Fight Back or Fail, by Aging Hipster

“No one’s paying attention right now. The race is fundamentally sound. Obama has more field offices. This time the people won’t be fooled!”

Last week the frequency of denials that something was amiss in the Obama campaign became more common on Obama sympathetic web sites and blogs. Those of us who didn’t believe in this Pollyanna nonsense were often reassured, occasionally insulted and once or twice given profanity laced tongue lashings. Deep in our hearts though, those of us who are dismayed by Obama’s punching bag strategy fear he has days, actually less than 100 hours, to fight back against John McCain or this campaign will take a turn from which it can not reverse itself.

In 1988, as any observer of presidential politics can tell you, the George Bush, Sr. team ran a number on Mike Dukakis, the Democratic nominee. Jules Witcover and Jack Germond’s rich study “Whose Broad Stripes and Bright Stars” tells the story of how the Bush people instilled fear in the hearts of voters against Dukakis. Some of it was based on fact, statements that Dukakis made about the ACLU, his stewardship of the Massachusetts Prison System or the conditions of Boston Harbor are examples. The relevance or context of these issues is too broad a topic to discuss here. Other parts were completely false. For example, the GOP, through the use of Republican Senator-Surrogates spread direct lies that his wife had burned an American flag and “there were pictures.” There were claims that Dukakis was mentally ill, that he practiced witchcraft. Imagine the marvelous slander the Right produced in the ‘88 campaign: no Internet yet!

Supposedly, Dukakis was culpable for his lack of response, but that isn’t quite true. Dukakis, at first, didn’t believe people would fall for that type of cynicism. Later, when a response was developed, it proved too lengthy. Finally, by the time he was able to fight back, all he did was respond, and the Bush team simply continued an attack against him that changed daily.

As Witcover and Germond note in the book, the Bush team had great masters of manipulation working behind the scenes, but it wasn’t the advertising that did in Dukakis. It was the fact that the Right was able to control the television news. “Visuals” became an important part of what was done. Reporters no longer had to work quite as hard for a story, since the campaign team did this for them.

Four years later, facing an incumbent Bush, Bill Clinton came along and dealt with many of the same tactics: the slander, the attacks on his wife and child, the lies and the half truths. This time, the attacks failed. Why?

There are really a number of reasons, and they don’t fit neatly into a single answer. First, the American people had seen what type of leader they had in the first Bush. Los Angeles in flames and a stalled economy come to mind. Second, the strongest third party run in US History (Ross Perot) helped the Clinton bid. Third, there was serious GOP fatigue after 12 years. What we are interested in, however, is the Clinton model for dealing with the GOP fear card.

Clinton’s rapid response team learned to stay in front of news cycles by responding to attacks as fast as they happened. Simply put, they learned to control the news cycle, something which, up until last week, the Obama team was also doing. Mainly, the Clinton team could land punches and fight back…hard.

The GOP Playbook has been used now for 20 years. In August of 2004, the same tactics were employed on John Kerry, and Kerry failed to respond for 10 long days. By now, the communications world is at lightning speed. Clinton’s rapid response team was brilliant, but its mobility now would be the same as a horse drawn cavalry charge facing Nazi tanks in Poland.

In 2008 situations move too fast to sit there when your opponent says you wouldn’t mind your country losing a war. That only invites more slander.

The news media must be controlled. They aren’t fair and they aren’t going to cut anyone any slack.

Finally, voters like fighters. They don’t like dirty fighters, and they can spot one from any distance. In 1988, the elder Bush seemed effete, as though his didn’t want to get his hands dirty. He let his underlings do his fighting. McCain seems to relish the role. He is treading on dangerous ground, to a point. Americans are fundamentally a decent people. Most people are repulsed by such behavior. Unfortunately, that’s not the end of the story. What people like less is someone who won’t fight back.

Politics is an emotional affair. The masses want a fair fighter, but given the choice between a one who won’t fight and one who will, they will take the street brawler 100% of the time.

Fight back or fail.

161 Comments

Filed under Posts By Aging Hipster

Tags: Bush, Clinton, Dukakis, Obama