This morning, I wrote a blog post arguing that John McCain was not serious about his William Ayers attacks. Later in the day Time's Michael Scherer, who has spent the past several months covering McCain with intelligence and sensibility, responded with a post saying that McCain was serious, to the extent that serious is a factor that matters.
Mike and I continued our debate privately over email. As he writes, "After a few exchanges, we decided to post our entirely friendly and respectful give-and-take, in a slightly edited form."
So, read those e-mails after the jump. Then comment, and tell us what you think.
At 5:26 p.m., Ambinder wrote:
Sarah Palin is a credible surrogate for McCain with independents?
And that's just the point: he seems tepid about Ayers; his decisions
about what to say about Ayers seem political unless he commits to the
message, unless he makes the argument rather than assuming that the
argument will make itself. If McCain wants to discredit Obama because
of the Ayers association, he needs to find a way to inform the people
for whom the
prospect of an Ayers connection will change their minds. Right now, all
available evidence indicates that these voters don't know enough to
care.McCain can fix that by doing 1 2 or 3. He's not. Therefore he
just doesn't seem all that serious about Ayers. If the Ayers
association really matters .... If it really bothers McCain, if it
really ought to discredit Obama, then McCain
ought to be shouting it from the hilltops. He's whispering right now from the valley.
At 5:55 p.m., Scherer wrote:
I agree that McCain is probably still deep down conflicted, perhaps
more for reasons of legacy and reputation than anything else. (And, he
actually did enjoy those gabfests with the press.) But I don't think
the Ayers play is a misplay, or that McCain is somehow holding back
against the plan. The campaign is carrying out the plan of using Ayers,
ACORN, and whatever else
to grab news cycles, to refocus the spotlight away from the economy, and attempt to take back control of the momentum.
Aides have been very clear about the desire to use Palin as point to
drive news cycles. I don't think it matters that she doesn't appeal to
independents, or that there is little substance to the attacks. The
campaign's contention is that if you get in the news, it filters down,
through impressions to voters.
And when it comes to Ayers, the details could become counterproductive.
It's clear from the McCain messaging that the main idea is to "raise
questions," not to clearly answer them. Next will be ACORN, and I would
not be surprised to see Obama's record on crime issues in Illinois, and
whatever else. And the whole thing will roll out as designed, unless
they decide that the whole campaign is lost, which is unlikely, mainly
because this election is still pretty close.
All that said, my post was not really about your post as much as an
idea I have been trying to figure out how to write for a while: That
the authenticity debate, as normally framed, is off when it comes to
McCain. He is the same person today he was back when he was the media's
friend and the enemy of slimy politics. It's just the mathematics of
the nation changed
around him.
At 6:05 p.m., Ambinder wrote:
But it's not working. To the extent that questions are being raised,
they are being raised at the extreme margins of a 10 point race (or
seven point race). They know this; they see the same polls and do the
same focus groups. They're not grabbing news cycles. The news isn't
about Ayers...
In fact, the stories that seep through seem to be about conservative
intellectuals abandoning McCain, not about William Ayers -- or they're
about McCain's soul -- or about conservatives questioning whether
McCain has lost his soul, or they're about angry Republicans at
events... One CNN segment on ACORN?. [Ambinder post-conversation note:
CBS just did an ACORN segment tonight, too.}
McCain has always been more political and less authentically
anti-politics than he is portrayed, but he has always been more
principled and less political than most, which is why his frustration
is evident from his performances on the stump..(or it appears so on TV,
which is how 99% of the people see them). He is raging, internally.
It's evident externally.
All of which is to say -- the misdirection is so transparent -- and,
indeed, McCain advisers _tell us_ about the misdirection on background
-- that I can't imagine they stick to it.
BTW: McCain, five minutes ago: "I want to be president and I don't want
Obama to be...he is a decent person and a person you don't have to be
scared of ([there are scattered boos]...if I didn't think I'd be a lot
better, I wouldn't be running."
Message that filters down (through a media that is, let's face it, kind
of in tank for change, if not for Obama): Angry Republicans think Obama
is a bad guy; McCain speaks truth to power and calls his "decent."
At 6:09 p.m., Scherer wrote:
Am watching too, but I think that is McCain just trying to make clear
that he is not calling for anyone to lose their bearings over the
election, which seems to have been happening at recent events.
I am not sure how much of McCain's evident frustration is internal
doubt, and how much is that he feels the world--and the press--has
unfairly turned on him. (I actually think the latter is a big deal.
McCain's ability to morally dispatch those who stand in his way is
substantial, as his record in the Senate shows.)
The argument we are having is whether the current strategy is failing
as designed, or failing because it is not being carried out. I think
the former. I think they don't have another play, and there is still
hope that the worm turns. They are sticking to the script and adding a
economic crisis graft on the side. It may not be working, but I don't
think that's McCain not being serious.
At 6:13 p.m., Ambinder wrote:
Well, the press is another issue, but I totally agree with your POV,
which, after all, is based on seeing him up close more than me.
What also confuses me is, quite frankly, [is] his policy generation
process, which seems ad hoc and counterproductive and not well thought
out even as the guy in charge of it, Doug Holtz-Eakin, is universally
respected. McCain's had new
stuff to say this week, but it's been lost in the details, and the
press is having trouble taking it seriously.
At 6:25 p.m., Scherer wrote:
The impression of policy development problems is unmistakable, and
there may be real problems behind the scenes, though I don't know.
Doug's efforts have been heroic, but this is one area where McCain
seems to still suffer from the rapid up-scaling of his operation over
the spring and summer. McCain may have figured out how to hold big
events, but his campaign still has clear disadvantages of scale when
compared with the Obama operation, which has the benefit of an entire
Democratic policy apparatus in exile. Doug has help, but his brief is
enormous
« The Daily Bric-A-Brac: Cordially... | Main | ACORN Story Breaking Through? » Scherer v. Ambinder: The E-Mails10 Oct 2008 07:44 pm Comments (31)
Count me as another one who was never sold on mccain and never understood the media lovefest. I never believed him - somehow he always seemed to be acting to me - and I watched him constantly take a brave stand, get a lot of publicity for that stand, and then quietly cave anyway (torture and immigration being just 2 examples). He's achieved remarkably little for someone who has been in the senate for 26 years and I always assumed that was a temperament issue. I also just plain don't like him. He is not an authentic person. He is not comfortable with who he is. He's desperate to impress. Nothing about this campaign is a surprise to me and I'm sick of seeing people apologize for him. Then again, he never let me swing on his tire so what do I know? 
I can't even imagine the press second guessing Obama on anything like this. That, of course, would be racist or something the self appointed intellectual superiors in the press would tell us.
I can see why you are saying McCain is not serious about Ayer's. Besides the factors you have already mentioned, the attack is piled on to the already existing idea that McCain is desperate because he is losing. When the press started reporting that McCain was pulling out of Michigan, I think that seemed to signal to most average voters, not necessarily the low information ones, that McCain was on the ropes and that Obama was up. Couple this with the Ayer's attacks and it leaves an impression of desperation and probably confusion, "what the hell does this have to do with anything and why is McCain only bringing this up when he is losing?" But, from the perspective of Scherer, I can also see his point. They believe in this strategy and are moving forward with it. I dont doubt Scherer's perspective, I just wonder whether his lack of distance from the events unfolding, especially his distance from the average television watching voter, is being taken into account. How these things unfold to a non-linear tv watcher is important. Not everyone watches the news all day, everyday. I bet most are seeing these events unfold in chunks, not one major meta-narrative or meme at a time. If that's the case, then things seem even more disjointed from the perspective of a voter.
I can't even keep up with my own emails, let alone someone else's. ;-)
McCain needs something better than an acronym. Seriously? ACORN? That's an old brand of computers from the 80s. I'm a political nerd with the best of them, but it sounds so innocuous that I couldn't care less if Lady Lynn de Rothschild was at the helm. They're leading with Ayers which is such a non-story that one can only assume that ACORN, as a secondary line of fire, is even less convincing. Seriously? That's it? That's all they've got? ACORN? Are you kidding me? You've got to imagine that this is the kind of stuff that Hillary Clinton's campaign looked at and passed on as a line of attack. So yeah. McCain's campaign is using Hillary Clinton's leftovers to try and win this election. Good luck with that.
This is narcissism.
I think you, Marc, touched on it with "the press is having trouble taking it seriously." That's the crux of this. It's failed policy executed, not failure to execute policy. There is a certain amount of credibility you can give either campaign, and John McCain has been burning through his. While the media can't come out and respond to the Palin/Couric interview as "it was a farce," they can let those impressions dictate their further coverage. We've had the Palin announcement, the Sex Ed ad, Gibson/Palin interview, suspending the campaign, the Couric/Palin interview, the Des Moines Register interview, and the debate results. At every stop along that list, the McCain campaign has not only defended the incidents, they've defended them vigorously. Palin as acceptable candidate? That fails the credibility test. Suspending the campaign to do nothing, and actually, not suspend the campaign? Political stunt. At some point, and we've reached it, the media is going to catch on and say "we're not your mouthpiece anymore." That's one reason Ayers didn't break through: It wasn't about Ayers, it was about McCain's need to use Ayers. The pattern established is one of political theatrics, not politics. The media simply followed that pattern with Ayers. McCain's strategy relied on a complicit media: his base. He lost that with the Palin pick, because her pick required questions to be asked. They thought they could dress her up and no one would dare poke around. They made a critical miscalculation there. Everything since then has been a reaction to Palin's negative press. They've overplayed too many hands to have anything they say taken at face value.
Seriously? Talk about vanity!! You want the readers to comment on your conversation with another journalist?? What the hell is happening?!?! Why can't we just have the election tomorrow and get this over with!! P.S. I've been reading both you & Scherer for months now and I've got to say you both have a soft corner for McCain.
Leaving aside questions of authenticity, I think the biggest problem for the McCain campaign is the lack of discipline when it comes to messaging and message control. If CW is that you are not strong on economic issues, you do not come out with a half-baked idea. Even if it means that you may not be able to unveil the new policy during the debate, when presumably you will have a larger audience. You make sure it's well laid out. A bit of armchair analysis, perhaps, but it seems like this is a candidate/campaign that's was shaken by the 2000 race, and then demoralized by the lack of attention during the Democratic primary and since then by the strength of Obama's support. After 2000, it seemed like the campaign took home the message that they need to make friends with the base. That is all well and good but any moves to the left or right need to be well thought out so that then the move to the proverbial center doesn't look as transparent. And that needs discipline and longterm thinking. Same sort of short term planning is happening now where they throw everything and anything at Obama hoping that something will stick. Need to change the narrative, pick Palin. Really? Does that seem like someone with a long term plan? Why bother with the inexperience theme and then take it off the table with Palin? Campaign suspension, Ayers, Bill Daley.. this is a campaign without any sort of discipline when it comes to message, just a series of hail mary like pot shots that come across looking like gimmicks.
one of the frustrating things for me is hearing pundits question mccain's campaign tactics this cycle, and then go on to say that that doesn't represent the real john mccain. let's give him the benefit of the doubt. maybe because they don't want to admit that the john mccain they liked in 2000 wasn't worthy of their admiration. mccain must have changed because it can't be their judgment that was faulty. the thing is, we're talking about the same person. the guy who campaigns so slimily today has the same values and judgment and temperament of that other guy. of course the math is different. in fact the difference in math is what exposes the guy's true values. but the values are the same. and we should just admit that and not try to pull the punch because we like - or used to like - the guy.
Obama has Biden - an amazing public speaker - and Michelle - who was great on Larry King and with Jon Stewart on the Daily Show. McCain has Palin - who can't be let lose on anything but audiences who were going to vote Republican anyway and would be chewed up and spat out by King and Stewart - and Cindy - who can only rattle her jewels. It's three against one - no wonder McCain is looking tired and is making bad calls. A year ago I thought there were three equally good choices for President: McCain, Obama, Clinton, with Obama the lightest of the three. Now he is only one left standing. (And you can now add both the Clintons to Obama's team; five to one.) McCain doesn't believe the Ayers line - how can he as he isn't an idiot (Palin, on the other hand...) and he must also know it's counter-productive as it repels the moderate vote - but it is the only weapon he has left in his arsenal. He is just bone tired - a sad sight to see. If Palin's Troopergate blows up in his face this week, I'd worry for him.
"Principled"? Sending out his wife, who is on record as loathing political campaigning, to first smear Michelle Obama ("I've always been proud...") and now to near-libel Sen. Obama (taking body armor from son)? Principled? And now, since he's worried about the optics of cable news catching him whooping yahoos into seething rages, that he's (finally) tamping it down in public (meanwhile his media call team continues the smears, again with Mrs. Obama), he's showing his "genuine" side? Oh, and that discomfort you see on the stump? That's not some inner moral dilemma playing itself out. It's rage.
I pretty much agree with the third e-mail, feeding off of this from the second: "The campaign is carrying out the plan of using Ayers, ACORN, and whatever else to grab news cycles, to refocus the spotlight away from the economy." I mean, that's just insane. NOTHING is going to grab the spotlight away from the economy. Nothing. If you want to be covered, you talk about the economy. I know it's not McCain's favorite issue, but jeez louise, emergencies arise when you're president and you have to cope even if they're not the term-defining moments you were hoping for. You're also right that the new policy proposals come across as "??....???" But at this point I have faith not only in Obama, not only in his economic philosophy at least over the only other philosophy on display (aka change the subject), but in his ability to get a good team together and get stuff done, which will be critical as the new president takes over. As Fallows has pointed out, Bush is just comically out of his depth at the moment and the best one can hope for is that he not get in the way, which to his credit he appears to be managing.
I am not sure whether McCain's defense of Obama's decency today was political or honest yet. I hope he has realized the possible dangers in pouring fuel to the fire...But he could just be doing so to appease the media....I cannot give him the benefit of the doubt anymore. The Ayers card, whatever. I don't think it gets him anywhere, but it's fair game. To stand by while charged insults are shouted from his supporters and him not say anything....Not alright. We wlll have to wait and see where this goes over the next few days.
Are republicans turning towards Fascism?
You both belabor the obvious points. McCain, like Clinton, has been bested by the better candidate - period. Isn't it time that we all started acknowledging that Obama has strategized and executed almost flawlessly, while McCain (and particularly snarky Nicole Wallace) have done neither? Obama is running a 21st century campaign and McCain is fighting back to the best of his ability with 20th century 'tactics.' It is simply no contest...and with McCain desperate to win, he has resorted to exactly what he so loathed about Bush et al in 2000, losing his moral compass along the way. The real John McCain would grab back the reins of his campaign and finish with honor and dignity. We'll see...
i am admittedly abusing the fact that comments are enabled to go off topic and harass marc for pushing the acorn story - man, you are a solid journo, how are you abetting this garbage? i mean, geez, you acknowledge that the absolute worst possible implication of the acorn imbroglio is that verification of registration might be delayed. do you really think that's why the right is pushing the story? of course not, but any play it gets distracts from real issues and sets up the shameful prospect of voters being disenfranchised by gop freaks. you might think you're being impartial, but the truth is, you're being played. (p.s. i still totally respect you, just taken aback by the acorn play.)
this is in the future, in 30 more years.... in a election the periodist asked to the democratic front runner " why did you meet Osama Bin Laden in the living of his house and starting your politic carrer receiving, at the same time, money on that visit?" then his fundation gave you $100M to distribute between radical schools? Did you know that Osama Bin Laden killed thousand of US citizens mastering bomb in USA soil? Answer from that candidate, "at that time, when in Laden planned and executed the terrorist attack to the Towes, I was just 8 year old so, don't trown on me the old trick politic game and moving from the real issues for the USA people. Does it sound familiar for you? Here are some big differences:
Now that Palin has been found guilty do you think anyone will find her credible anymore? Voters will be more likely to think she's just trying to make herself look good in light of the Troopergate findings. Would would want to elect a very elderly President and know that if his health were to fail this corrupt governor would take the reins. No one smart enough to have graduated from high school I'd bet!
McCain's fair weather principles aside, it's hard to take someone seriously when he's bounced around like a dashboard Jesus since this economic crisis became more evident in the market. McCain's problems are the result of McCain's erratic decision-making and his complete disrespect for the intelligence of the American people. And now he's trying to make up for that with more disrespect. Here's hoping we've wised up some over the last eight years.
I think Michael S. was right to be skeptical. I think you, Marc, appear to have gone out of your way to give Macbeth (er, McCain) the benefit of the doubt with little regard for what the actual evidence was -- outside of your narrow interpretation of his "real" motives. Guess that tire swing is back in business!
I do believe that the McCain campaign believes in the Ayers "strategy". What I can't believe is that they think it will work.
Two things: First, like Generals who flawlessly prepare to fight the previous war, John McCain is attempting to run the campaign that defeated him in 2000. His takeaway from getting Roved seems to have been that base-pandering combined with ludicrous smears is the way to win (the less charitable way to view that is that he decided, after 2000, that honor and integrity were incompatible with electoral success, so he spent eight years shedding himself of those accoutrements). Second, I agree that the McCain's heavily news-cycle-based campaign has absolutely no chance of capturing the necessary amount of attention right now for those tactics to have any noticeable effect. When the entire planet's economy is imploding in real time, no amount of Ayers-waving or Wright-whispering is going to make a dent in the news cycle; and if you push it loud enough to try to make yourself heard over the sound of crashing markets, you end up looking really stupid, and really ugly, and really out-of-touch, and damaging your own campaign in the process. Just like when the world is on fire and there's actual news going on, CNN seems strangely disinclined to wibble on about shark attacks or missing white women or Britney Paris Lohan.
It is amusing to watch two McCain sympathizers chewing over their guts about his pathetic, dishonorable, dishonest campaign. You guys' stomachs must be tied up in knots! Hey, Marc, does this mean you've rediscovered your balls and will allow comments on your blog again?
I hate to admit it but McCain and Palin are liars. There's no doubt Palin was caught red handed! The McCain campaign prides itself on straight talk and while inquiring "Who is the real Barack Obama?". Maybe they can answer the question, who is the real Sarah Palin? The GOP has two candidates in the General Election with questionable judgement and temperment. This should have been the second time Sarah Palin was found guilty of Abuse of Power. The first time was when she demanded her teenage daughter to marry her boyfriend before the media realized she was pregnant. Coming from a female Republican, Sarah Palin was a horrible choice to put on the ticket. I'm removing my McCain-Palin 08 sign from my lawn. Sorry John McCain you lost my support.
is there some rule that american journalists are not permitted one iota of common sense? mccain has resorted to the sleaziest of sleaze campaigns and you twats post polite debate over whether he's serious? what self-important self-indulgent and laughably irrelevant wankers you are.
When will you people stop apologizing for McCain, as if he isn't in charge of his own campaign? Are you journalists or mind readers?Or are you a pair of hacks? To your credit, Ambinder, you're nowhere near as bad as Scherer.
McCain is ruining his legacy. He's dragging his campaign in the mud. He is looking more trivial, angry and out of touch with his sleazy distractions. Everyone knows 'it's the economy. . stupid.' And he's being stupid. If he keeps up this 'change the subject hooplah', he will not only lose the presidency, he'll lose his reputation. He is running an irratic, angry race and he may soon be irrelevant.
The economy crisis is a direct effect of the world running out of energy. We have taken for granted the large supply of energy we have to harvest on. The unfortunate reality is the fuel we have been burning for energy took millions of years to collect from dead living things, and we've used up over half of it in only 100 years. That is hitting our pocket. And us being stubborn, sticking to fossil fuels is causing us to hit a decline. This is no longer about what the government is doing to give people jobs to work. We need to save the world's energy sources which will save our economy. We've hit peak production of fossil fuels. My Thermodynamics book warned me of this that it could be as early as 2010. The writer wasn't kidding. We're seeing it already. The problem isn't when we run out, it's when our supply decreases in production. Prices jack up and everyone flops on their face. What we need is to jump on the renewable fuels soon. But we need to save our fossil fuels as a backup. We need to adopt a chain of nuclear power plants to replace the fossils. This would be the best way to get rid of the coal burning plants. Keep coal around for when we really need it. We have nuclear ability, why aren't we using it? It's clean. It's efficient. And best of all, MUCH more powerful. Once the nuclear power is established, and coal plants torn down, we can then move onto hydro dams. Rivers are the ultimate source of free energy. Next up is wind power. And then the alt energy sources all go down-hill from there. I would grab onto the ocean waves power if off the shore. This is a neat way to take energy from the moon. Yes, waves our powered by the moon. But all the other junk: Solar: should only be used for portable applications such as going into space. Not efficient enough, takes up too much space, and unreliable. Not to mention it requires too many materials. Geothermal: plain and simply sucks. It will take too much research to make it worth anything. And it will never power anything big. So this is a basic outline of what we need to do. And how will it happen? I'm doubting Obama is going to just start stacking our nation with nuclear energy. He's going to try and jump into the renewable energies too quickly, costing us higher bills in paying for all the coal we're burning during the process and polluting the world. Like I said, renewable need to comes after nucelar. Renewables on their own are not powerful enough to just take over everything. We need consistent energy first. Mccain will give us the building blocks to push into the clean energy sources. He's definitely set on nuclear power and he is very right to want to. I really hope he'll win the vote this election so we can approach this the right way. Energy is the world's greatest problem right now. You can cry about economy all you want. But it's energy sources which are our concern. We're running out, and we need to act NOW. Fix the energy crisis now, and the economy fixes right along with it.
McCain has been a Republican office-holder for 26 years, representing a state that until recently was well to the right of the rest of the country. If he's surprised to see racism, xenophobia, religious bigotry and demonization of opponents boiling over in the Republican base, then he has been oblivious to a trend that has been building in his party throughout his political career. Given his unconcealed contempt for Obama in the debates, his call for "respectful" treatment now sounds insincere. Having let loose the rabid dogs, McCain is not going to be able to call them off at this late stage. Even if he manages to win the election, his reputation is permanently soiled by his campaign's tactics.
|
Subscribe to this blog by Email Twitter || On Facebook || QIK Live Channel  Recent Posts
Monthly Archives
|
| 
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
You guys are totally in the tank for... bloviating.
We have to operate from the assumption that McCain is in charge of his own campaign. His campaign is wearing at the edges and getting worse. He never had strong ideas, never had a tough primary challenge. He is an ego-maniac who demonizes everyone against him. You media folks always loved him, but the rest of nation was never as sold. We still don't know him.McCain's descent is not just the economy--it is the product of bad decisions, bad management and confused (lack of) vision.It happened to Hillary and the media largely ignored her mistakes. Stop ignoring McCain's mistakes. Stop apologizing for him. His false "honor" is a construct. Snatching some crazy woman's microphone and saying "Be nice" is not honor. McCain is reaping what he and Palin sow. Good riddance.Posted by Joe Justice | October 10, 2008 7:56 PM