Matthew Yglesias (July 06, 2008) - Steve Schmitt Demotion Watch (Politics)

« The Party of Helms | Main | By Request: Counterfactuals »

Steve Schmitt Demotion Watch

06 Jul 2008 10:59 am

Anway, let me now go on the record to say that another McCain staff shake-up is, if not inevitable, very likely. McCain's staff is just too factionalized to remain stable unless McCain is consistently winning. And Schmidt is a Bush 2004 veteran who lacks the deep emotional ties to the candiate that other McCainiacs have. I predict that at some point, probably just before or just after the convention, there will be a move to "Let McCain be McCain," and new boss Steve Schmidt will be replaced with either John Weaver or Mike Murphy, to try to recreate the magic of the 2000 campaign.

It took all the way until July 7 for this story to surface in the NYT:

“I think the depressingly self-absorbed McCain campaign machine needs to get out of the way,” said Mike Murphy, a longtime friend and media adviser who has no role in the current operation but who still talks to Mr. McCain every few days. “They need to just let McCain be McCain.”

Schmitt better close that lead in a hurry.

Permalink :: Comments (9) ::

Comments (9)

"It took all the way until July 7 for this story to surface in the NYT..."

(Still the sixth.)

Posted by tom | July 6, 2008 11:41 AM

This whole debate about how much grooming McCain requires is the mark of a doomed campaign.

What Steve Schmidt is thinking is: "We're going to lose, but I want to at least show my future employers that I did my best with a damaged product."

And what Mike Murphy is thinking is: "McCain's going to lose, but you might as well let him enjoy himself in the process."

Posted by lampwick | July 6, 2008 11:50 AM

Didn't Murphy or Weaver officially change his registration to Democrat over the way Rove and Bush treated McCain in 2000? And then act as McCain's point man in the failed Veep negotiations with Kerry in '04?

Inside baseball, I know, but not the kind of stuff that makes donors happy.

Posted by Jim | July 6, 2008 12:48 PM

I may be demonstrating my ignorance, but did Sorkin come up with the "let Bartlett be Bartlett" slogan or did he crib it from prior campaigns. For all I know, the Whigs were saying "let Fillmore be Fillmore" back in the 1850's.

Posted by Led | July 6, 2008 2:09 PM

I believe the original was "let Reagan be Reagan" but I don't know the context.

Posted by ResumeMan | July 6, 2008 2:29 PM

Yeah, "let Reagan be Reagan" was a rallying cry of conservatives back in the 80s.

Posted by Matthew Yglesias | July 6, 2008 2:57 PM

Yeah, Jim, Weaver was the one who switched and then did the Kerry thing.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/democrats-say-mccain-nearly-abandoned-gop-2007-03-28.html

Posted by Sam | July 6, 2008 4:43 PM

"Let McCain be McCain"

Yes, by all means let him be the temperamental, tired, psychotic, ignorant, senile old fool that he is.

We need him to lose.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | July 6, 2008 5:54 PM