McCain to use the Democrat-supporting blogs against Obama
Fraser Nelson 4:26pm
The stature of the blogs is a striking feature of the American elections. There are more of them, and some of the best journalists now working exclusively online (which means there are several news cycles in a day, and newspapers are outdated by 9am). Sites like Politico have done a talent swoop; the Drudge Report is checked several times a day by most American journalists, used as a radar. Now there are attack dog sites: scores of them, eager to tear into the other side. The Daily Kos – described as “extreme left” by Fox – is one. But others, less well-known, go even further.
But in going after Palin’s family – with rumours about the parentage of Trig, her youngest child with Down syndrome – the blogs may now be starting to rebound on Obama. The Republicans have a strategy here of the “false proxy” where they say it’s the Democrats – not the blogs – which are mud-raking. Fred Thomson used this trick last night, effectively suggesting Obama is coming after Palin’s family. Obama immediately spotted the potency of this charge and – as James says – elegantly distanced himself from some attacks. But I hear the McCain team’s strategy today is to accuse Obama of a sexist double-standard, calling for peace on the record but sending out the attack dogs meanwhile. Belief in the vicious nature of the other side is a major stirring factor in campaigns. “Remember,” said one (female) strategist at a fringe event I was at, “the left would eat your two eyeballs as grapes if they could. So if you say ‘we can win’ you are complicit in an Obama victory. You must say ‘we will win’”.
In the 2004 presidential campaign it was the 527s, independent attack dogs with websites and TV adverts, which mopped up the attention. Kerry’s biggest single failure was not taking them seriously, specifically the Swift Boat Veterans For Truth. This time, it’s the blogosphere which is doing all the running, and the Republicans see a way of turning the weight and momentum of Democrat-supporting blogs against Obama. The McCain camp will release a new advert at 1pm today, addressing the attacks. Stay tuned.
P.S. Joe Lieberman will today hold a news conference calling on Obama to condemn Robert Wexler, a congressman from Florida, who described the Palin pick as an “affront to all Jewish Americans” because she supported Pat Buchanan for the presidency and “Pat Buchanan is a Nazi sympathiser”. It was a bizarre attack, and one McCain could have happily ignored. But the Republicans will today put Wexley centre stage, seeking to portray him as an Obama proxy and thus the face of Obama’s double standards.
Previous
Familiar Clown
September 3rd, 2008 5:58pm Report this commentAnd the TV campaign commercials aren't particulary 'grown up' either. Imagine during a British GE Cameron or Brown had to announce each clip with, "I'm so-and-so and I approve this message" and then to tell a prime-time audience that it's 3am and you're best off with me if the phone rings in No.10. All very amusing!
Robert Williams
September 3rd, 2008 6:35pm Report this commentAccording to Paul Harris in last Sunday's Observer it is only the Republicans who have "attack dogs" & 527 funded smearers. No suggestion that the Democratic party would stoop so low.
"As he bids to be president, Barack Obama is feeling the force of the mighty Republican propaganda machine. TV and radio hosts, authors and well-funded lobby groups have joined forces in a sophisticated and aggressive smear campaign. Paul Harris reports on the attack dogs"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/aug/31/uselections2008.barackobama
DK
September 3rd, 2008 9:40pm Report this commentThis is standard ignorance from the mainstream media. The liberal bloggers didn't start any of these rumours (made them prime time for sure). They actually trawled the blogs, papers and talk radio of *conservative* Alaskans. They've been talking about all these rumours for several months partly because many of the Republican elected officials and activists absolutely loath Palin.
Joe Lieberman might want to retract his statement after it was confirmed that Palin was in the pews when a guy from Jews for Jesus was preaching that Palestinian terrorist attacks were God's judgement on Jews for failing to convert to Christianity.
Joe Camel
September 3rd, 2008 10:45pm Report this commentHere it is, in Republican Convention week: the New Yorker's John McCain cover.
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/toc/2008/09/08/toc_20080901
... as a small boy in short pants playing Monopoly, all by himself. Hardly as controversial as the Obama cover, at first glance.
Alex Creel
September 3rd, 2008 11:50pm Report this commentFraser. I've just caught up on 5 days of blogs from yourself, James and Melanie on the subject of Palin's suitability for the role of VP. I think I'm going to have to source some of the attack dog blogs just to feel I've not entered a parallel universe. I subscribe to the spectator for its intelligence and clarity in reporting. How you can turn the clock back to the dark ages and agree with the choice of a creationist candidate is beyond me. My christian family are perplexed that anyone whose views fly in the face of hundreds of years of scientific fact can be entrusted with the responsibility of leading the United States. Will anyone at the speccie admit even the slightest discomfort with her views or is the fact that you picked the right horse in this race all important?
The Laughing Cavalier
September 4th, 2008 12:49pm Report this commentSarah Palin is not a "Creationist". All she has asid is that she thought it should be taught alongside Darwinism in public schools and Sunday schools. Don't fall for left wing propaganda.
Simon Orr
September 4th, 2008 1:48pm Report this comment"Joe Lieberman might want to retract his statement after it was confirmed that Palin was in the pews when a guy from Jews for Jesus was preaching that Palestinian terrorist attacks were God's judgement on Jews for failing to convert to Christianity."
If hearing one talk condeming the Jews makes you a Nazi. Then what does hearing years of talks condeming white Americans from a man you put in a position of trust over your family make you?
Back to top