Out of Touch

This is the first add from Progressive Media, the David Brock-helmed independent expenditure group that's supposed to whack John McCain while Clinton and Obama continue to duke it out:

When you think about how potentially damaging something as basic as "John McCain agrees with George W. Bush about important issues" could be as an attack, it's a stark reminder of how bad the fundamentals are for the Republicans. I would, however, somewhat prefer to see early attacks focus on McCain's disastrous thinking on national security issues -- the economy argument is very easy to make, so it's more important to get started on the more difficult task of making the case that for all the honor of McCain's military service, it's left him with a reckless and absurd strategic vision.

Comments

I disagree, Matt. I think you start off with less emotionally-charged issues, and establish the Bush-McCain linkage - get the viewers used to linking the two, then when you introduce the hotter stuff later, it's already ingrained.

Posted by Brautigan | April 15, 2008 10:17 AM

How about pointing out that McCain has "a reckless and absurd strategic vision" without attributing it to his honorable military service?

Fucking Democrats.

Posted by aleks | April 15, 2008 10:24 AM

Although I a lurve Democrats unlike aleks, I would say that aleks is right in that it is better to delink the whole military service issue. After all, Kerry's and Webb's military service had a big impact on them, but did not get them to go runnin' around the bend like McCain on the interventionalist stuff.

Posted by Dean Chung | April 15, 2008 10:29 AM

They're both of right. The fundamental underpinnings of Federal Reserve bail outs means investment bankers will continue to see a strong economy. I think that was one of the hands.

Posted by asl | April 15, 2008 10:30 AM

I. Love. That. Ad.

That is good stuff. The word-for-word correspondence between McCain and Bush says so much more than just having a scary-voiced narrator intone that "McCain agrees with Bush that the economy is OK". It really ties McCain to Shrubby in a very visceral way.

Posted by CT | April 15, 2008 10:31 AM

McCain, like Bush went into his daddy's business. Like Bush, he wasn't exactly a rousing success:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_11_16/ai_61361646

http://forums.military.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/8430006241001/m/1250002671001

The question I'm waiting for any Repub to answer is this: Other than suck Bush's and Pat Robertson's dicks (metaphorically, of course), what, exactly, has John McCain done in the past eight years to reverse your party leaders' stance--taken during the primary campaign in 2000--that McCain is too crazy to be president?

Posted by Jamey | April 15, 2008 10:32 AM

Dean,
I'd lurve us a lot more if we didn't go so far out of our way to deliver the country into Republican hands every time.

Posted by aleks | April 15, 2008 10:38 AM

In addition to what other commenters have said, I want to point out that right now the number one issue for most Americans is the economy.

Overall foreign policy is something that is too nuanced right now to talk about in a single ad.

Plus, since the strongest argument for McCain revolves around his military service and patriotism, attacking anything that somehow relates to that would have a negative backlash.

Posted by john m | April 15, 2008 10:41 AM

aleks-- yeah so sad but true, definitely feel like the Dem pols could do a little better job of not getting beaten up. Would have really helped the last several years.

Posted by Dean Chung | April 15, 2008 10:44 AM

Who cares about stuff like the economy and the war when we're running the risk of having an elitist as our next president?

Posted by Bill | April 15, 2008 10:49 AM

A Muslim-Atheist Elitist who scorns religious people while going to a Black Panther Church.

Posted by aleks | April 15, 2008 10:53 AM

Fuck my country over all you want, just DON'T BE CONDESCENDIN' ME!!!

Posted by Bill | April 15, 2008 10:58 AM

Anyone you would commit this country to an endless conflict in an immoral war makes me question his so called military service honor.

Posted by Jessee | April 15, 2008 11:20 AM

I think the spot is pretty good, as far as it goes...

But this is pretty much the same mistake the Democrats made in several past election cycles, notably 2004---focus on the economy but hide from foreign policy. Didn't seem to work...

Look, folks, AIPAC basically owns most of the Democratic Party, and it (mostly) agrees with McCain's position on Iraq. So Democrats are really, really nervous about claiming that McCain's position on Iraq isn't fairly moderate, even though it's actually completely nuts.

That's a real problem for the Democrats. But maybe Matt will sell so many copies of his book, he'll get rich enough to buy back the Democrats back from AIPAC...

Posted by RKU | April 15, 2008 11:54 AM

Nice jab. It's a good start.

I like that it's not a personal attack against McCain, which would only give him a platform to rebut & reinforce his popular mythical biography and make the focus all about Him. The Dems can't let McCain get away with perpetuating the myth that he is somehow not the same kind of Republican as the ones who have bankrupted the American dream and tarnished American standing abroad. This election has to be about reality: the real world consequences of Republican principles, values and policies in action, and the unthinkable consequences of allowing them to stay in control of the Executive, the Congress, or the Judiciary. This election has to be about the positive changes that Democratic leadership will make in redirecting national priorities in accord with the progressive aspirations that the majority of Americans actually share.

When asked which party they trust to handle the economy, more than half (54%) of voters say the Dem party. Looking at who voters believe has a better chance of winning the Nov. election, a generic Dem or a generic GOPer, the Dem holds a 17% lead, according to a Hotline/Natl Journ poll released earlier this month. However, this is down from the Dem's 31% lead in February. McCain's favorables are up, esp among independents. Clearly, the "myth of the maverick" is working: more people think McCain is somehow different than other Republicans, and they're more likely to trust him. Best way to bust the myth is to show - in his own words - how much more of the same he really is.

This media campaign has to hit hard nationally, to start poking holes in the McCain Myth. I hope it airs on national cable channels - they've gotta target the bitter white guys who get suckered into thinking about gay marriage rather than remembering who's responsible for the policies that hurt working families; or thinking about some vague NRA-inspired threat to the 2nd amendment rather than about who lost all those guns & money in the Iraqi desert...

p.s. where do I send my $25?

Posted by eliot | April 15, 2008 11:56 AM

Right-on to those who say delink his reckless policy from his military service, that is insane.

Posted by bruce | April 15, 2008 1:11 PM

aleks, you left out Marxist.

Posted by Gus | April 15, 2008 1:39 PM

not to be a spelling nazi but correct the first sentence and feel free to delete this post

Posted by DaMav | April 15, 2008 2:39 PM

I disagree as well.
This is TV, not print. Show, not tell. Wordy is bad, and this ad isn't wordy.

Early advertising should be "teaser"-like, in that they set up the core "memes simply and effectively. The core meme against McCain is "more of the same failed ideas from a sycophantic little Bush toady". So it's better to set it up with simpler things like this, and then fill it out with more substantial examples later.

(Examples that stay the hell away from the "war hero" stuff. Don't acknowledge it, don't denigrate it. If asked, just say that the real issue is his failed ideas in the 21st century, not his service record in the 20th. "he's a hero, but he's wrong" is ludicrously wrongheaded. "He's wrong". Full stop.)

Posted by Demosthenes | April 15, 2008 4:16 PM

I disagree about ignoring his war record. He's RUNNING on his war record. That's his whole concept: that nobody will question his Iraq (and Iran) war plans OR his economic nonsense because he's a "war hero".

Read here:

What does it mean to call McCain a 'war hero' candidate?
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0414/p09s01-coop.html

Either you disable that "war here" crap or you concede the election.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | April 15, 2008 7:40 PM

I disagree about ignoring his war record. He's RUNNING on his war record. That's his whole concept: that nobody will question his Iraq (and Iran) war plans OR his economic nonsense because he's a "war hero".

Read here:

What does it mean to call McCain a 'war hero' candidate?
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0414/p09s01-coop.html

Either you disable that "war hero" crap or you concede the election.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | April 15, 2008 7:41 PM

Oops, tried to stop it, not fast enough. Rarely you can stop a post to edit it if you hit the cancel button fast enough, didn't work this time.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | April 15, 2008 7:44 PM