Closing Time

With the polls closing in Virginia and Florida at 7:00 PM, Ohio at 7:30 PM and Pennsylvania at 8:00 PM, we should know by 8:01 PM Tuesday just how late the night will be.

The claims by McCain’s chief pollster earlier this week of the race tightening have been refuted by a number of sources in the media, pollsters and an independent research company.

All of us at Greenberg Quinlan Rosner were in awe of the boldness of these assertions, as they, we are sure, honestly reflect the data, show a nuanced use of language and topics, and weave a story that almost gets to the conclusions that this race is opening up, unpredictable, and closing, without formally saying those things. What is interesting is that some of the findings match ours, but with a fuller picture, take us to a different close.

Nate Silver reports as of 6:40 PM tonight:

Running the numbers. Looks like they'll contain good news for Senator Obama.

So much for spending the weekend "functionally tied."

McCain's Economic Initiative

As John McCain spends the last week of the campaign talking about economics, the Obama campaign just released this ad, the first criticizing Sarah Palin as VP choice. The spot has no voice-over, relying on John McCain's own words printed on the screen juxtaposed with a winking Sarah Palin. The intent of the ad is not to attack Palin, but to remind voters of McCain's admission of weakness on economic issues and to illustrate his irresponsible selection of Palin.

The Mouse Roars

Apparently the Disney Co. was more interested in ABC's Wednesday night line-up than in participating in tonight's Obamathon. They offered a Thursday night slot, which Obama refused (as we have learned, out of necessity, as there is a live component to tonight's informercial). ABC is running the following to promote its programming:

Attempting to Suppress the Vote

While it is unclear who is circulating this flier in Virginia, its intent is obvious. It reads, in part:

All Republican party supporters and independent voters supporting Republican candidates shall vote on November 4th as precribed (sic) by law.

All Democratic party supporters and independent voters supporting Democratic candidates shall vote on November 5th as adopted by emergency regulation of the Virginia General Assembly.

No(bama) Bias

Here is an interesting piece that attempts to counter the argument that the media in general has been "in the tank" for Obama.

The myth of the pro-Obama media is the same as the myth of the liberal press, and it has been created by a standard strategy: Right-wing pundits declare repeatedly and vociferously that the media are biased in favor of liberals; centrist media pundits, who generally prefer critiques from the right because they don’t make a structural challenge to their work, concede that they have a point; and progressive critics, excluded from both the pro-establishment and the right-wing talkshows that dominate the media, go unheard.

Fair & Balanced

Here's an article that frame's the media bias on the right. Please note that while it was written seven years ago, almost all of the "players" are the same today.

I searched for and found the Salon.com article that carried the Rupert Murdoch quote that preceded the article linked above:

I challenge anybody to show me an example of bias in Fox News Channel.

Murdoch contends that it is imperative for a newspaper to have a "strong point of view", while believing Fox News has been unbiased. Apparently he hadn't been watching.

Closing the Sale

I wonder if this is the "short form" of tomorrow night's infomercial. Take note of the very end of the spot, immediately after "Barack Obama" is overprinted on the screen...it's not presumptive, but mildly subliminal; a crossing of the threshold.

The Branding of the President

As Courtney posted yesterday, campaign advertising is essentially product positioning. In the Obama camp, the responsibility for the Obama product largely falls to David Axelrod:

Mr. Axelrod has been not only a leading face of the campaign but also an architect of the Obama message and a keeper of the brand.

What, then, is the Obama Brand?

Obama's success owes a lot, of course, to his message--the promise to pass Democratic policies by rallying a "coalition for change." But watching Obamamania over the past few weeks, I've become convinced that there's something more subtle at work, too. It's not just the message and the man and the speeches that are swaying Democratic voters--though they are. It's the way the campaign has folded the man and the message and the speeches into a systemic branding effort. Reinforced with a coherent, comprehensive program of fonts, logos, slogans and web design, Obama is the first presidential candidate to be marketed like a high-end consumer brand.

And the McCain Brand?

The man who revels in being called a "maverick" has frittered away much of the brand advantage he spent a career establishing. With a back-of-the-envelope approach to the financial crisis, he has damaged the leadership credentials his supporters admired and his opponents feared. Some polls show Barack Obama almost pulling even on the question of who would make a better commander in chief.

If the polls are right, more Americans will be buying the Obama brand than the McCain brand this year.

The Blame Game

With 9 days remaining until the election, defections from the McCain camp have already begun.

Aides to George W.Bush, former Reagan White House staff and friends of John McCain have all told The Sunday Telegraph that they not only expect to lose on November 4, but also believe that Mr Obama is poised to win a crushing mandate.

Jon Kyl, the other Arizona Senator, said recently

Unfortunately, I think John McCain might be added to that long list of Arizonans who ran for president but were never elected.

With growing doubt about another McCain comeback, there is a call for a strategy shift to play a new fear card: that the inevitability of an Obama presidency could result in a Democratic trifecta a week from Tuesday, putting our nation at great peril. It has been recommended to stop spending RNC money on McCain and divert it to the Senate races in the final days.

What should Republicans be doing differently? Two things:

1. Every available dollar that can be shifted to a senatorial campaign must be shifted to a senatorial campaign. Right now, we are investing heavily in Pennsylvania in hopes of corralling those fabled "Hillary Democrats" for McCain. But McCain's hopes in Pennsylvania are delusive: The state went for Kerry in 2004, Gore in 2000 and Clinton in 1992 and 1996, and McCain lags Obama by a dozen points in recent polls. But even if we were somehow to take the state, that victory would not compensate for the likely loss of Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada and other states tipped to the Democrats by demographic changes and the mortgage crisis. The "win Pennsylvania and win the nation" strategy may have looked plausible in August and September, when McCain trailed Obama by just a few digits. Now it looks far-fetched.

But it is not far-fetched to hope that we can hold 45 or 46 of our current 49 Senate seats. In 1993, then-Senate Minority Leader Robert J. Dole (R-Kan.) stopped Hillary-care with only 43 seats. But if we are reduced to just 40 or 41 senators, as could easily happen, Republicans and conservatives would find themselves powerless to stop anything -- and more conservative Democrats would lose bargaining power with the Obama White House.

2. We need a message change that frankly acknowledges that the Democrats are probably going to win the White House -- and that warns of the dangers of one-party, left-wing government. There's a lot of poll evidence that voters prefer divided government. By some estimates, perhaps as many as 8 percent of voters consciously cast strategic votes in favor of division. These are the voters we need to be talking to now.

I'm not suggesting that the RNC throw up its hands. But down-ballot Republicans need to give up on the happy talk about how McCain has Obama just where he wants him, take off their game faces and say something like this:

"We're almost certainly looking at a Democratic White House. I can work with a Democratic president to help this state. But we need balance in Washington.

"The government now owns a big stake in the nation's banking system. Trillions of dollars are now under direct government control. It's not wise to put that money under one-party control. It's just too tempting. You need a second set of eyes on that cash. You need oversight and accountability. Otherwise, you're going to wake up two years from now and find out that a Democratic president, a Democratic Senate and a Democratic House have been funneling a ton of that money to their friends and allies. It'll be a big scandal -- but it will be too late. The money will be gone. Divided government is the best precaution you can have."

Rush to Judgment

With the election still a week and a half away, Rush Limbaugh is not wasting any time telling the Republicans what they did wrong in 2008 and who is to blame.

Now, I wish to ask all of you influential pseudointellectual conservative media types who have also abandoned McCain and want to go vote for Obama (and you know who you are without my having to mention your name) what happened to your precious theory? What the hell happened to your theory that only John McCain could enlarge this party, that we had to get moderates and independents? How the hell is it that moderate Republicans are fleeing their own party and we are not attracting other moderates and independents? How in the hell did you people figure this to happen? So the Republican Party's own strategy here not only has it backfired, it's embarrassing.

In Rushland, the only palpable reason for the defections of William Weld, Scott McLellan, Chris Buckley, Colin Powell and Chuck Hagel (and all of the other unnamed Republican turncoats) is that they are convinced that Obama is going to win and they do not want to be Washington outsiders.

By the way, we know what this is about. This is about being invited to state dinners in a Barack Obama administration. This is about the social structure of Washington. This is about style. It has nothing to do with the fact that these people love Obama's policies. They couldn't if they're paying attention. Not if they say they're Republicans. They couldn't possibly.

In a week that has seen a six-figure shopping spree, a hoax by a McCain campaign worker that had incendiary potential, revelations of dissension in the McCain-Palin camp, a neo-con call to fire the campaign and the discovery of a diva, it is reassuring to have Rush Limbaugh to put everything in perspective.

Thanks Rush.

Thanks, But No Thanks

Endorsements, while usually welcomed by candidates, may in fact not sway too many voters, particularly this late in the race (Colin Powell's will likely be the exception).

It's been shown endorsements don't matter that much, except early in the game when it helps candidates raise money.

Being the favorite son (or daughter) should carry some weight, though, shouldn't it? The Anchorage Daily News yesterday announced their endorsement:

Gov. Palin's nomination clearly alters the landscape for Alaskans as we survey this race for the presidency -- but it does not overwhelm all other judgment. The election, after all is said and done, is not about Sarah Palin, and our sober view is that her running mate, Sen. John McCain, is the wrong choice for president at this critical time for our nation.

Sen. Barack Obama, the Democratic nominee, brings far more promise to the office. In a time of grave economic crisis, he displays thoughtful analysis, enlists wise counsel and operates with a cool, steady hand. The same cannot be said of Sen. McCain.

Biden Under Fire

Joe Biden gave an interview to a local Florida TV station on Thursday, a station clearly guilty of media bias, though not the bias incessantly referred to by those on the right. This goes well beyond a tough interview, it is an attempted neo-con interrogation.



Biden handled the ambush with a mix of calm and incredulity, answering every loaded question the best way he could.

The right blogosphere is lapping this up.

The Truth Hurts

Here are the Point-Counterpoint ads on taxes, the first from McCain and the second from Obama:





Two points on the Obama creative: the music bed is similar to that of the McCain ad, though it is louder and more defined, suggesting here's the real story/we have nothing to hide, and there is no voice-over, letting the facts (according to Obama) speak for themselves.

The Office

Here are two ads, similar in their use of the Oval Office. The first, from Jimmy Carter's failed re-election bid in 1980, uses the Oval Office as the setting to emphasize Carter's decision-making capabilities. The second, by the RNC, uses imagery of the Oval Office to cast doubt on Barack Obama's ability to handle the Office.

Judgment & More of the Same

Here is an ad that was run in the 1988 campaign by Michael Dukakis criticizing the vice-presidential selection of Dan Quayle by George H.W Bush. It speaks to the primary role of the vice-president and questions the decision-making abilities of candidate Bush.



The transcript of the spot as it ran:

(Heartbeat.)

MALE NARRATOR: The most powerful man in the world is also mortal. We know this all too well in America. One in five American vice presidents has had to rise to the duties of Commander-in-Chief. One in five has had to take on the responsibilities of the most powerful office in the world. For this job, after five months of reflection, George Bush made his personal choice: J. Danforth Quayle.

MALE NARRATOR [and TEXT]: Hopefully, we will never know how great a lapse of judgment that really was.

My simple editing of the transcript for 2008 creates an ad even more appropriate now, as McCain's age, health and Palin's lack of experience are each of more concern than were those of Bush/Quayle (Quayle was brutally criticized, even though he was a sitting U.S. Senator):

(Heartbeat.)

MALE NARRATOR: The most powerful man in the world is also mortal. We know this all too well in America. One in five American vice presidents has had to rise to the duties of Commander-in-Chief. One in five has had to take on the responsibilities of the most powerful office in the world. For this job, after five months of reflection, John McCain made his personal choice: Sarah Palin.

MALE NARRATOR [and TEXT]: Hopefully, we will never know how great a lapse of judgment that really was.

The Obama campaign chose to not attack McCain's pick directly, instead launchng this ad back in August.

Al the Shoe Salesman

The Obama Campaign has found its “Joe the Plumber” in a new web ad: his name is Al the Shoe Salesman!



There are similarities, both real and imagined, between these two icons. Joe represents the American worker who is fearful of paying more taxes under Obama’s plan, as we have seen John McCain point Joe out, ad nauseam, since the last debate, not to mention Frank the Fireman, Sally the Seamstress and Bob the Butcher. Al also represents the American worker, and the Obama campaign has give him the tools to determine for himself which candidate’s plan is better for his unique financial situation.

I logged on to taxcut.barackobama.com to see for myself just how the candidates compare. Entering three sets of hypothetical situations, here’s what I found:

Annual Income $30,000
Filing Status Married Filing Jointly
Dependents 2

Obama Savings $1,000
McCain Savings $342

Annual Income $30,000
Filing Status Head of Household
Dependents 2

Obama Savings $500
McCain Savings $680

Annual Income $40,000
Filing Status Married Filing Jointly
Dependents 2

Obama Savings $1,000
McCain Savings $680

Annual Income $40,000
Filing Status Head of Household
Dependents 2

Obama Savings $500
McCain Savings $945

Annual Income $50,000-75,000
Filing Status Married Filing Jointly
Dependents 2

Obama Savings $1,000
McCain Savings $645

Annual Income $50,000-75,000
Filing Status Head of Household
Dependents 2

Obama Savings $500
McCain Savings $270

It should be noted that under the Obama plan there is also the possibility of $4,000 tax credit to pay for college expenses and a 50% tax credit for up to $1000 for retirement savings. The site does not indicate whether similar savings are available under McCain’s proposals.

This site can be an effective tool for voters who want to see for themselves which candidate’s plan might be better for them.

Al the Shoe Salesman, of course, is actor Ed O’Neill who played Al Bundy on Fox’s 1987-1997 sitcom Married With Children. He is not really a shoe salesman. There’s the other similarity, as we quickly learned, Joe really isn’t a plumber.

Civics 101

John McCain said today of Sarah Palin: "I think she is the most qualified of any that has run recently for vice president."

As Caroline blogged earlier, Palin's unique understanding of our Constitution has again revealed itself. And this evening, Chris Matthews mercilessly took one of McCain's most visible surrogates back to school. The video is worth watching (Bill Burton of the Obama campaign was on the segment as well, though he quickly recognized that what was unfolding should not be interrupted.)

The RNC should have diverted some of that $150,000 to a tutor.

Owning the Air & Web

Click on the map above to see a comparison of spending in the "battleground states."

With a tremendous amount of cash in hand ($150 million raised in September alone) and momentum on his side (note to Joe Biden, please think before you speak), Barack Obama has been outspending John McCain by a margin of 4:1.

Last week alone, Obama broadcast some 50,000 30-second spots on national, local and cable TV channels, according to the Campaign Media Analysis Group's Evan Tracey.

To put that in context, if that much airtime was run end to end on a single channel, it would take 17 days for the reel to end.

The edge in Internet advertising is even greater, with Obama running 914 million ads on the web in September, compared to McCain's 7.8 million.

The disparity makes McCain's task of overcoming Obama's leads in many key battlegrounds that much harder. In some hotly contested areas, the advertising score is not just lopsided, it's a complete shutout.

The Bradley Effect

There is much discussion among pollsters, academics and campaign veterans over the Bradley effect and what role, if any, it may play in this year's presidential election results. Does the Bradley effect really exist today? Is there the possibility of a reverse Bradley effect, where polling underestimates the planned voting for Barack Obama? A more thorough review of this may be appropriate post-election when we focus on racism, however, it is worthy of consideration as we look at polling.

Nate Silver believes the Bradley effect is a myth perpetuated by four major points of misunderstanding and confusion.

…the Bradley Effect is not an argument about whether people vote based on race. It's an argument about whether people will lie to pollsters.

He also contends it may in fact had its origins in bad polling, citing Bradley's pollster.

Keith Olbermann recently discussed it, as did Rachel Maddow (starts about 3:45 in), with their respective guests.





Sean Oxendine responds to Silver's criticism in detail, and asserts:

If he finds no Bradley effect and I find a Bradley effect, there is evidence for the Bradley effect. That doesn't mean that it is there or not – and remember, the real point of the article was to speculate on what would have to happen for McCain to win, not to prove or disprove anything -- all it means is that more research must be done.

Since polling drives the media narrative, and internal campaign polling helps determine the electoral map strategy of where to send the candidates, surrogates and advertising dollars, the potential of a Bradley effect can not be ignored.

A Few Laughs with McCain & Obama

Last night's Alfred E. Smith Dinner in New York gave both candidates an opportunity to poke fun at the campaign, each other and themselves. They each showed a great sense of humor and the clips are worth watching. John McCain's praise of Barack Obama near the end of his monologue, much like his admonishment of the crowd at last week's rally, is noteworthy.

The Tale of the Tape

Here's a look back on the debate we never saw:

Political Discourse

Rachel Maddow conducted an interview she hadn't bargained for last night when guest David Frum indicted shows such as hers as "intensifications of some of the ugliness of tone" in the campaign (starts about three minutes in).

Frum has been a consistent and vocal critic of Republican presidential candidate John McCain's choice of Sarah Palin as his running mate on the ground that Palin is unqualified to assume the presidency. Speaking of Palin's performance during the campaign, Frum has stated, "I think she has pretty thoroughly -- and probably irretrievably -- proven that she is not up to the job of being president of the United States."

Humor, sarcasm and satire all play a part in stimulating the dialogue and debate of a campaign; it is ultimately the campaign and their message, not the messenger, that bears the responsibility for the political agenda.

Sex(ism), Lies and Videotape

Before the media scrutiny of the Palin wink, there was the open criticism of the Clinton cackle.



Shuster was later suspended by MSNBC for referring to the Clinton's as "pimping-out" their daughter Chelsea to campaign for her mother.

The New York Times reported in June on the charges of sexism in the coverage of Hillary Clinton's campaign.

Cable television has come under the most criticism. Chris Matthews, a host on MSNBC, called Mrs. Clinton a “she-devil” and said she had gotten as far as she had only because her husband had “messed around.”

Mike Barnicle, a panelist on MSNBC, said that Mrs. Clinton was “looking like everyone’s first wife standing outside a probate court.” Tucker Carlson, also on MSNBC, said, “When she comes on television, I involuntarily cross my legs.”

The establishment news media were faulted too. The New York Times wrote about Mrs. Clinton’s “cackle” and The Washington Post wrote about her cleavage.

Ken Rudin, an editor at National Public Radio, appeared on CNN, where he equated Mrs. Clinton with the actress Glenn Close in “Fatal Attraction.” “She’s going to keep coming back, and they’re not going to stop her," Mr. Rudin said. He later apologized.

The question of sexism in campaign coverage is debated in this clip from MSNBC's Morning Joe:



Carly Fiorina (before her being exiled from the campaign) addressed sexist coverage of Sarah Palin just prior to her convention address.



(In retrospect, the decision on the part of the McCain camp to restrict the media's access to Palin had much less to do with charges of sexism and much more to do with how well they knew how little she knew.)

During coverage of Palin, MSNBC chose to frame the question that would never have been raised had the VP choice been a man:

"SOME WORKING MOTHERS WORRY THAT PALIN IS TAKING ON TOO MUCH"
"SOME VOTERS CONCERNED IF PALIN, A MOTHER OF FIVE, HAS TIME TO BE VP"

A Wikipedia search turned up an unexpected reference to Dick Morris, a former (Bill) Clinton surrogate and current Fox News contributor. Morris, with his anti-Clinton and pro-Republican perspectives, seems to be able to conveniently argue both sides of the question:

On November 5, 2007, when asked about Hillary Clinton's claim of experiencing sexism during the Democratic Presidential Primary debates in the months prior to the Iowa Caucuses, Morris commented that "when a woman wants to be President, she shouldn't complain based on gender. I'm going to go home because the big boys are picking on me. What happens when the boys in the Middle East or the boys who run Russia or the boys who run China start picking on you? Are we going to have a President of the United States saying the boys are picking on me? This is what Hillary always does. Whenever she gets under fire, she retreats behind the apron strings."

On September 2, 2008, during the Republican National Convention Morris said, in reference to personal attacks on 2008 Republican Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin and her children, that "a man would never have had to go through this." Morris elaborated that the attacks on her ability as a mother of five to balance family life and the duties of the Vice Presidential office reflected a "deep sexism that runs through our society."

From the Times article, Katie Couric said of Clinton and sexism:

Like her or not, one of the great lessons of that campaign is the continued — and accepted — role of sexism in American life, particularly in the media.

Reality Replaces Rhetoric

In what seemed to be a "What have I done" moment at a rally yesterday, John McCain attempted to halt the diatribe that has begun to take over his events.


His efforts were recognized by Barack Obama at a rally this morning.

I want to acknowledge that Senator McCain tried to tone down the rhetoric in his town hall meeting yesterday,” Mr. Obama said, speaking at an early-morning rally in North Philadelphia. “I appreciated his reminder that we can disagree while still being respectful of each other. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again – Senator McCain has served this country with honor, and he deserves our thanks for that.

While there is still an inconsistency in message between McCain, his surrogates, the RNC and even McCain himself, yesterday was notable as McCain seemed to embrace his earlier rhetoric about the dignity of his campaign and the tenor that he would avoid. We haven't seen this level of respect in months, and certainly not over the past week. Recognizing that the toothpaste was oozing out of the tube, both at the rallies and thanks to YouTube, McCain acted nobly, if only for a moment.

McCain was criticized in a Baltimore Sun op-ed piece yesterday, written by an author who knows him well.

John McCain and Sarah Palin, you are playing with fire, and you know it. You are unleashing the monster of American hatred and prejudice, to the peril of all of us. You are doing this in wartime. You are doing this as our economy collapses. You are doing this in a country with a history of assassinations.

Change the atmosphere of your campaign. Talk about the issues at hand. Make your case. But stop stirring up the lunatic fringe of haters, or risk suffering the judgment of history and the loathing of the American people - forever.

We will hold you responsible.

McCain seemed to heed the call.

Americans Want a Respectful Campaign

Talking Points Memo's Josh Marshall posted this video that captures the hypocrisy of the desperate McCain campaign.



"Americans want a respectful campaign." - John McCain

Obama Uses the Economy for Political Cover

Today's speech in Ohio by Barack Obama is criticized by the McCain camp (below the video).


“Instead of acknowledging the real differences that exist in this election, Barack Obama is using America’s economic crisis to deflect legitimate criticisms of himself and his record. Now, more than ever, Americans should be scrutinizing Barack Obama’s role in shielding Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from increased regulation. Voters deserve a real debate about Barack Obama’s proposals for one trillion dollars in new government spending and tax increases on small businesses – when Americans can afford neither. At a time when hardworking families face uncertainty and a historic decision in November, they expect more than Barack Obama’s self-interested calls to stifle any inquiry into his record or his past.” —Tucker Bounds, spokesman McCain-Palin 2008

It wouldn't be much of a leap to replace "Tucker Bounds" above with "Homer Simpson." They should take a look at Bill Clinton's 1992 playbook: It's the Economy, stupid.

Something in the Ayres

While John McCain is pushing the association card hard, and the RNC has launched a new Ayers ad, the Washington Times ran a piece yesterday that demonstrates a close personal relationship between John McCain and Charles Keating.

McCain wrote: "As you know, I am deeply appreciative of your friendship and support over the years, and I would not want to do anything which would offend you. Please accept my apology, and be assured that there will be no future repetition of this kind."

Six days later Keating sent a handwritten note back assuring McCain he has done, and can do, no wrong. "Don't be silly. You can call me anything, write anything or do anything. I'm yours till death do us part."

While the Keating Five attack was launched by Obama to blunt the Ayers attack this week, one has to wonder which relationship voters should be more concerned with: the membership of Obama and Ayres on a philanthropic board or that of two men with questionable ethics, one who was convicted after his financial house of cards fell and the other who was criticized for his poor judgement.

The RNC ad:

I'm Mad. I'm Really Mad.

From Salon.com:

This incident, a question asked at a recent McCain campaign rally, has been going around the Internet today, and for good reason. It seems to sum up, in one neat package, much of the dynamic of the presidential campaign right now. There’s the fear on the right that an Obama administration may now be inevitable — and anger over that prospect — combined with the results of the McCain campaign’s recent tactics and the conversation in conservative media right now.

Here’s the exchange. A video of it, which you really should watch to fully appreciate this (make sure to note the picture of Bill Ayers that Fox News includes at the right of the screen), is at the bottom of this post.

Guilt By Association

The McCain camp has launched a long (1:40) ad entitled "Ayers" to challenge Barack Obama's truthfulness about his association with Bill Ayers.



The problem with the attack is that it suggests that Obama endorsed Ayers activities from the 1960's and 70's; the faulty conclusion challenges Obama to somehow prove something that does not exist. The McCain camp might want to consider investigating the other members of the Woods Fund board, which included "radicals" like the "...publisher of the Chicago Tribune, the President of the Field Museum and the President of the University of Illinois." An understanding of the real connection should put an end to this propaganda.

In fact, according to several people involved, Mr. Ayers played no role in Mr. Obama’s appointment. Instead, it was suggested by Deborah Leff, then president of the Joyce Foundation, a Chicago-based group whose board Mr. Obama, a young lawyer, had joined the previous year. At a lunch with two other foundation heads, Patricia A. Graham of the Spencer Foundation and Adele Simmons of the MacArthur Foundation, Ms. Leff suggested that Mr. Obama would make a good board chairman, she said in an interview. Mr. Ayers was not present and had not suggested Mr. Obama, she said.

The fear card is an old Republican playbook strategy.

Did Obama Get Dissed?

I noticed that McCain refused to shake Obama's hand last night post-debate as the two were meeting the audience. After a review of the videotape (nothing escapes the lens), it appears that McCain tapped Obama on the back and may have said something to introduce Cindy; Obama turned and realized his hand was to the right of Cindy and promptly adjusted.



The conspiracy theorists are already pounding the keys on this one; I don't think there's anything to it (they did shake hands just before the Brokaw-McCain teleprompter moment). Regardless, I'm not expecting any "Kum ba yah" moments between the two of them anytime soon.

Game-Changer…Not!

John McCain entered last night’s debate with a game-changer in hand:

You know that home values of retirees continues to decline and people are no longer able to afford their mortgage payments. As president of the United States, Alan, I would order the secretary of the treasury to immediately buy up the bad home loan mortgages in America and renegotiate at the new value of those homes -- at the diminished value of those homes and let people be able to make those -- be able to make those payments and stay in their homes.

Brilliant! No...wait, wait…where have I heard this before?

From the people who brought us “John McCain invented the Blackberry” and “John McCain rushed back to Washington to get the bailout passed,” we now have the “John McCain Rescue Plan.” Unfortunately, we already have that plan, as McCain’s game changer is a nuanced expansion of the $700 Billion Rescue plan that was signed into law last week. And the right is not happy about it at all.

Katie Couric interviewed undecided voters immediately after the debate; the CBS poll of uncommitted voters gave the edge to Obama, though there really was no game-changer for either candidate.

Ultimately, few uncommitted voters' minds were made up as a result of this debate, according to the poll. Immediately after the debate, 15 percent of them said they are now committed to Obama, and 12 percent are now committed to McCain. But most - 72 percent - remain uncommitted.

The Two Faces of John

When the going gets tough, the tough go negative. Despite earlier refusals to engage in negative campaigning, the McCain camp launched into character attacks and guilt by association tactics on Saturday with Sarah Palin suggesting a closer than apparent relationship between Barack Obama and former Weather Underground member William Ayers. What a difference a few weeks (of negative polling) makes.



As reported on January 5 in the New Hampshire Union Leader:

McCain said he drew two lessons from the Iowa caucuses: that negative ads don't work, and that, 'If you're a person who is trustworthy, you can do well.' He also said he agrees with the "overwhelming media view" of Sen. Barack Obama's victory in the Democratic caucuses: Obama "is seen as a fresh face, and a lot of people, particularly younger ones, seem to be looking for that."

Following the negative attacks against him in the 2000 South Carolina Republican primary, John McCain said "I'm not going to take the low road to the highest office in the land. I want the presidency in the best way, not the worst way."

With rapidly declining poll numbers, political expediency has replaced a respect for history. In kind, Obama will be releasing a web attack at noon ET today. Currently, a page has posted with the headline "Keting Economics: John McCain and the Making of a Financial Crisis." The Obama camp will not be "Swift-Boated."

Commenting recently on McCain going negative, pollster John Zogby said "Voters want authenticity this year, and this is the opposite of authenticity. It's politics as usual, and he runs a very serious risk of damaging the way he's always been defined, as being above that sort of politics."

From the same article:

The unsavory reality is that negative ads tend to work. But McCain's bellicose stance toward Obama could backfire because it coincides with his campaign's decision to "double down" on his past reputation as a reformer and a "maverick," said Rodolfo Espino, an assistant political-science professor at Arizona State University. This month's Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minn., showcased McCain's history of bipartisan outreach and his commitment to changing Washington.

"I'm not condoning McCain's advertising and his handlers' behavior, but if you're running a campaign and you're running to win, what are you going to do?" Espino said. "All research points to the effectiveness of negative advertising."

As this recent SNL skit suggests, the campaign and its message will go wherever it needs to go to chase victory.



Interestingly, the concept of this spot originated with Al Franken, former SNL writer/cast member and current Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate in Minnesota. His opponent, incumbent Norm Coleman, sharply attacked Franken following the spot genesis story. Franken had been trailing by double digits and Coleman viewed this as an opportunity to widen his lead, by portraying Franken as irresponsible and dangerous. It backfired, as Franken has now taken the lead.

As the article points out: "The new poll suggests that one reason for Franken’s gain is voters’ reaction to the abrasive advertising in the campaign. The survey shows that 56 percent of poll respondents consider ads criticizing Franken to be “mostly unfair personal attacks.” Only 42 percent said the same about ads criticizing Coleman."

While negative advertising may sometimes be effective, unfounded personal attacks can backfire. With both McCain and Obama lowering the acceptability threshold, the line in the sand, if it were ever there at all, is quickly becoming a mirage.

Damage Control as Propaganda

We expect a lot of our elected officials. We expect them to be honest. We expect them to be genuine. And we expect them, as we often hear the pundits say, to be "authentic." There is nothing more authentic than hearing a "seat of your pants" answer to an interviewer's question. That is what was so strikingly revealing about Katie Couric's recent interviews with Sarah Palin. Palin's responses were authentic in that they showed, without the Republican talking points, just what she does not know; thinking on her feet may not be her strong suit.

However, when she knows the questions in advance, and has time to craft an answer, she really shines. Who knew how she really felt about the Supreme Court or what she reads? And of course it was Katie's (the media's) fault for not asking the right questions. Thankfully, Fox News was there to help clarify her positions.

MSNBC's Keith Olbermann often (nightly) refers with great affection to "Fix Noise"...it's a wonder his head doesn't explode.

Can't We All Just Get Along?

Bill O'Reilly had a chance last night to discuss Fannie Mae
with Barney Frank. Apparently, O'Reilly is no longer seeking investment strategy from Frank.

Citizen Journalism

As we have discussed in class, the internet has opened the media up to anyone with the bandwith and inclination to participate. The opportunities to add to the dialogue are plentiful; however, there are potentially dangerous risks. This morning's hoax exemplifies part of the downside to the open mic.

Victory is Ours...No, It's Ours

Over the last 90 minutes, we've just seen one candidate answer the questions and another regurgitate the talking points that she has been force-fed over the past several days.

Both have claimed the victory; thankfully, only one claimed they will seize the power that is (not) structurally implicit in the Constitution, will not answer the questions asked and will not be filtered by the MSM.

The CBS poll of uncommitted voters conducted immediately after the debate gave the edge to Biden, with 98% seeing him as knowledgeable, up 19 points from prior to the debate, while Palin was seen as knowledgeable by 66%, up 23 points. Biden also wins on preparedness to be Vice-President with a 97%-55% advantage.

Today in History

Here are four noteworthy Vice-Presidential Debate moments; none of the candidates credited with memorable remarks went on to victory (clips 2, 3 and 4 - Admiral Stockdale was only memorable for being unaware of where he was). They have their place in history, but were never a heartbeat away.

Ifill Shower

Maybe I am naïve, but I was never certain whether Tim Russert was a Democrat or a Republican. Watching him over the years on Meet the Press, I didn’t know where he stood, nor did I really care - as a moderator his role was to facilitate the discussion with his questions. He was not the story. The controversy over Gwen Ifill as moderator has attempted to make her the story, while clearly she is not.

John McCain took the high road yesterday, praising Ifill and her professionalism, which was a prelude to light criticism from Palin and Rudy Giuliani. Outrage from the right has focused on the lack of disclosure of Ifill’s upcoming book “The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama.” The fact that she was writing the book should have come as no surprise, as the first notice of it appeared in a Washington Times article on July 23 entitled “Smiley Faces Blog Anger.” "We have an awkward history about how to talk about race in the nation and in newsrooms," says Gwen Ifill, senior correspondent for PBS' "The NewsHour With Jim Lehrer" and author of "The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama," slated for publication early next year.

The Commission on Presidential Debates announced the four moderators on August 5, and articles about Ifill, which included references to her book appeared in the Washington Post on September 4.

Why is the right crying foul two days before the Vice-Presidential debate? Where was their criticism back in August? Or September? Presumably Jim Lehrer, Tom Brokaw and Bob Schieffer were selected for their journalistic credentials, and no less should be said of Ifill. If the right truly thought there were bias issues, they did not have to look any further than the 2004 Vice-Presidential debate, which was also moderated by Ifill. Criticism from the right followed that debate as a result of an exchange between Ifill and Vice-President Cheney:

Ifill has been criticized in the past by political commentators for her performance as a moderator -- most notably in 2004's vice presidential debate between Dick Cheney and ex-Sen. John Edwards. Edwards lashed out at Cheney's ties to Halliburton, to which Cheney responded: "I can respond, Gwen, but it's going to take more than 30 seconds."

Ifill shot back: "Well, that's all you've got."

Where was the outrage in August? They had four years to foment. Now, as the debate approaches and the polls are moving in the wrong direction, it’s time to “work the refs” so there is a ready narrative if Sarah Palin fails to score in the debate. If the right is right, maybe both Ifill and Palin should have been better vetted.

McCain Confident in Ifill

“I think that Gwen Ifill is a professional and I think that she will do a totally objective job because she is a highly respected professional,” McCain said during an interview at the Harry S. Truman Library and Museum. “Does this help…if she has written a book that’s favorable to Senator Obama? Probably not. But I have confidence that Gwen Ifill will do a professional job and I have that confidence.”

The Next Attack From the Right?

As Sarah Palin and Joe Biden prepare for tomorrow night’s debate, I am keeping my eye on an item that may not develop into anything at all, or might be the next attention-diverting media attack launched by the McCain camp. Tomorrow night’s moderator, PBS anchor Gwen Ifill, is writing a book “The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama” - scheduled for release in January 2009.

Blogger Michelle Malkin recently updated her posting to say that the McCain campaign did not know about the book: Fox’s Greta Van Susteren suggests that if there was not full disclosure, either Ifill should recuse herself, or the McCain camp should refuse to debate.

POST POSTING NOTE: I thought I had a scoop here until I read Colin's Trinity Bloggers post, and then to add insult to injury, his To Wit column...my face is devil-duck red!