Where is the Obama campaign?

[wolverinez]

Time magazine just backed up the "tire gauge" issue saying it's the same as drilling, but with immediate results, not 12 years from now.

where is ad showing McCain and Bush as old fashioned relics of the past who are in the pocket of the oil industry?

Why has the Obama campaign not learned from the Kerry camp that offense, not defense wins elections? Have they learned that you have to get ito the mud, that you do have to have outlandish attack ads so the networks will give them free air time?

I have to say, I'm a frustrated Obama supporter right now. This reminds me way too much of Kerry 04.

[Drunken Irishman]

1. You obviously haven't been paying attention.

[dkf]

3. Keith Olbermann did a better defense of Obama than

any other person I saw today.

Where are the Obama surrogates?

[wolverinez]

8. Good question

Where is the offense? You can't win if you don't score.

[dkf]

40. Were there any attempts?

It feels like everyone is AWOL.

[cbc5g]

2. This might help a little

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6587587

[anonymous171]

4. It's reminding me of Duakakis '88 actually.

McCain's campaign is going super-dirty, much like GHWB's campaign did and Obama isn't dishing any dirt back at him.

[wolverinez]

6. Yes it is

It's incredibly sad to see no fight at all. And by "fight", I don't mean long winded paragraph messages that people don't pay attention to. I mean media savy images like tire gauges and sensationalistic attack ads that get free airtime.

[Median Democrat]

14. Big Media Bias At Work

1. Obama gave a speech that specifically targetted energy.
2. Campaign released an attack ad that went after McCain's policies and support from oil companies.
3. Larry King interviewed T. Boone Pickens who was specifically praised by Obama for raising alternative energy sources, and Boone returned the compliment by pushing alternative fuel sources, and answering questions in favor of energy sources besides oil.

Now, if you are waiting for Fox News to play these segments and commercials for free on endless loop, which will force other networks to address the issue, well, don't hold your breath.

[RNdaSilva]

17. Yep...

[wolverinez]

20. Common denominator: attack ads work

Media doesn't care about speeches or long winded explanations that put people to sleep. They care about sensationalistic ads that they can create a story with. The GOP knows this.

Why don't we?

[Median Democrat]

22. Attacks Ads Work Really Well If Fox News Plays Them For Free

Do you seriously think that if the Obama campaign came up with some clever jingle, Fox News will see the light, and devote an entire show to an analysis of the ad. The Obama campaign has had several attack ads, including the one today, but SURPRISE Fox News is not airing it for free. I saw that CNN showed it for comment, but its not the endless loop that Fox gives to McCain's ads.

[wolverinez]

23. It's not just Fox...

It's all the networks. And the reason they play McCain's ads is because they are sensationalistic and over the top. Obama's ads are boring, so they don't get played because they don't get ratings.

[Median Democrat]

29. So, You Are Saying No Bias In Media? Fox News Would Play A Clever DNC Ad?

I personally think this ad nails McCain:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x165284

Are you suggesting that the Obama campaign should publish a false smear of John McCain on the theory that if its false, Fox News will play it again and again with numerous Democrats willng to lay their credibility on the line by defending it.

Interesting theory of yours: Fox News is not biased. Democrats just aren't newsworthy unless they are being attacked in a clever and creative way.

[wolverinez]

33. When did I say Fox wasn't biased?

They are an inept and completely biased "news" organization. What I am saying is Obama's ads are boring. McCain's ads got free air time because they were sensationilistic and used the name "Britney Spears". They knew they would be played over and over.

[JoFerret]

43. People vote their gut feelings

and not their careful analysis of a thoughtful speech on a key issue.

This may be unfortunate but it is true.

In this campaign phase McCain is churning the gut with doubts about Obama.

[RoyGBiv]

25. I don't agree ...

I was heavily involved in that campaign, and the "concern" then was not that Dukakis wasn't fighting back but that all he was doing was responding to criticism and not working on his own message. Further, his defensive maneuvers were horribly mismanaged, hastily put together, and in the end opened Dukakis up to more and more criticism. This later morphed (or merged really) into Dukakis sitting on his hands and doing nothing, which is precisely the opposite of what he did. His problem was that he played all-defense, all the time and did so extremely poorly.

Examples:

The fabled "tank incident" was a response to a criticism of Dukakis being soft on defense, not ready to be commander-in-chief. So, some genius thought up making him look like Snoopy while riding around on a tank. The campaign at the time, somehow, saw this as imagery that would paint Dukakis as a tough guy who was going to run that tank straight down Bush's throat. Well, we all know how that turned out.

Taxachusetts: An early front for the war of words, going back to the primaries even, was Dukakis and taxes. George Bush came out with his "read my lips" bullshit and hammered away at Dukakis's record on raising taxes as governor. The facts of the matter didn't support the assault at all, but never mind that. Dukakis went on the offensive, claiming there were good reasons for the tax increases he signed and suggesting that Bush would find the need to raise certain taxes as well. (He was right, but that was a piss poor way of putting it.)

Sewage Bay: In an attempt to attack Bush where Dukakis thought he was weakest was on the environment, so he went all-out ... and then had to turn around and wither under the assault by the Bush team that point out how polluted the water in Dukakis's own state was.

The Horton Ad: The way Dukakis responded to this was inexplicable. He defended it, then he turned around and went all intellectual and claimed he wouldn't want someone who killed his wife to be executed. Yeah, it was a bullshit question that had no "right" answer, but there were better ways to do damage control, and even once he'd given the answer he did, there were better ways to address it later.

The point here is not to suggest that Obama is in full-on attack mode himself nor that Dukakis ran even a competent campaign (he didn't), rather to highlight the problems with fighting back the way so many seem to want Obama to do. Every last one of these attacks on him are being offered by people who know what they're doing and know well the damage they can cause. That's why all the "concern" is out there, right? If they ads were so ineffectual, no one would care, but they aren't ineffectual. They're pulling Obama down a bit.

The problem, though, is that the manner in which Obama returns fire must be carefully considered, not shot off the hip. Dukakis walked around with his gun on his hip, never took aim, and shot himself in the foot more often than not. Meanwhile, while Dukakis spent all his time responding to attacks, the Bush team defined the campaign entirely. All of the assaults on Dukakis were traps, and all of the assaults on Obama are traps, some of them so intricately woven traps that he will not be able to devise a way to get out of them completely. But, he can minimize their damage by not addressing them the way his opponents want him to.

[Drunken Irishman]

31. Please, please, please, make this an original post.

If you don't, I will. This needs to be said, because some people here just don't get it.

[RoyGBiv]

38. For you, I will ...

:-)

My threads tends to die a quick death ... could be that 3am thing ... but I'll do it anyway.

[anonymous171]

32. Thanks for the reply.

So, the goal should be to respond in a way that the republicans aren't expecting (doesn't fit there frame. That of course takes time and planning, which is why Obama sometimes waits a little too long (IMO) to respond.

Oh, and I agree with the Drunken Irishman. You should make this an OP.

[RoyGBiv]

37. Thank YOU for the reply ...

That is, indeed, the goal.

We can quibble over whether he waits too long, and I wouldn't have much of a complaint with that kind of discussion as long as we can agree that running around hanging out the window shouting everything that pops off his head isn't the way to go about it. (And I'm not suggesting you're suggesting that, but that's the image I get from some of the concern we see ... people seeming to want Obama to go off on the same kind of rant we all pretty much agree we want McCain to succumb to during a debate.) The problem there is that there's no clear way to know how long too long is. I mean, you know it when you've passed it, e.g. Dukakis squandering an 18 freakin' point lead might be a freakin' clue (I will never stop having nightmares about that), but it's hard to know before you get there.

It's even harder for us to know, us being those who are not intimately involved in the inner-workings of the campaign itself. I don't trust polls that are marketed to news outlets, but I have a pretty good understanding of how accurate polling is done, and I know that competent political campaigns hire the best at that business and are aware of how things play.

For my part, based on the campaign Obama ran against Hillary, I'm in a cautious trust mode at the moment. He's not Dukakis (or Kerry), nor are his campaign handlers relatives of those who ran Dukakis's campaign. We would have seen that in the primary if that were the case. That, imo, is the one real benefit of the kind of primary we had. We got to see how Obama's campaign organization really works.

[babylonsister]

5. Where were you, oh worried one, during the primaries?

And if I weren't grown up, I'd add:


BITE ME, clown.

Explain your late arrival first, then your concerned criticism, then we'll talk. :eyes:

[wolverinez]

7. hmmm.....

I was Obama 100% in the primary and IWasn't worried due to his commanding lead. I *am* worried about the campaigns inability to effectively respond to the barrage of McCain attack ads these last few weeks.

Oh, it's nice to meet you to by the way.....

[babylonsister]

11. OK. Grrrr!

Sorry, just testing.

Where were you before the primaries, and how old are you? Are you a middle-aged person paying attention or a young one? I'd welcome either or any alternatives, truly. It'd be nice to get a feel for the newbies here, and what attracted them.

[wolverinez]

18. posting here for quite some time....

under different names for awhile, off an on throughout the years. I'm late 20's. I also run a website that supports Obama.

Sorry, I'm just genuinely concerned about the lack of offense(which also seemed to plague the Kerry campaign). I'm tired of losing on the "high road".

1. Fresh, exciting Dem candidate everyone rallies around
2. GOP goes on massive attack campiagn in late July/August/September
3. Dem candidate plays prevent defense, hopes the clock runs out while clinging to lead in polls
4. GOP wins election with another attack campaign ater debates(even though they lsot them)

There's a big difference between a concern troll and reality. This is the same exact shit that went on here during 2004.

[babylonsister]

26. No, it's really not.

Read this thread, and these sites. I'm pretty jazzed.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=6581553#6581565

[truthisfreedom]

9. A little too much concern, methinks. What do you want them to do, be at the beck and call of the

McSplode campaign?

[AtomicKitten]

10. No Drama Obama just ran a brilliant ad tying McBush and Junior into Big Oil.

Secondly Obama is crushing McBush in the electoral vote, ya know, the one that actually counts during the general election.

Obama has done a great job running his campaign so far, so you needn't worry your little head (although dramatic hand-wringing at DU is always worth a shot). ;)

[babylonsister]

12. "Dramatic hand-wringing"

:rofl: Who's doing that? Oy!

[AtomicKitten]

15. Hey, who's not doing it these days?

Those truly asceered mixed with those with an agenda usually provide DU with a cornucopia of concern posts lending credence to the notion that you can't please all the people all the time further proving the theory that nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition.

[babylonsister]

30. No joke-everyone is!

Spanish Inquisition?

OK then. I know, for political junkies, everyone is on their last nerve. But I've noticed a lot of people never seen before. It's worrisome.

I'm out of here before the convention, sans 'puter. Like Obama, the break will be good!
I will be back for the debaates, and the party. :D

[opihimoimoi]

13. The OBAMA CAMPAIGN is ahead and KICKING ASS....He has a POSITIVE POLARITY

576X more powerful than McLosers Neg Campaign...

McToast is burnt out

[kevinmc]

16. wolverinez (14 posts) Second Concern Troll I have spotted tonight .. n/t

[wolverinez]

19. Nope

there's nothing trollish about noting the complete lack of offense in this campaign.

[truthisfreedom]

39. It's not the troll you should be worried about. It's the concern.

We don't need no stinking concern.

[RNdaSilva]

21. Obama will win in a landslide...

Relax...

I told myself that I wasn't going to address negative threads. What am I doing here?

[Median Democrat]

24. Unlikely - No Democrat Has Won 50% Of Pop Vote Since Carter in 1976

I think people are being unrealistic if they expect a landslide, except perhaps in the electoral vote. With the popular vote, the last time a Democrat won more than 50% of the popular vote was Jimmy Carter in 1976 shortly after the end of the Vietnam war and following the impeachment of Nixon. YET, even Carter could only garner 50.1 percent of the popular vote. Bill Clinton never won a majority of the popular vote. Ironically, Gore came closest to winning the popular vote, but he was still under 50%. So, I think a landslide is unrealistic given that an impeachment and the thousands of dead Americans due to the Vietnam war could not pave the way for a landslide for Jimmy Carter.

[babylonsister]

35. Yep. They're out tonight. nt

[wolverinez]

36. Wrong twice?

It's called a little bit of reality. Don't get too worked up over it.

[DFLforever]

27. The ad you want is on DU's front page,

It came out today: It's called "pocket".

[wolverinez]

28. Boring ad IMHO

Nothing sensationalistic, nothing exciting. Standard presidential campaign ad.

[VolcanoJen]

34. Welcome to DU!

You seem concerned.

[TheKentuckian]

41. I'd love to see some harder hits

and I think we will. McCain simply has too much material. We've got to see at least a full minute of McCain vs. McCain town hall debate.

I'd like to see one featuring befuddled leadership you can't depend on featuring his not nearly famous enough birth control vs. Viagra interview and getting obliterated by Ron Paul.

There's also clever stuff that can be done with John Boy's "Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" ditty.

Hell, McCain loves stupid gimmicks and catchphrases, let's portray him as a bumbling Inspector Gadget.

[AllentownJake]

42. Actually it makes John McCain look like an elitist

Keith Olbermann pointed out that most working class white males already know that keeping your tires inflated improves gas mileage....only an asshole who doesn't drive or hasn't driven in years wouldn't know that.

[H2O Man]

44. You are part of

the Obama campaign. Get busy.