Swinging for the fences
Can McCain connect is the final debate?
Swinging for the fences
Dick Polman, Inquirer National Political Columnist
Which sounds like more compelling television tonight: the Philadelphia Phillies questing for their first World Series in 15 years - or John McCain trying to demonstrate that, politically speaking, he still has a pulse?
Granted, that's a no-brainer...particularly since the odds tonight of McCain hitting a titanic Matt Stairs home run, and sending Barack Obama to the showers in their third and final debate, and thereby reversing the dynamics of this presidential race, are roughly equivalent to the odds of Sarah Palin giving voice to an original, coherent thought.
But since I'm nonetheless drawn to the game where the winner gets the world's most powerful job, a few advance observations seem appropriate. And, given where the race stands today, let's keep it simple:
If McCain is to gain any meaningful ground on Obama, he needs to demonstrate that he is credible on the economy. Judging by all the national and key state polls, it may well be too late for McCain already. But this is his sole path to the comeback trail. He either swings for the fences and clears the yard, or he's done.
The conservative base is thirsting for McCain to confront Obama tonight on character, and presumbly expose Obama as a terrorist fellow-traveler, but this advice is vivid proof that the Republican right is out of touch this autumn with the American mainstream. Most people don't care about Bill Ayres. They're focused these days on their 401(k)s, not on whether Obama did a school project with a guy who committed crimes when Obama was eight.
The new CBS News-New York Times poll, released last night, confirms what other surveys have signaled for weeks: The more McCain attacks Obama, the more McCain sinks. The new poll reports that, while 72 percent of Americans have not changed their opinion of McCain during the past few weeks, 21 percent say they now think less of him, while only seven percent think better of him. Why? Because of his attacks on Obama, which are cited as the primary reason.
When these pollsters did their last survey, during the third week in September, 43 percent of Americans viewed Obama favorably; today, 50 percent view him favorably (his highest percentage yet), while 32 percent view him negatively. By contrast, only 36 percent now view McCain favorably, and 41 percent view him negatively. That five-point deficit is the worst McCain showing in a CBS-Times poll since the summer of 2007, when his candidacy was thought to be dead. Back then, however, he still had ample time to recover. Not anymore. The poll, which reports that Obama now leads leading McCain among likely voters by 14 points, also notes that 83 percent of Americans have made up their minds and don't expect to change them - an eight-point jump over the past three weeks.
Impressions, once formed, are difficult to change at the eleventh hour. The public, watching the first two debates, has basically decided that Obama's temperament is far better suited for crisis leadership. Even the Fox News surveys report this. Given this reality, the Obama camp should exult tonight if McCain makes good on his threat to bring up Bill Ayres. What better gift for Obama than to have McCain deliver the kind of attack that will further alienate swing voters?
What's also astounding - and symptomatic of the McCain campaign's tactical ineptitude - is that McCain has telegraphed the Ayres punch in advance. Now, if McCain doesn't bring it up, he looks timid. And if he does bring it up (or moderater Bob Schieffer brings it up), Obama will deliver a well-rehearsed response (thanks to the advance telegraphing) that likely will sound something like this: "Senator McCain, you seem to think it's important to bring up deplorable crimes that were committed when I was a child. You've also said, in your ads, that I served with Mr. Ayres on a 'radical' reform project. Well, that project was called the Annenberg Challenge. It was established by a prominent Republican - whose widow, Sen. McCain, is a donor to your campaign. Look, it's time you stopped trying to change the subject, although I understand why you do. One of your own strategists recently told the press, 'If we keep talking about the economic crisis, we'll lose.' But senator, the economic crisis is what most Americans care about. So I'll keep talking about that, even of you won't."
McCain has no choice but to contest Obama on issues turf that favors the Democrat. He gave it a try yesterday, sketching out an economic agenda that included lower capital gains taxes (a weird notion, since virtually nobody has capital gains these days), and a proposal to exempt unemployment insurance from taxes (a proposal that Obama already floated on Monday). Most interestingly, McCain did not propose a broadscale middle-class tax cut - something that conservatives have been pleading for him to do. Only Obama has proposed such a tax cut. You know that McCain must be in trouble when a new national poll (ABC News-Washington Post) reports that the Democrat, by an 11-point margin, is viewed as the candidate who is most trustworthy on the issue of taxes.
A conservative commentator, Stephen Hayes, put it best the other day. He wrote, "John McCain's campaign has no discernable central theme, no succinct answer to the most basic question voters ask as they consider their choice: Why should I choose you over the other guy?"
Either McCain effectively answers that question tonight, or he hangs up his spikes.
-------
By the way, I'm doing a special online gig during the debate. Readers will be able to post live questions to me, and I hope to respond (to the sane ones, of my choosing) in real time. The link is here, although you can find it in graphic display on my home page, situated directly below this post.
If anyone wants to be concerned about real issues, why would Obama want to taxes Joe the plumber? He wants to spread Joe's wealth around. He said it right to his face. Anyone else think Joe pays too much money and should pay higher taxes. Also, why does Obama keep saying the 95% of Americans lie since the bottom 40% don't pay income taxes. The fact is he is giving them a credit, not a deduction. Which means he is taking from one and giving to another; taken from Joe the plumber. We'll have the biggest welfare state in the world. http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/13/obama-plumber-plan-spread-wealth/ http://www.nypost.com/seven/10152008/postopinion/editorials/obama_tells_the_tax_truth_133633.htm— thelastRepublicaninPhilly- AHiredGun...I too am still here. I just read the post. McCain said the other day that he does not give a d*mn about Ayers being a terrorist or what Ayers did back in the 1960's. He cares about Obama not being forthright with the American people from the get go about his relationship with Ayers. Just as Obama is not disassociating himself with ACORN, he tried to disassociate himself with Ayers. Now Obama is running ads saying Ayers will not be a part of his administration...which, if this attack is having a negative effect on McCain it seems strange Obama would feel compelled to do. Saying Obama was only 8 years old when Ayers committed is act is like me saying I can follow a Nazi because, after all, I wasn't even born when Hitler committed his acts of terror and genocide. I would much rather see McCain call Obama out on all the lies and distortions in his ads about McCain's plans and record. I would much rather see McCain call Obama out on his lack of leadership on the mortgage issue, voting for some legislation instead of just writing a letter to the Sec of Treasury (big deal...a letter). I personally believe Obama will bring up Ayers. Isn't it funny that whenever anyone ask Obama about any of his past, it is a distraction. What does he have to hide?— tom - wilmington, de
- puttinonthefoil, will the terrorist William Ayers be invited to the white house? Will the racist preacher Wright be invited to the white house? If you think no, why would you think that? These two have been major influences in Obama's life. Do you think ACORN is right in registering phony votes? Would you not be in a rage if ACORN was working for McCain? It doens't matter what Obama says about ACORN, they are still working for him. Just think about that. Don't you think that might be an issue to some people?— thelastRepublicaninPhilly
- lastrepublican...the real lie is that Obama's tax cut is not really a tax cut, but just a bunch of "refundable" tax credits. So, if you pay mortgage interest, you can get a mortgage interest credit, but if you do not pay a mortgage, you get no credit. He has a "make work pay" credit where he is just giving people either $500 or $1,000...which amounts to a giveaway. He wants to expand the Earned Income Credit. Obama has no cut in rates, just a bunch of credits. That is not a tax cut.— tom - wilmington, de
- (Sigh) ... the ususal unhinged morons posting with the same, tired, debunked lies over and over again, day after day, insisting on posing "questions" to which answers have been given or aren't worthy of. Why can they not get it that NO ONE cares about these issues. What is your point in trying to make something out them, ad nauseam, without insight, research, substance, truth or value, etc??? Do you not have anything else? I really wish the editor of the comments here would weed you people out until you move on or get something new or relevant to post. My hope is that you'll just shrivel up in the corner with your thumbs in your mouths when we have our President-elect Obama on Nov 4th.— Waiting4U
- Can any of you Obama supporters tell me where Obama finished in his classes at either Columbia or Harvard? Did he accomplish anything or publish anything as president of the Law Review? Did he work on any major law cases...besides suing a bank in Chicago to give someone a subprime mortgage who had bad credit and low income? How about as an Illinois State legislator....any major legislative accomplishments there? What did he work on in a bi-partisan manner while an Illinois state senator. How about as a U.S. Senator....any major legislation with his name on it? I mean besides nuclear proliferation...which evereybody favors controlling. What has Obama done that qualifies him to be president of the United States? Mark Halperin in today's WSJ admits the media has been too easy on Obama, so I was just wondering if any of you supporters can enlighten me.— tom - wilmington, de
- No tom, we're not going to enlighten you - can't you do your own research. Typical lazy McCian supporter.— Waiting4U
- waiting4u...I have done the research, and can find nothing. Your response only fortifies me that you cannot find anything either...you just hate Republicans and are swayed by soaring rhetoric...you would probably vote for a popsicle stick rather than a conservative republican. Typical Obama supporter answer.....which is no answer.— tom - wilmington, de
Comment removed.- McCain cannot win the "guilt by association" game so you shouldn't even try. His political career was bankrolled by convicted felon Charles Keating who gave us the Savings and Loan debacle and bailout, and which cost American taxpayers billions. One of McCain's biggest supporters was Pastor Hagee who has made a career out of spewing hateful things about Catholics, Jews and others. His pick to lead his transition team is a lobbyist who pushed to lift the sanctions against Iraq in the 1990s (and thus was, by definition, aiding and abetting Saddam Hussein). His running mate has direct and recent ties to a political party in Alaska that advocates for secession from the United States. His running mate has been found guilty of breaking a state ethics law. And at least a half-dozen top campaign advisers have been lobbyists with questionable ties (one was on Fannie Mae's payroll right up until the bailout). So, McCain can't win the "guilt by association" game. Let's just stick to the issues. And for me, the only one I need to remember is that McCain has consistently supported sending our troops into the black hole of Iraq. He has no plan or even definition of success over there and our $10 Billion a month, that could be building bridges and schools and roads and an effective health care system, is being poured down the drain in Iraq. Astonishingly, McCain sees absolutely no problem with this and that is why American voters are walking away from him.— djoseph
- Waiting4U, actually I have to give the comment editor some credit here. I've tried to post a few times on CNN.com and they were all rejected. Ever notice how they are all pro-Obama? Anyway, I even checked. I tried to post everything on CNN.com from simple comments (nothing negative) to simply McCain's name. Most had made it, but them promptly removed. Also, why are you here? I can't recall when you provided anything of substance. In fact it would be refreshing if the paper would write at least one positive McCain article, or a negative Obama article. Actually what will probably shrivel up in the corner with thumbs in thier mouths will be journalists, or people like you. They will have no one left to criticize. It will be all Obama's fault; it will be all democrats fault. Bush will be off limits just like Clinton was. The next 4 year will be economic hell for all of us no matter who gets in; however, McCain will have a recession but Obama would make it a depression. I'm being honest here, if McCain gets in Hillary has a really good shot. If Obama gets in, he and congress will be swept out and replaced with republicans. Either way, a plus for me.— thelastRepublicaninPhilly
- lonewolf, you're probably right with McCain being a one-term president. If Obama gets in there is no way Hillary will ever have a shot.— thelastRepublicaninPhilly
- djoseph, I respect you decision but the fact is that no president, not even if it was Obama, would run up our debt for infrastructure and healthcare. War time is one of the few times that deficeit spending is tolerated. I think it was Kennedy that started that. (That's not a dig at democrats, I like JFK and I only mention that for historical reference - please feel free to correct me if I was wrong about JFK and deficeit spending for military use). Yes, we are in a long war that no one likes. Iraq was a mess with Saddam in power, we made it a mess by removing him but we've done a pretty good job of cleaning the place up. It's not perfect and and great expense to US but my opinion is history will show this was a good move.— thelastRepublicaninPhilly
- Why wouldn't Ayers or Wright be welcomed at the White House? Both have done many other useful things with their lives beyond a few bad moments. I am in no way condoning their past remarks or actions; but, if they are indeed friends of Obama why not? They arent convicted felons. They are U.S. Citizens in good standing. And, just a jibe here, they have sent far less people to their death than the current inhabitant of the White House -- and probably killed far less people than McCain. Would you want to have held against you every person you have ever had an association with? I have many friends, many different backgrounds, and pasts. I would hate to think that their actions would ever reflect upon me, as a person, as being unable to do anything. The lie that is being held alive here is that Obama has not been honest with the people about Ayers and/or Wright; when, in fact he has. He has made no move to hide them, what more exactly does McCain want when he says "Obama needs to be more forethcoming about" these (friendships, associations, or whatever you want to call them). I can find nowhere that Obama has lied or been anything less than honest with the American people. This is why McCain's candidacy holds no water -- because there are too many easily assailable holes in it.— Master Dreamz
- I think I can understand how people whose life experience has been very narrow could be upset about the Ayres/Wright/etc/ thing in Obama's life, but I don't see how anybody who has lived a reasonable middle-class life in the USA would find anything there worth bothering about. More fundamentally, how important is it what a politician "really" believes? Most people, and especially politicians, live a carefully constructed life that hardly resembles what actually goes on in their heads. It's the public side that counts; consider Lincoln, FDR, Jefferson, LLoyd George, you name it.— liberal
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
