Poblano over at www.fivethirtyeight.com has an interesting post up today examining the frequency of negative hits against the three remaining Presidential candidates, McCain, Clinton, and Obama. The metric used is press releases by each of the candidates, the DNC and the RNC. The differences are quite stark with Barack Obama both sustaining the highest total number of negative attacks and delivering the lowest number of negative attacks.
The current tallies, from September 2007 to May 2008 are: 226 attacks on Obama, 196 attacks on McCain, and 56 attacks on Clinton. Meanwhile Obama has delivered 19 attacks compared to McCain's 27 and Clinton's 144. But, the real key, I believe is this statement from Pablano:
The Obama campaign does very, very little attacking (quite possibly too little), at least in the form of press releases. That doesn't mean that they won't go negative, but they prefer to wait for an opportunity to counter-punch and/or to do so somewhat surreptitiously. But what they won't usually do is to try and dictate the course of a news cycle with an attack.
I believe that this is what Obama's "new politics" is all about. In a word, going negative without appearing to go negative. The hypocrisy of selling yourself in this way doesn't really bother me. And, if it is true, I think it is brilliant and is probably the next generation of political strategy. "Negative politicking" is frustrating partly because it is unseemly, but mostly because it works despite its unseemliness. The ability to go negative without appearing to go negative has the same impact, without fewer risks.
That said, one potential advantage the Clinton team would have over Obama in a general election is that they do "try and dictate the course of the news cycle" as Poblano puts it. This is something George Bush did so well for 5 1/2 years. It is the "tried and true" way of winning elections and does indeed represent the politics of the late 1980s through the present.
Do you really believe that Obama's NAFTA-gate story coming out just before Ohio was an accident? How about Jeremiah Wright's comments coming out when they did? Is it a coincidence that Mark Penn alluded to the "kitchen sink" strategy just days before all of the dukey began hitting the fan for the Obama campaign? I don't think so. And I think this is something Clinton would continue to do very effectively against McCain if she somehow eeks out the nomination.
On the other hand, Obama's campaign has been about making himself look as though he is above these sorts of tactics. This is another well-tested campaign strategy which is quite often ineffective. But, I believe that his real strategy has been to distance himself from attacks while quietly fostering a media environment which is sympathetic to his campaign. Most likely, we'll get a chance to see if he can pull it off.
Link to the post by Poblano:
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/05/i
ncoming.html
|
|
|
Permalink :: 53 Comments :: Post a Comment
|
In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.
If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.
