of difference what anyone says on DU, but if we accept the vanity that what people say here wins and loses elections then the Kerry happy-talkers did our candidate no favor.

So, accepting the widespread belief that that posting here is of great national import, people might want to encourage the Obama campaign to:

1) Stop trying to make people THINK you are changing positions. Whether any positions are changed in reality is irrelevant. Obama has been intentionally sending signals that he is not as far left as he is perceived. That is a conscious campaign strategy. It is also a clear political error. There are no universal political strategies. What worked for Bill Clinton was a disaster for Al Gore. And what worked for Bill Clinton will be a disaster for Barack Obama too. All candidates are actors playing a character. Like Gore, Obama's public role is the virtuous wise-man, not the lovable rogue.

There is no universal right answer to whether triangulation works politically. It depends on the candidate and the national climate. Having crafted the image of a moral paragon who is all about change and above political considerations, all conventional political moves bite Obama harder than they would someone with a different image. People enjoyed seeing what mischief Bill would get into next. The nickname "Slick Willy" became almost a term of endearment. But "Slick Barry" is an electoral non-starter. No one-size-fits-all. There are options that most candidates have that Obama doesn't have. There are options he has that other candidate's don't have. Everyone must use the tools they've got.

2) Pick a VP sooner rather than later, and make sure he (it will be a he) is an effective attack dog. Among those being considered only Biden fits that bill. You need someone who can criticize McCain without damaging the Obama brand, and who can criticize him as an equal. All reporters have known Biden for years, and know he speaks his mind. So nobody will blame Obama for anything Biden says. And in terms of press attention, nobody cares what Tim Kaine or Katherine Sibelius have to say about John McCain, but Biden vs. McCain is a clash of two long-time colorful characters on the national scene. Biden is the only candidate being considered who can get away with treating McCain with contempt and that is what is needed. The media would love covering that match-up. Biden wouldn't begin every mention of McCain with that blather about McCain's service... to Biden, McCain is a fellow senator with less seniority, not a national icon. (Also, Biden is a foreign policy expert, a Catholic, and his son has served in Iraq, so he has other attributes beyond his quotable sharp tongue.)

Part of the reason Obama's press image has deteriorated somewhat is that virtue is B-O-R-I-N-G. The media wants a show, and if a show is not provided they will make trouble to create one. So the Obama show needs to add some sharp edges and flavor, and Obama himself is not in a position do it.

[mloutre]

1. hey, no fair making sense! this is DU/GD-P!

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

12. Aw... freep kitty is cute. I just can't find it in me to dislike him.

And his spelling is pretty good for a cat.

[Bluerthanblue]

2. the media also DRIVES public opinion- which is why people

were so outraged by election polls, and predictions being made before all voting places close. You don't realize, or have neglected to note, the sub-consious effects that operate through the media- Want to buy a beanie baby anyone?

If Obama were to actually do what you suggest, what kind of a candidate would we end up with? One WE want? Or the one the media dictates we have to accept?


peace~

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

4. I would think most DUers would prefer what I'm suggesting

I am proposing that Obama remain the Obama of the primaries, when the press loved him.

I don't think that would be something anyone on DU would have a problem with. The only question is whether it's good politics.

I think it is.

[Bluerthanblue]

6. are you really sure it's Obama

that has changed? The press didn't love him enough to stop playing up Rev.Wright- or Michelle's comments- or to question his "muslum" roots- or to look for slights - "you're likeable enough Hillary"- "the snub at SOTU"- "I've been to 57 states".- etc.
I think the media is pushing the notion that Obama has changed. And people, lots of people are buying it.

The media sure as hell seems to love McCain. I'll give you that much. But I don't believe the media has ever loved Obama- and while I see that as healty (I don't have much respect for the 'media') The effect the media has on the psyche of the average American can't be discounted.

Look at Obama's stand on Rev.Wright- he didn't break with him, until Rev.Wright chose to use the media to promote the agenda of racisim in this election process. Rev. Wright's last speech promoted division- and Obama's words spoke to that-

peace~

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

7. Which returns to the first point... if the MSM wants to create a flip-flop narrative then

Which returns to the first point... if the MSM wants to create a flip-flop narrative then that's what it is.

It isn't fair, but it's the reality.

Even if we accept that it's a MSM creation, it is a creation the Obama campaign has played into, rather than against.

If a candidate gets bad press he is doing something wrong. Not something evil, just wrong... ineffective. So it's best to do something different.

As to whether the media loved (and loves) Obama, it's all relative, of course. In relative terms they love him less today than they did at points in the past, and his job is to make them love him more. Some of the media love was really Hillary hate, and it was always obvious that the press would turn on him some once she was out of the picture. But his job is to work with those realities.

The Obama campaign has been no better than average since Wisconsin, which is getting to be a long time ago. And it is risky to assume McCain's operation will remain as ridiculous as it has been so far.

So I am discouraging complacency. Most folks seem to think that winning a Democratic Primary involves the same skill-set as winning a general election. It doesn't. Winners of Democratic primary contests tend to lose general elections. The Dukakis primary campaign was incredible, for instance.

So there is no reason to assume infallibility in the Obama general election campaign strategy.

I think they have somewhat misread why he appealed to independents so much.

I predicted that X, Y and Z would hurt in the polls. X, Y and Z happened, and Obama has gone down in the polls. So I credit my analysis with, at the very least, not being disproved.

[Bluerthanblue]

8. geez, I can't

refute your logical thinking, but I have to confess, I don't think in logical terms very well. (as if I have to confess that ;) )

But I have to ask, if negative press comes from screwing up, does that mean McCain isn't really screwing up? Cause this guy is teflon.

:shrug:

thanks.


peace~

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

10. Sad but true.

Yes, McCain is screwing up. No poll shows him ahead, so it's hard to say he's setting the world on fire.

But the media has accepted his phony image as an honest maverick for a decade, so until they stop giving him that deference he can say any idiotic, offensive thing he wants.

At whatever point the media were to highlight his screw-ups I would say he misread the change in the media, and misreading the media's likely response to things is the ultimate mistake.

Nobody screwed up as much as Ronald Reagan, but since he got a bouquet from the press for every senile pronouncement I can't say he was screwing up as a politician. As a President? Yes, major fuck-up all around. But as a politician he was teflon.

And knowing you are teflon is part of the game. If everyone believes your lies, keep lying.

[WillyT]

3. If Find It More Like A Vacuum...

in that it is devoid of any substance... and that it sucks.

:evilgrin:

[mrreowwr_kittty]

5. You are making a good argument for Biden.

I could see him getting away with saying whatever he wanted about McCain. After all, he pretty much owned Rudy with the 9-11 joke at the debate. It was hysterical and I marvelled at how he got away with invoking 9-11 like that.

[skooooo]

9. Gravity is just a theory tho! nt

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

11. The jury is still out.