The Washington Post makes what I think is an excellent point this morning.
Remember back to the 2004 presidential campaign where conservatives — led by Swift Boat Veterans for Truth — effectively undermined Sen. John Kerry’s (D) candidacy with a campaign that focused on attempting to discredit his military service in Vietnam.
Or to the 2002 Georgia Senate race when then Rep. Saxby Chambliss (R) ran ads featuring images of Sen. Max Cleland (D), a triple amputee, alongside those of Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden.
Or to 1988 when Republicans attacked Michael Dukakis (D) over a convicted felon named Willie Horton.
You get the idea. Democrats always felt as though they won the “moral” victory, but Republicans won the actual victory.
This is the first Democratic national campaign that is beating the Republican to their own playbook. And the GOP is reacting with righteous indignation. “Beneath the dignity of the President” is such a whiny comment from a guy who has played this game before.
In October 2002, a pro-Romney radio ad aired that excised 74 words from an O’Brien statement so it sounded as though she opposed recruiting large employers to Massachusetts, something Romney backed. After O’Brien complained, Romney pulled the spot, claiming an ad agency goofed. But O’Brien insisted it was intentional, and Romney spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom — a top aide to his presidential campaign today – defended the splicing of quotes, describing it as “something reporters do every day.”
It doesn’t make me proud as a Democrat to play this game. I would love to see Obama do more work touting accomplishments. Anyone remember (wish I could find it) the Baker ad showing Governor Patrick making optimistic statements about the economy, making him appear out of touch with reality and with hurting families? It’s clear that’s why he won’t and can’t do so easily. Sadly, this campaign won’t be about issues.
Going back to the Romney deliberate misquotes of Obama “If we make this about the economy, we lose”. We know this campaign is going to get nasty. What’s truly shocking to Democrats, to Republicans and to the media, is that nobody really cares what factcheck.org thinks (rightly or, in this case, wrongly). This campaign is about how to create bad optics for your opponent. Right now Obama is doing a much better job of it, and Romney is on his heels trying to figure out how to land a single decent punch.
I’m not sure any of us on the left saw this coming. This is not Chicago-style politics. This is Lee Atwater politics. This is Karl Rove politics. This is John O’Neil politics. Back to The Post:
The reality is that 2012 may not be a campaign that Democrats will look back on lovingly — as they do when it comes to the 2008 campaign — but the incumbent seems to understand that winning, whether beautiful or ugly, is the ultimate goal.
That’s what makes, for example, going after Romney regarding Bain not quite a Swift Boat moment.
Not only are the Democrats playing a version of hardball normally associated with Republicans, but the Republican target is dealing with it badly, what you’d normally expect from the Democrats. I think we’ve learned something.
Defining Romney early is a really important tactical move by the Obama camp. Adrian Walker explained it well in his column today.
…in the examples given, the Republicans were peddling falsehoods.
The truth about Romney should even make the most dazed FOX victims think twice about outsourcing their vote.
Flashback:
“I don’t give them Hell, I just tell the truth about them and they think it’s Hell.” — Harry Truman.
Accuracy is a major difference… though the singing Mittster is reminiscent of the windsurfing ad. It’s just this kind of tough campaign doesn’t tend to come from a Democrat. It’s nice to see the Democrats finally joining the fray, knowing this is how you win — and how the GOP have dominated national elections for a good portion of the last 45 years.
is full of accuracy. You can argue, to some extent (though not too far) that some of the items on the list are arguably not all his fault, but they certainly happened on his watch, and totally par for the course, especially since Romney is placing the blame for the economy not being better than it is squarely on Obama (who, it can be argued, has had a tougher time than Romney ever did with his opposite-party legislature in passing anything at all…the Dem leg in MA certainly would have cooperated with truly economy-helping initiatives, that Mitt was uninterested in passing any wasn’t of their doing).
Not only are the Democrats’ charges accurate they’re also appropriate. There is a difference between discussing someone’s business record and disparaging their military service. I haven’t heard anything on the Democrats’ side that’s made me cringe.
And when I do, I’ll call them on it. Let’s be clear: our side is perfectly willing to genuinely critique our party leaders when we disagree.
We’re not lock step. That’s been a huge part of our problem…but also our strength. Or at least, our moral high ground.
Much of the time anyway.
Which is why I am a Democrat-leaning Independent.
When the wealth is spread so unequally in this country, and America is basically in a depression because conservatives won’t do what needs to be done (borrow at low interest rates to rehire laid off firefighters, cops, teachers, food inspectors and rebuild bridges & mass transit)… when the deck is stacked against working people gaining ground with their own labor, it is an issue that one presidential candidate shut down profitable factories to enrich himself. Mitt Romney is a one-man source of unemployment.