A portrait in political suicide
Did McCain go down for the last time?
A portrait in political suicide
Dick Polman, Inquirer National Political Columnist
It was approximately 9:54 p.m., Eastern Standard Time, on the 15th of October, when John McCain set fire to his hair and took a hammer to his fading candidacy, smashing it to smithereens.
Until that moment in the final presidential debate, he had actually performed fairly well. He had played offense against Barack Obama without being offensive; in other words, he had basically hewed to the issues.
For instance, he had seized on Obama's recent Ohio conversation with the gentleman known officially as Joe Wurzelbacher - known forevermore as Joe the Plumber - and he got some mileage out of that, because Joe the Plumber has aspirations to be a small businessman making more than $250,000, and, under Obama's tax plan, Joe the Plumber could face an increase in his marginal tax rate. McCain needled Obama about all that - which, as political rhetoric goes, is fair enough, given the traditional Republican belief that nobody's taxes should ever go up. And as the debate topics shifted, McCain remained assertive, saying that Obama the so-called reformer had actually supported a whole range of earmark pork-barrel projects, including "$3 million for an overhead projector" in a Chicago planetarium. Granted, the average debate-watcher was probably sick of hearing McCain bang away about earmarks, and, granted, that "overhead projector" McCain keeps mentioning is actually a sophisticated device that projects 4,500 stars on the dome of a renowned city planetarium that attracts 400,000 visitors a year, the first time the device has been upgraded in 40 years...but at least McCain was sticking to issues, and keeping his emotions on low boil.
But then, as the hour neared 10 p.m., his simmering cup runneth over. He took the bait. And he probably lost this election.
It happened shortly after moderator Bob Schieffer dangled Bill Ayers in front of McCain. Schieffer told him, "Your running mate said (that Obama) palled around with terrorists," and invited McCain to say it to Obama's face. For a couple minutes there, it appeared that McCain would let the matter rest, that he would not waste the viewer's time playing guilt-by-association. That would have been the smart move. McCain has been hustling the Obama-Ayers "link" for weeks now - Ayres, an extremist antiwar bomber back in the late '60s, served with Obama on several Chicago education projects during the '90s - and the more he tries to make it stick, the lower he sinks in the polls. The more that he and Sarah Palin try to paint Obama as a terrorist fellow traveler, the more Obama's favorability rating goes up. And if that wasn't enough to deter McCain from his doomed tactic, perhaps this item should have been persuasive: The latest CBS News-New York Times survey reports that 56 percent of Americans dismiss the Ayres link as inconsequential. Want to guess what percent of Americans view the Ayers link as a serious issue detrimental to Obama? Nine.
Unsolicited futile memo to McCain: People. Do. Not. Care.
And yet, in the end, McCain went for it anyway. It was basically a suicidal move, since most voters have already dismissed McCain as excessively negative, but let us remember that McCain also has to serve his core constituency. His right-wing supporters have been demanding that McCain wield Ayers as a weapon, and, as we know by now (the Palin pick being the best example), McCain dances to the conservatives' tune. He'll never win this election with just his base; on other hand, if he doesn't sufficiently kowtow, his base won't show up to vote, either.
So he took the plunge: "I don't care about an old, washed-up terrorist. But...we need to know the full extent of that relationship." Whereupon Obama, who knew this moment was coming, proceeded to take McCain apart:
"Bill Ayers is a professor of education in Chicago. Forty years ago, when I was eight years old, he engaged in despicable acts with a radical domestic group. I have roundly condemned those acts. Ten years ago, he and I served on a board that was funded by one of Ronald Reagan's former ambassadors and close friends, Mr. Annenberg. Other members on that board were the presidents of the University of Illinois; the president of Northwestern University, who happens to be a Republican; the president of the Chicago Tribune, a Republican-leaning newspaper. Mr. Ayers is not involved in my campaign. He has never been involved in this campaign. And he will not advise me in the White House."
That was part one of the response. Note the fact that Ayres served on that board with a number of Republicans, none of whom seemed to be discomfited by Ayers' crimes nearly 30 years earlier. Obama also could have mentioned that Annenberg's widow is a current donor to the McCain campaign, and Obama could have mentioned that another McCain donor - Arnold Weber, a former officer at the Commercial Club of Chicago - also had no problem serving on a board with Ayers, but perhaps Obama wanted to get to the rest of his response. It came a few moments later:
"(T)he allegation that Senator McCain has continually made is that somehow my associations are troubling. Let me tell you who I associate with. On economic policy, I associate with Warren Buffett and former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker. If I'm interested in figuring out my foreign policy, I associate myself with my running mate, Joe Biden, or with Dick Lugar, the Republican ranking member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee or General Jim Jones, the former supreme allied commander of NATO. Those are the people, Democrats and Republicans, who have shaped my ideas and who will be surrounding me in the White House. And I think the fact that this has become such an important part of your campaign, Senator McCain, says more about your campaign than it says about me."
Obama accomplished a lot in part two. He essentially said that, while McCain wants to dredge up 1969, he prefers to talk about the people with whom he plans to associate in 2009. He even addressed the "inexperience" factor by naming some of the experienced people who will advise him. He hit the bipartisan theme by citing Dick Lugar. He hit the commander-in-chief theme by citing Jim Jones. And, in his final remark, he put the onus back on McCain.
That should have been the end of it. But no. McCain still wouldn't let it go. He had looked twitchy and jumpy from the opening minutes - and it was glaringly obvious when contrasted with Obama's cool - but his agitation seemed worse as he dug his hole ever deeper:
"Well, again, while you were on the board of the Woods Foundation, you and Mr. Ayers together, you sent $230,000 to ACORN. So - and you launched your political campaign in Mr. Ayers' living room...The facts are the facts, and records are records."
It went on like that a bit longer. But the thing is, the average swing voter doesn't know or care what the Woods Foundation is (nor did McCain tell them), and doesn't know or care about ACORN. The average swing voter knows and cares about the bills piling up on the kitchen table. And as for that line about how Obama "launched" his '95 state Senate campaign in Ayers' living room....McCain was lying again (a common occurrence lately, as I have repeatedly detailed). The actual fact is, Obama launched his state Senate run on Sept. 19, 1995...at the Hyde Park Ramada Inn. Ayers did host a coffee get-together for Obama, but it was only one of many held in Obama's neighborhood.
Most interestingly, here's how McCain finished regaling us with Ayers: "The American people will make a judgment. And my campaign is about getting this economy back on track, about creating jobs, about a brighter future for America. And that's what my campaign is about." That's quite a segue. He goes from dark insinuations to "a brighter future" in the blink of an eye. The dark insinuations were for the conservative base. The optimism line was for the independent swing voters. He somehow thinks that he can attract both with this kind of message whiplash.
But the early verdict is in already. CNN/Opinion Research Corporation reports this morning that, among debate-watching independents, 57 percent scored Obama the winner, and only 31 percent chose McCain. Over at CBS News, the pollster reported that, among uncommitted debate-watchers, 53 percent sided with Obama, and only 22 percent favored McCain. The GOP candidate's last major opportunity to reverse the dynamics of this race has now come and gone.
Marshall McLuhan, the famed sociologist, wrote that TV is a "cool" medium, one that is inhospitable to "hot" personalities. It won't do any good, but some Republican with clout would be well advised to inform the Bush alumni in charge of McCain's campaign that, at least this year, there's no way Americans will elect a guy who acts like he needs anger management.
.
Here come The McCainiac-yak-yak-yak-yaks! To tell Polman he is a hack, a liar, an Obama supporter; but we all know he lacks good old-fashioned conservative core values. You're either RIGHT or wrong.— Talvenada- The picture of the two candidates next to each other was striking. It was a very personal camera view, and it was more like a conversation than the other debates. But what was that weird bracelet on McCain's wrist?— Logathis
- I beleive the bracelet has the name of a service member inscribed on it and Obama wears one as well. We used to wear them for the POWs and MIAs during Vietnam. The idea being when they returned you could send the returning service member the bracelet. I still have mine, the service members remains were never found. More to the point I missed the exchange that is cited here but it's about time someone called McCain and Palin on their smears. I was busy watching the Phillies clinch! Go Phils!
- Thank you John S. McCain, you may go to bed now. You job (and political career and legacy) are done. You just elected us President Obama!!!!— rallyrally
- Poor McCain. He claims to be "proud" of "ready-to-be-president" Sarah Palin and her experience with autism (although her infant son has Down syndrome). He was staunch in his defense of the virtue of the wonderful people who attend his campaign events (where they are incited by said running mate to spew vile hate). And like Claude Rains in Casablance, he was shocked, shocked that anyone would invoke the name of George Wallace to describe his campaign's transparent and calculated appeals to bigots and xenophobes. Methinks he doth protest way too much. The McCain camp likes to deride Obama's eloquence and community organizer past with the snide claim that he's never managed anything. Well, Obama managed an effective and (apparently) successful campaign for president with a steady hand, consistent messages and inspiring vision. McCain, on the other hand, has mismanaged his own incoherent campaign, lurching from one ineffective tactic to another, failing to articulate a compelling reason we should vote FOR McCain, and concentrating instead on why we should vote AGAINST Obama. McCain has no one to blame but himself for the meltdown of his presidential aspirations. He's been running for president since 2000 and still can't tell us why he's better for the country than Obama or how he differs from Bush. Now we'll never know, thank the Lord!— Dogyeller
- It will be interesting to see how the final 3+ weeks plays out. Obama is really our only choice to lead us out of the Bush recession.— ModerateMarge
- Polman is such a hack. And all of you who expect anything to change are in for a rude awakening. The government spends too much and constantly raises taxes regardless of who is in charge. Every year the threshold for social security is raised. so both me and my employer have to pay more each and every year. Maybe a percent to two is saved on income tax only to be walluped by a massive property increase at the local level. Either way the government always collects more yet get deeper and deeper in debt by creating more programs and the burearacracy. To all of you- if you need health care go out and get a friggin job! Even Wawa and Walmart provide health care. To sit around and think the government will do anything positive for you is plain stupid. For example everytime the government provides a subsidy or tax break for higher education the Universities raise their tuition by almost the exact amount of tax break or subisidy. Wake up people and stop counting on these fools to do anything for you. The federal government is there to provide for the common defense-nothing more and nothing less
- What a joke of a commentary. Polman is so in the tank.— CD75
- The great and almighty Obama has come down from the heavens to save us all from ourselves. If he says he can do it, he will because he is not of this Earth. We must beleive him without question, because if you question him you are a racist. Obama is the divine and will being utopia for all. No one need to work ever again because "some rich guy" will pay for us all. Tax cuts for all, new social progams, but the deficit will go down. The evil and dumb repubs will be banished. All war on Earth will end because Obama says so. So let it be written, so let it be done.— CD75
- I am watching the debate now as I used last night to watch the Phils game with my two sons. However, a funny clip was played on MSNBC this morning. It was Biden, saying "Baracks plan is about something simple, a three letter word J O B S." Three letter word....JOBS.— tom - wilmington, de
- I'm glad Obama had the opportunity to effectively respond to the Ayers "connection" with McCain present, and I'm glad Schieffer mentioned Palin's comments at this debate.— p-diddy
- CD75: I thought Sarah Palin was the Chosen One. Obama is the Elected One.— p-diddy
- Obamaism and Polmanism: only the government can save us from ourselves and better our lives. The problem with knuckleheads like Polman and Obama is that they are saying the people are too dumb and stupid to help themselves and make their own lives better. Thus, Obama and Polman create a culture and society of sheep who wait around for their sheepherder to come and solve all our problems. The sheep become emotionally and fiancially tied to their sheepherder. The sheep believe that if they make a mistake or a lazy, the sheepherder will save them. The sheep worship their sheepherder by wearling t-shirts with his picture on it with the word "Hope". The sheep don't think for themselves, because they have been promised everything by their sheepherder. The sheep become dependent on their sheepherder for everything, including their self-esteem. The sheepherder is perfect to the sheep, because he tells them what they want to hear: everything will be okay because the sheepherder knows what is best for you. The sheep are weak and frail, but do not know it because the sheepherder tells them he will take care of them.— CD75
- Republican conservatives continue to promulgate myths about federal taxes, which they in fact might sincerely believe. Fact: the top marginal federal tax rate has steadily declined since World War II. It went as far down as 28% under the 1986 act. In order to do this, that law (promoted by Sen. Bill Bradley) taxed all income, including capital gains, at the same rate. The Wall St folks quickly lobbied Congress into re-adopting a capital gains tax break, resulting in a tax shortfall and a deficit, which then under the older Bush resulted in the famous "read my lips" increase in the top rate to 35%. Clinton added a 39% rate, which had no apparent damaging effect on jobs or the economy. Bush II adopted the current scheme, due to expire by its own terms in 2011, which rolled the top rate back to his Dad's 35% but also added massive dividend and capital gains breaks. Since the budget has been in deficit, these breaks are, in effect, tax increases on our children and grandchildren.— liberal
- P-diddy, yes, Obama may be the elected one, but he is being elected by a large flock of sheep.— CD75
Cited by the Columbia Journalism Review as one of the nation's top political reporters, and lauded by the ABC News political website as "one of the finest political journalists of his generation," Dick Polman is a national political columnist at the Philadelphia Inquirer. He is on the full-time faculty at the University of Pennsylvania, as "writer in residence." Dick has been a frequent guest on C-Span, MSNBC, CNN, NPR and the BBC. He covered the 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004 presidential campaigns.
ARCHIVES
All commentaries posted before April 18, 2008, can be accessed at www.dickpolman.blogspot.com.
- American Spectator
- David Limbaugh
- Free Republic
- Glenn Reynolds
- Hugh Hewitt
- Human Events
- John Hawkins
- Matt Lewis
- Michelle Malkin
- National Review
- Opinion Journal
- Power Line
- Red State
- The Brody File
- The Daily Caller
- Town Hall
- Weekly Standard
- Center for American Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- Daily Kos
- David Corn
- Huffington Post
- Media Matters
- Mojoblog (Mother Jones)
- Open Left
- Political Animal
- Salon's War Room
- Talking Points Memo
- Tapped
- The Democratic Strategist
- The Grey Matter
- Unclaimed Territory
- Andrew Sullivan
- Attytood
- Chi Tribune's The Swamp
- CJR's Campaign Desk
- CNN's Political Ticker
- CQ Politics
- FactCheck.org
- Gail Collins
- Howard Kurtz
- Mickey Kaus
- NBC's First Read
- Obit
- Political Wire
- Politico
- Politics Daily
- Pollster.com
- Real Clear Politics
- The Atlantic Wire
- The Fix
- The Moderate Voice
- The Plank
- USA Today On Politics
- Wonkette
