« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Election 2008: Is this about issues or personalities?

WARNING: Don't complain about paucity of issues a week after the conventions.

Jim Vandehei is at it again. The former WashPost-er, now with Politico.com, teamed up with John Harris last week to throw together the inestimably weak 6 things Palin pick says about McCain. (1. He’s desperate; 2. He’s willing to gamble — bigtime; 3. He’s worried about the political implications of his age; 4. He’s not worried about the actuarial implications of his age; 5. He’s worried about his conservative base; 6. At the end of the day, McCain is still McCain.) The piece is not worth the bandwidth it consumes, assuming points which are demonstrably false and leaping to bizarre, non sequitur conclusions. There was a certain erratic egotism to the piece, as if everyone reading it knew to assume as a given that the writers had any clue of that about which they were writing.

Again. Today, Vandehei teams up with Jonathan Martin to post the equally bizarre McCain, Palin push biography, not issues. Their entire thesis rests on a single statement from McCain campaign manager Rick Davis:

When John McCain’s campaign manager said last week that this presidential election “is not about issues,” it wasn’t a Freudian slip. It was an unvarnished preview of McCain’s new campaign plan.

In the past week, McCain — with new running mate Sarah Palin always close by his side — has transformed the Republican campaign narrative into what amounts to a running biography of this new political odd couple.

Davis uttered those words an interview with Vandehei’s old employer, the Washington Post. Let’s add some context, straight from the WashPost’s Chris Cillizza:

“This election is not about issues,” said Davis. “This election is about a composite view of what people take away from these candidates.”

Davis added that issues will no doubt play a major role in the decisions undecided voters will make but that they won’t ultimately be conclusive. He added that the campaign has “ultimate faith” in the idea that the more voters get to know McCain and Barack Obama, the better the Republican nominee will do. [emphasis my own]

Davis was asked by host Chris Wallace about his “not about issues” quote, so cavalier tossed around without context by Martin and Vandehei, on the last FOX News Sunday

:

WALLACE: Rick, do you want to focus on personality or a composite view of the candidates, not issues, because of the fact, for instance, that we’ve got 6.1 percent unemployment, the highest in five years?

DAVIS: No, Chris. And what you didn’t — what you didn’t show on the screen was the next sentence, which is the composite view is made up of people’s values. It’s made up of their opinions. It’s made up of their judgment and their principles.

And so then I let — then the next sentence says, “And of course, issues will play an important role in people’s final decision.”

So I respect the fact that the Obama campaign has some kind of a — you know, obsession about Rick Davis. I’ve been the focus of their advertising, and now their candidate seems to be, you know, wanting to attack me more than anybody else. That’s fine. The water is warm. I’m happy to go toe to toe.
But to insinuate yesterday on the stump that somehow those comments implied that I was going to, you know, indicate that he was going to have these Muslim connections or that he had these radical relationships is absolutely out of control. I mean, what is this guy trying to do?

Davis did not promise an issueless campaign; to say otherwise is to perpetrate a fraud against Rick Davis and the campaign, which is being done daily by Obama. By others? Only if they are, knowingly or unwittingly, doing David Axelrod’s bidding.

Write the Martin/Vandehei duo:

To win, McCain advisers believe the Republican nominee must distance himself from Bush and even his own party. That isn’t easy work.

But they got a solid clue on the best way to pull this off from none other than Barack Obama. They saw how his generalized message of change resonated. So while Obama was busy soft-selling the change portion of his campaign at his convention, McCain was busy stealing it — and busy downplaying the sort of issue-by-issue laundry list Obama delivered in his State of the Union-like acceptance speech.

Politics is also about masking your weaknesses. Let’s face it: McCain is not a policy wonk, especially when it comes to discussing domestic issues. He’s gotten more comfortable talking about issues such as energy because he’s had to this year, but he’s much stronger on the nitty-gritty substance of governing only as it relates to his sense of political honor (how, for example, pork-barreling is tied to corruption).

First of all, McCain’s being doing change and reform since Barry was in bobby socks, so the accusation that he stole the notion from Obama is a negative reality inversion. Change fits John McCain better than it does Barack Obama, who has voted consistently in lockstep with his Dem caucus when he showed up in the Senate to vote. The list of issues in Obama’s speech before the Styrofoam columns in the football stadium was simply an empty litany of wild-eyed statements. There was no substance, no actual promise. The speech was delivered with a wink and a nod because the forum called for something larger than life. There was no “nitty-gritty substance of governing” in that speech. McCain’s recent talk of vetoing pork-laden bills from Congress was, in fact, substantial. Nitty and gritty.

The larger point, though, is that only a fool declares that a campaign is devoid of issues and substance in the first week after a convention, when the candidates are putting the finishing touches on their self-definitions. And it is insipid to tell us that Obama has the substance on the issues when he still won’t let us know what Hopechangehope is supposed to be.

McCain and Palin are drawing bigger-than-ever crowds and leading in the polls, and even the Republican Party as a whole is seeing an uptick in popularity.

Oddly, it’s the vice presidential candidate who seems to be the reason. Does anyone think the convention would have grabbed as large a TV audience without her? Does anyone think voters would be lining the streets and packing crowds without Palin onboard?

This was left out of their 6 things Palin pick says about McCain. Sarah Palin was chosen, in part, to energize the base, to erase an excitement-deficit. The campaign needed volunteers and donors, and people willing to push a yard sign into their lawn. Governor Palin did that.

Oddly, I have to add, it’s the vice presidential candidate who has reinforced John McCain’s seemingly inbred penchant for attacking the status quo, for reform, for change. This was also not one of the “6 things.”

Oh, the essence of the candidates is important, and it is a part of the contest Barry & Joe cannot win. I caught part of Greta Van Susteren’s show on FNC last night. She was in Alaska talking to various people in Palin’s home town of Wasilla. They all called her, “Sarah,” and they related that when she was mayor, her husband Todd was “first dude.” That’s how the people Governor Palin have represented think of her. Joe Biden’s constituents? I can imagine a citizen of Wilmington of Joe Biden as “that senator-guy who lives up there in the estate on the hill. Yeah, we see him every six years. Nice fellow, he is.”

John McCain is third-generation Navy, a pilot, a Prisoner of War. He served his country next as a member of Congress and as a U.S. Senator with a maverick streak. Barack Obama? I don’t know. He was a community organizer, which sounds like a fine thing, and we know he was present often enough in the Illinois State senate, as that’s how he voted. We know he gave a well-received speech at the 2004 DNC and that he somehow squeaked by Senator Clinton in the Dem nominating contests. And we know about Hopechangehope, though not what it is.

I do not know that the McCain camp would attempt to dissuade me from the previous two paragraphs, and that’s a personality narrative which is being built. It is bizarre to think that such things have not always been fundamental to the decision=making processes of voters, perhaps since Andrew Jackson in 1824. (He did win the popular vote that year.)

This will not be an issueless, even if Obama would have felt more comfortable sticking to the vague Hopechangehope. With John McCain and Sarah Palin campaigning on actual records of specific change, that may no longer work for him. Remember, Obama is no longer dealing only with the star struck portion of the Dem electorate; he has to hang onto the “Reagan Democrats” and the “Hillary Democrats,” and he has to appeal to the indie voters of all stripes.

McCain selected a game changer as his running mate, a phenomenon which, by my estimation, had never happened with a veep pick. Do the Democrats even have a potential game changer on their rolls?

Either way, rest assured that no matter what the partisans try to argue, the issues will play a major role in both campaigns. However, unfortunately for Axelrod and friends, so will biography and personality. For whom will we vote? This is the first week after the conventions, as the narrative is built and reinforced.

Get Alerts

COMMENTS

  • VanneGarden

    Wow, I learned a lot.

    Rick Davis In Wikipedia

    • VanneGarden

      Not sure how that happened…

      Rick Davis Wikipedia)

      • Orbitermaniac

        The best thing since the convention is the emotionally out of control response that the Obama campaign and all of their friends are expressing in both in the MSM and the blogs. Where is the same level of journalistic zeal on the empty celebrity style speeches that are all about Obama?s ego?.what was it Obama said?…?a light will come down from ?somewhere? you will have an epiphany and you?ll say to yourself?you have to vote for Obama?. If McCain or Palin said something like that, they’d be blasted as religious, right wing nut jobs…hey wait a minute..they are being painted as Right wing nut jobs…

        I find the double standard just pathetic and will only help to further the McCain/Palin cause. Thank you MSM and Obama bloggers!

        • sdstockguy

          Issues cannot be separated from personalities in considering the next President and Vice-President of the United States. Much ado is made of campaign issues and platforms, and the issues at hand for our country should be discussed to reveal the philosophical viewpoints of the candidates. But, in considering all the things that the President does, can you think of one area where the person’s wisdom, judgment, and spirit of optimism, humor, and confidence are irrelevant?

          Character, experience, wisdom, judgment, optimism, determination, humor, and graciousness are essential to the day to day governing of the country, to working with Congress to get things done, to the appointment of judges, to leading the military, and to representing our country to the world.

          With the office of the Presidency comes great power, responsibility, and privilege. The demands and temptations that go with the office require a person that respects the office, and who has learned humility through experience and testing over time.

          I have weighed the candidates in the balance. I find Sen. Obama wanting in experience with defense issues, and this is not a “learn as you go” job. His rhetoric speaks beyond his years, but I would not judge him by his words, but by his actions, by his experience, and by those that he has honored.

          How much can anyone learn about leading the free world, commanding our armed forces, administrating the cabinet, working with Congress, or appointing of judges…let alone all the other leadership roles that the President must undertake…in 2 years in Congress? Is he going to rely on his Bachelor’s “thesis” (I thought you only published a thesis as a graduate student) on Soviet Nuclear Disarmament as his guiding light for relations with Russia?

          After getting his BA, his first job, which lasted only a year, was research and writing for the “Business International Money Report.” Is his one year of experience as a writer going to be the basis of his international economic policies?

          From 1984-1985..(again, only a year), he worked as a “community organizers” for PIRG to promote reform at City College in Harlem. Will this year of experience with one Junior College the basis of his education policies?

          From 1985-1988 (his first position for more than a year), he served as director of the Developing Communities Project (DCP), where he grew the DCP staff from 1 to 13 and the budget from $70,000 to $400,000. Is this three year stint at a faith-based charity the extent of his executive management experience, his qualifications to manage a 2.73 Trillion dollar budget?

          From 1988-1991 Barrack Obama went to Harvard Law School. This was his first experience with doing something for more than 3 years, but he did graduate Magna Cum Laude.

          Although he graduated with honors in 1991, he didn?t work as an attorney until 1993, taking a year off to lead Project Push. The great accomplishment there was getting 600,000 voters registered.

          But, finally in 1993 he went to work in earnest until 2002 (9 whole years) as an associate attorney with Davis, Minre, Barnhill & Galland, a small firm (only 14 attorneys). During his tenure there his ?major? case involved forcing the state of Illinois to enforce the motor voter law, in which he argued his case before the U.S. Court of Appeals. Is this short legal career going to be the basis for his understanding of the legal system, the selection of judges, and judgment regarding new law formation?
          In 1996 to 2004 Barrack Obama served in the Illinois Senate. So?actually, he worked as an attorney for only 3 years, and then he ran for the Illinois Senate, maintaining his status with Davis, Minre, Barnhill & Galland concurrently with his service in the Illinois state Senate. In the state senate he served as Chairman of the Health and Human Services Committee. His other accomplishments were ?spearheading a successful bipartisan effort in Illinois to pass the broadest ethics-reform legislation in 25 years, and gained bipartisan support for his successful bills reforming death penalty interrogations and ending racial profiling by police. He also ?worked with the Republican-led effort to reform welfare.? Is this the extent of his ?bipartisan? experience and the basis for how he?s going to get things done with the Congress of the United States?
          While in the Illinois state senate, he also sponsored successful bills expanding tax credits and child-care subsidies for low-income working families, protecting overtime pay for workers, expanding health care for children, and providing job skills training for juveniles. After serving 8 years, his first long-term commitment over 4 years, he then ran for the United States Senate, a six-year commitment. But, after only 2 years, he ran for the presidency.
          Since he has only been active in the Senate for 2 years (since he?s been campaigning for the last 2 years). But, during his time in the Senate, what are the actions that speak louder than his words? His voting record, even on the issues dear to the hearts of liberals, shows ambivalence or indecisiveness.
          “I remember the days when Obama was already a rising national star in the Democratic Party and in the Illinois state legislature. And what a disappointment to us he was. He voted “present” instead of “no” on five horrendous anti-women/anti-choice bills.”

          –E-mail from Connecticut NOW attacking Sen. Obama’s record on abortion issues.

          Here?s a comment from a democrat regarding his voting record:

          I went to votesmart.org and looked at the voting records for Barack Obama ( http://www.vote-smart.org/voti…php?canid=9490 )and Hillary Clinton ( http://www.vote-smart.org/voti…hp?canid=55463 ).

          I tallied up the total votes listed for Barack (387) and Clinton (498). The big difference in votes listed probably has to do with the fact that Clinton was first elected in 2000 and Obama was first elected in 04.

          I also tallied up the NV, or “not voting” listings for Hillary and Barack, and came up with a NV % by dividing the NVs by the total number of votes listed for Barack and Hillary.

          While Hillary abstained from voting 16.3% of the time, Barack abstained at almost TWICE that rate (30.5%).

          Kinda hard to know what exactly what kind of candidate you’ve got when they’re abstaining about every third vote, huh? I went to votesmart.org and looked at the voting records for Barack Obama ( http://www.vote-smart.org/voti…php?canid=9490 )and Hillary Clinton ( http://www.vote-smart.org/voti…hp?canid=55463 ).

          I tallied up the total votes listed for Barack (387) and Clinton (498). The big difference in votes listed probably has to do with the fact that Clinton was first elected in 2000 and Obama was first elected in 04.

          I also tallied up the NV, or “not voting” listings for Hillary and Barack, and came up with a NV % by dividing the NVs by the total number of votes listed for Barack and Hillary.

          While Hillary abstained from voting 16.3% of the time, Barack abstained at almost TWICE that rate (30.5%).

          Kinda hard to know what exactly what kind of candidate you’ve got when they’re abstaining about every third vote, huh?
          Can the country really afford to elect to the office of President of the United States an individual whose only experience that has lasted up to 8 years was being as a state senator, during which he maintained a concurrent position at a law firm for 6 of those years. And when he was a state senator, he voted ?present? over 100 times. He has a track record of moving from one thing to another. His record of commitments ?1 year as a researcher and writer; 1 year as a community organizer, 2 ? years as director of a faith-based charity, 4 years in law school, 3 years as an associate attorney at Davis, Minre, Barnhill & Galland before he ran for state senator where he served 8 years while maintaining a divided loyalty to his lawfirm for 5 of those years. He finally ran for the United States Senate, a six-year commitment. But, after only 2 of those years he decided to run for President. I really wonder if Barrack Obama can maintain his attention span long enough to serve as Present?oops, I mean President for 4 full years. Will he get bored after 2 years? Will he lack the decisiveness needed to make the tough calls? His experience and record make him an excellent candidate to be a junior senator with committee duties where he can learn how to write, sponsor, and pass new laws. His ability to debate will serve him well as a senator. But, he lacks the executive experience and stick-to-itive leadership qualities that our president must have before he gets to the office.

          • StandardCandle

            Here is what I have observed(granted this may just be through rose colored glasses):

            McCain lobs a few easy pitches to Obama and his campaign concerning the “referendum on experience, McCain is a proven leader and statesman”… you know to test the water on how well the media can re-direct the issues voters from worrying about where Obama stands on the issues…this helps determine how the media will try to contort the McCain campaign’s description of the hero…

            Then a few fast balls come high and inside to put Obama on his heels about the Biden pick, again… pushing the “lack of experience” issue being criticized by his subordinates on video…and displaying this for any issues voter that’s watching…

            Finally… Obama’s expecting the Romney/Pawlenty pick…choking the bat ready for another fast ball…ready for another one inside…step back and bring the hips around for an out of the park home run…as there are mounds and mounds of opposition research and great ways to change the media dialogue from issues to personalities…”wonk”…”boring”…”mormon”…”midwestern yes man”…

            Well here comes the pitch… a nasty changeup…the bat hits his heels before the ball crosses the plate….well now there is No experience dialogue, no flip flop dialog, no personality dialogue, no “we’re making history” dialogue… what is the campaign to do? Well… everyone’s a hypocrite…let’s start there right, we can hang her somewhere right?… nope… ok let’s call out small town experience… oops that backfired… let’s call into question age… oops that offended the major voting bloc… quickly now re-group folks… commence unsubstantiated rhetoric on personality differences… discredit the ticket on personality alone…

            To Obama campaign… I really hope you make the foolish mistake to change this from an experience issue that can be dealt with through double talk and media bias…to well a glorified high school personality contest…

            They don’t understand that all those red counties in 2004 outside the metropolitan radius will just become more red and for two simple reasons…

            1. I’d rather have a beer with John, Cindy, Sarah, and Todd than… those senators that want me to believe they’re cool.

            and

            1. Dynamic War Hero and public servant paired with driven hockey mom turned power politician…. will always trump 2 dynamic senators promoting hope and change through empty rhetoric and even more empty unscripted stage presence.

            It seems to me if they really want the personality contest to be the focus… they must have some GRAND.. and I mean 20x’s more organized effort than Move On efforts to registering voters under 25 with super awesome and witty “i didn’t vote for stupid” t-shirts…(that’s sarcasm folks.)

            end.

          • TexasTom

            Token mean anything. Commies and affirmative action, recipe for disaster.

  • BlueHorseshoe

    I for one am getting sick of all this mock outrage, “How dare John McCain make this pick, he’s 72 years old and he has had 2 bouts with skin cancer” Give me a break. “How could he do this to the country?” I could ask the same of all of the left wing media who have done everything in their power to make Barack Obama the next POTUS. We should be asking the question, ” How could you guys put Obama not a heartbeat away, he will be the heartbeat. I think they need to answer some questions for us, and the rest of America for that matter. If they want to discredit Palin they should stick with their personal smear campaign, when it’s comes to experience and accomplishments we win all day long.

  • bs

    What a bunch of blind nitwits.

    What really galls me is that these b*ds get away with repeated ageist discriminatory statements like those you cite. Can you imagine the outrage that would be thrown about if someone from Fox News stated that Barry chose Biden because Obama is “worried about the political implications of his race”? (which may well be true, but no one would think to say it, because, well, it wouldn’t be PC). Age discrimination is perfectly fine, however.

    And again, I ask, why isn’t the press pointing out the distinct possibility that Obama will be struck with lung cancer as a result of his smoking? Did the Left all of a sudden forget about their anti-smoking crusades?

    The Obamedia is the lowest form of human excrement.

  • Patricia_C

    Since the democratic ticket lacks a resume in both departments (issues and personalities)… I am not quite sure why they feel it’s necessary to choose between the two…

    I mean, I’m just sayin’…

  • Maggie_in_Indiana

    If the left is demanding answers to silly rumors to distract McCain and Palin then it seems it’s our job on the right to keep demanding answers to questions we have been asking for over a year.Reverend Wright,Ayers,his tax plan if it’s done(he changed it during Bill O’s interview),his Harvard recommendations,what did he accomplish as a community organizer,why he voted present so many times,and when does life begin???? There are many more but it ticks me off to list them.

    While we are making noise for Sarah and McCain and enjoying ourselves ,I don’t think the guard should be dropped or the pressure let up on Barrack Hussein Obama and his nasty friends.None of which seem to follow him around on the trail.Odd?

  • Mark_Kilmer

    However, the media are pushing a false notion that Obama, by listing a few things in a speech, has taken solid, feasible positions on issues. (Yes, there are some issues on which he’s taken several positions: Iraq, Georgia v. Russia, energy, etc.)

    My problem with some of this Politico.com stuff is that they present it as factual when it is non sequitur opinion and they lace it with nods and winks and the stuff of “common knowledge.” Its the pedantic stuff of text books, as if they were lecturing their readers.