Campaign Diaries

I apologize for the slower and off rhythm posting these days. I have been wasting hours a day for nearly a week trying to find any sort of decent housing in DC area for the next four months (if any readers know of a place, e-mail me!) - but I might as well slow down this week to recharge my batteries before the final stretch to November 4th.

Past presidential candidates who have tried to score a major coup in their convention speech have often greatly suffered when statements they made for shock value have backfired - whether it be Walter Mondale saying he would raise taxes in 1984 to George H. W. Bush’s “read my lips” in 1988. Recent nominees have mostly tried to score points with their oratory or with choreographed stunts (Al Gore’s kiss) rather than by introducing an element of surprises. But speculation is mounting that McCain is considering causing a huge surprise of his own on September 4th by pledging to only serve one term.

The idea of such a pledge has been floating for quite a while - and various reports have suggested that McCain had considered it last year. First Read mentioned the possibility this morning, and Rick Davis pointedly refused to rule out that possibility when interviewed by Fox News’s Chris Wallace today. It is certainly not likely that McCain would make such a drastic decision - but considering how long it has been since this idea has been in the air, his advisers at least have to be talking about it.

So what would be the benefits of such a move by McCain? For one, it would be an attempt to resolve the age issue. If voters are worried about electing too old a president, at least they know that they will not be asked to extend his mandate to 8 years. Second, it would be a possible response to this year’s Democratic tilt. It’s always been clear that the GOP’s strategy this year was to argue: ‘You want to vote Democratic but you don’t want to vote for this Democrat’ but with a one term pledge they could add ‘just put McCain in office for four years and then you’ll have a chance to put a guy from the other team in office in 2012.’

Third, and this is the official reason that would be given to justify such a pledge, McCain would use it as an opportunity to showcase his lack of ambition, his willingness to put “country first” (his slogan - which some surrogates are starting to take further) and it would be used to mark a fundamental break with the Bush Administration: A McCain White House would be a place of policy, not of politics - and whether or not the Arizona Senator makes any one-term pledge this theme already features prominently in his campaign.

While this looks very good on paper, there are obvious drawbacks. For one, McCain would be transformed into an instant lame-duck if he is elected, with prominent Republicans (starting with Romney and Huckabee) fighting it out for the 2012 nomination. Sure, McCain could break his pledge - but his would be much more powerful a pledge than the one Senate candidates often make, and regularly break. Electorally, it would make McCain’s acceptance speech quite an event, but it would also focus the conversation on (1) McCain’s age and (2) the qualifications of his vice-president. Not to mention that it might make the Republican look desperate and increasingly unimportant - never a good place for a candidate to be.

Furthermore, a one-term pledge strategy could work if we assume that the electorate is willing to vote for this Republican more than it is willing to vote for this Democrat, so that their preference for McCain’s person would finally win out over their desire to have a Democratic president if the Republican took a one-term pledge. But Obama is now working overtime to turn the spotlight back on McCain, and the two Senators have comparable favorability ratings. This suggests that such a pledge might tie McCain’s hands without yielding him much benefit.

If Republican strategists are seriously considering this option, they are certainly considering all these possible consequences and quite probably conducting polling to see what impact it would have. So this remains speculation to occupy us in this week in which Obama is in vacation, the veepstakes are on hold and voters are looking at Beijing anyway.

Another object of speculation is the conventions’ speaker line-ups. News that Hillary Clinton would speak in Tuesday’s primetime spot led to reports that she would be the Democrats’ keynote speaker, though the Obama campaign has pushed back on that, responding that there would more likely be another Democrat to keynote the convention (the speech that launched Obama four years ago). But with networks devoting one hour of primetime a night to the conventions (if they even broadcast for all four nights), it is Hillary’s speech that will fill that slot.

That is something the Obama campaign cannot escape (Clinton makes for good political drama) but also something it should embrace. Viewers would surely watch Hillary’s speech more than that of an unknown party member (however much of a rising star he might be), and Obama needs Clinton’s primary electorate to unite around him as much as ever.

On Wednesday, of course, it will be the vice-presidential nominee’s acceptance speech - over the one of Bill Clinton - followed by Obama’s on Thursday. That only leaves Monday’s primetime slot open, with reports suggesting that Michelle Obama could headline that night. That would be a departure from 2000 and 2004 when Tipper Gore and Theresa Heinz Kerry had lower-profile roles.

As for the Republicans’ speaker line-up, speculation has long focused on Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal as the convention’s keynote speaker. That choice would make sense in that it would satisfy the party’s conservative elites and show a more multicultural/multiracial image of the GOP without thrusting Jindal into the VP spotlight to which he is probably not prepared. Another topic discussion has long been whether Joe Lieberman would go to the GOP convention and whether he would give a speech. Now, Politico’s Jonathan Martin reports that Hadassah, Joe’s wife, will appear at a Republican breakfast held in the Twin Cities on the first day of the convention - as sure a sign as we have gotten for now that Joe will indeed be in Minnesota the first week of September.

Update: The Obama campaign has just announced that Mark Warner would deliver the convention’s keynote speech, which will be on Tuesday night. The campaign highlighted Warner’s bipartisan credentials: “Like Barack Obama, Mark Warner is not afraid to challenge the status quo to bring people together and get things moving,” Plouffe said. You might remember that Warner, who has a moderate profile, was one of the front-runners for the presidential race before abruptly announcing he would not run. This also confirms that Warner will not be the VP, but that Obama is still looking to use Warner to give himself a boost in Virginia.