After a brief bounce in the aftermath of the GOP convention, McCain had been falling behind and the race was settling back in its mid-August form. With the Wall Street meltdown shifting the conversation to the economy, he had lost the control of the narrative - something no trailing candidate can afford to do. And with his back once again against the wall, McCain decided to take the same route as his late August stunner and once again take a huge gamble.
41 days from Election Day, everything a presidential campaign does is about politics. And McCain’s dramatic decision to suspend his campaign to return to Washington and focus on the financial crisis is an obvious attempt to shake up the race.
(This is certainly not to say that McCain’s move is bound to fail. Remember that Huckabee’s comically transparent attempt to go negative against Romney while enjoying the benefits of staying positive in the final days of Iowa was mocked by many - and Huckabee triumphed in the caucuses.)
McCain’s goal is clear: His early September surge was due to his successfully recasting himself as a maverick and a reformer, intent on putting his “country first” and partisanship and party second. But that image appears to have dissipated already, and as I argued in my analysis of McCain’s acceptance speech, he did not use striking enough language or policy proposals to durably differentiate himself from Bush. Well, his campaign clearly views the financial crisis as an opportunity to put McCain’s speech in action and cast the Arizona Senator as a leader who can take the initiative in a time of crisis.
Beyond those obvious consideration, the McCain campaign might be thinking that delaying Friday’s debate would be a way to make sure voters pay attention to the foreign policy debate. After all, viewers might not pay that much attention to candidates talking about Bin Laden, Iran and Georgia in the midst of a financial crisis - but it is essential for McCain that voters pay a lot of attention to the national security debate, which might be one of McCain’s only occasions to shift the discussion from the economy to terrorism. If the debate is delayed until after a bailout plan is passed, national security topics would probably seem more relevant to voters.
This obviously puts Obama in a difficult position: he cannot entirely dismiss McCain’s move without looking like they are putting the campaign above the country’s interest, and he cannot entirely accept it since it would allow McCain to shine. In other words, Obama needs to follow McCain enough to not appear to be playing partisan politics but distance himself from him enough to not cede McCain a leadership role.
This is indeed the dual strategy Democrats have used over the past two hours. On the one hand, Obama acknowledged the seriousness of the financial situation and the need to “rise above” parties and appear open to reaching an arrangement to suspend some of the campaigning. “What I’ve told the leadership in Congress is that if I can be helpful then I am prepared to be anywhere, anytime,” Obama said. On the other hand, Democrats moved to cast McCain’s maneuver as an inappropriate stunt fueled by electoral consideration. “What I think is important is that we don’t suddenly infuse Capitol Hill with presidential politics,” Obama said, echoing Reid’s forceful statement that had implied McCain was after a “photo-op.”
And as he insisted that the debate should take place, Obama suggested McCain was not able to multitask, in what could be a subtle reminder of McCain’s age, “Presidents are going to have to deal with more than one thing at a time.” It is unclear what will happen if Obama presses ahead with the debate and McCain continues to resist. The debate commission and the University of Mississippi have said they will continue preparations, but what happens if the campaigns are still at odds about this on Friday night? Who blinks first?
Needless to say, this is a developing situation, and a lot could change in the next few hours. It is too early to tell whether McCain’s move will be yet another shrewd game-changer that infuses some life in his campaign or whether Obama’s quick reaction will be enough to deprive McCain of a leadership role. While McCain has a lot to gain, he also stands to lose if this comes to be seen as a strange and unnecessary move. And the Obama campaign also needs to deal with this situation very carefully, as the GOP is now watching for any move Obama might take that would allow them to paint him as putting his campaign first.
In particular, it will be very interesting to see whether Obama follows McCain’s lead and tries to pull his campaign ads for a few days. Indeed, while it might be understandable for McCain to propose that the candidates go back to DC this week rather than last (since the bailout debate is occurring right now), it is more puzzling that the McCain campaign thought the financial crisis was an opportunity to air ad after ad hitting Obama last week, but that the same crisis now demands a suspension of advertising. As with most things political, how all of this plays out will also depend on how much cynisism the press uses in its coverage.
Update: Incredibly enough, SUSA went in the field this afternoon and came out with a quick snap poll of a 1000 adults across the country. Only 10% say the debate should be postponed, and 46% say it would be bad for America if it were to not take place. Only 14% say that it is a good idea for a candidate to suspend his campaign. Naturally, take this with a HUGE grain of salt, as it is a mid-day poll at a time many people aren’t at home and before most voters really get a sense of what is going on… but certainly interesting preliminary numbers.
Update #2: Wow. I joked to friends two hours ago that the McCain campaign might use a delay to Friday’s debate as a way to get rid of the Palin-Biden debate… but I did not really expect to be proven right so quickly. The current McCain proposal: Put the first presidential debate on October 2nd (the date of the VP debate), and move the VP debate to an undetermined date at the University of Mississippi where the first debate was to be held. It is for now unclear why the VP debate could not stay in its place and the presidential debate could not be rescheduled. Also, why is McCain giving an interview to ABC News after he announces he will suspend his campaign?
I don’t care where you stand on the political spectrum: this was an obvious political ploy on behalf of the McCain camp to try and divert attention towards McCain, who (shock!) just so happens to be dipping economically in the polls today. Bi-partisanship? Bullshit. This is the lowest type of political opportunism, and Obama showed guts and gonads by rejecting McCain’s “offer” and explaining that, yes, a president must also be a multi-tasker. As if a few hours spent debating in Mississippi would have any effect whatsoever on the bailout; let Congress do its job. McCain has lost any and all respect I had left for him.
I get the strong sense that you already disliked him…and that this “last straw” is yet another occasion to declare it a “last straw.” Next time he does something you do not like (anything), it will again be the “last straw” which finally scraped away that last speck of a shred of respect you had for McCain. Better to admit we’ve picked sides and simply are adding this latest manuver to our book of grudges.
Of course he–and Obama–are playing politics. McCain plays politics when he makes this move, Obama plays politics when he carefully strategizes his response. This is normal, and I don’t really hold against either one of them. This is the game we the people make them play. We don’t really look for the honorable per se (whatever we may tell ourselves). We look for the bread and circus more than anything. And once we decide who will give us the biggest chunk, we loathe their opponent, and deride them ceaselessly.
But then, this is not really a degeneration of American politics. It was present at least as far back as the 1790s, and in presidential politics came out full-formed in the election of 1800. I hope no one back then was hoping that “we’ll grow out of this mindset; we’ll evolve.” They would be sorely disappointed. Better to just accept it for what it is, and be as self-conscious as possible that once we pick sides, it’s hard to be objective.
By the way, I also don’t like McCain or his speedy willingness to shed honor to win while carefully maintaining his mantle of “maverick” and “hero,” and acting as if we’re being unpatriotic for even questioning his motives. Still, the worst that I can conclude of all that, for practical purposes, is that he is a better politician than some.
Of course I already disliked the guy, but I did respect him more than 99% of the Republican party. That was before he started campaigning. This was a shameless attempt and everyone knows it. Just because slime politics is the norm doesn’t mean I have to accept it as “necessary.” And yes, you are right that McCain is a better politician, all Republicans are better than Democrats at playing politics. I’m just glad Obama didn’t cave, like his predesessors, and actually called out McCain’s classless bluff.
I agree that Obama made the right moves.
Not so sure about “all Republicans are better than Democrats at playing politics”? A Republican dominated Congress would prove that point better. My compliment to McCain was meant to be backhanded. I’m not a fan.
I will neither christen the Republicans nor the Democrats as more free of the stink of western democratic politics. I don’t think I could find a corrupt or “slimy” practice in the one that I could not find in the other. The fact that power shifts from one to the other tells me that the sides are pretty evenly stacked on the whole.
I’m just going to try to listen very carefully and vote for the best man. I almost wish there was a way of shielding a candidate’s political party from the public so we would actually have to listen to the message and consider issue positions rather than just ask if they’re playing for our home team. Of course that might mean that previous Democrats might vote Republican and vice versa. And we can’t have that!
I think McCain clearly wants to assume the mantle of leadership, be in the neighborhood when a deal is struck, as it must be, and grab the photo-ops. Obama undoubtedly felt that he was sand-bagged after calling McCain about a joint statement of principals and no mention of this, but that’s politics, and given where he found himself, he did the best he could. I don’t like McCain, but as a political gambit, pretty good way to grab the spotlight when you’re in trouble, and because it’s out of left (or right) field, it reinforces the image of him as an a** kicker and china breaker, a good thing at a time when people are angry and looking to vent.
The move is getting low grades from the talking heads, including people like Mickey Edwards and Norman Ornstein, who normally would lean Right. But then…..
The shocker in this is the request to postpone the VP debate. While it can be rationalized as making room for a postponed presidential debate, it will generate a wave of snickers from people who think McCain will move heaven and earth to keep Palin out of the reach of the press. Net, McCain might have shot himself in the foot.
Another McCain gimmick. First delay the republican convention for a hurricane, then he picks a know-nothing veep who he has to coddle like a toddler and now this. We as a people derserve better. Much better.
So McCain wants to delay Palin’s debate (why not cancel it!). That will play very badly and play into the narrative developing about her not answering questions other than in staged situations.
Obama’s point about multi-tasking is well made and is McCain saying 2 senators cannot debate for 1.5 hours whilst 1 President, 98 other senators and 435 congressman are insufficient for dealing with this situation?
Obama can easily call McCain’s bluff on the debate. McCain will show up or he will lose one of the three debates by default since another one will not be scheduled.
I also think that delaying the debate is a political tactic, but I was thinking that it could actually work becuase there are a lot of concerns over this bail out plan. However, if McCain is looking into delaying the VP debate as well, it makes it seem much more political, considering how much the McCain campaign have been trying to hide Palin from the press. McCain should have just stuck to delaying the first Presidential debate.
Also what use does Palin serve in the bailout - at least McCain and Obama are senators and will vote on it. She is a Governor and “Washington Outsider” so she is available. Of course looking at her recent Katie Couric interview Palin could do with all the prep time available - she was so weak, it was embarrassing.
Yep, I too wondered how the GOP would try to wriggle out of having Sarah Palin participate in a real-life debate.
McCain’s ploy is the political equivalent of the Hail Mary play, except that such strategies need to have at least some structure in order to succeed. McCain’s problem is that there’s nobody downfield.
Kudos both the Obama and the sponsors of the debate for refusing to reschedule. The alternatives open to McCain are not pretty. Either he caves in and agrees to debate, or he refuses and sticks to his insistence that they should be delayed. If he chooses the former, all the world will be watching to see what exactly it was he was so afraid of publicly revealing. If the latter then both he and Palin will be conducting the remnants of a campaign, which will have degenerated to something of a dog-and-pony show, entirely shielded from the press.
.
After Democrats were begging
for McCain’s involvement
less than 48 hours ago to help gather Republican support for the bill, its laughable that they are now criticizing him for taking them up on the offer. What a bunch of hypocrites! As Taniel correctly stated, this is a risk for McCain to step up and help Reid and his merry band of fools try to accomplish what they admittedly could not do themselves. If it ends up helping McCain politically, then it’s the Democrats own fault. If it hurts McCain, then it’s his own fault for taking advice from Democrats.
After Democrats were begging for McCain’s involvement less than 48 hours ago to help gather Republican support for the bill, its laughable that they are now criticizing him for taking them up on the offer.
Ah, how does “involvement” necessitate calling off Friday night’s debate?
There are many ways to be “involved.” One can voice one’s support from wherever one is. One can pressure colleagues from wherever one is. One can even spend extensive time in DC and still spare a few hours for an important national debate which has been in the works for months. The idea that McCain absolutely has to be in DC on Friday evening because of the financial situation is, well, a stretch to put it in the kindest possible terms (and “patently ridiculous” would be a justifiable description).
And there are good arguments for not having the candidates in town: when bipartisanship is the order of the day, it might be easier to reach an accord by keeping presidential politics out of the room.
As for “Reid and his merry band of fools,” that’s easy to say when one isn’t under the burden of coming forward with a better alternative. Might want to check my last post in the “McCain’s rough patch” thread.
Oh, and the justification for delaying the scheduled VP debate is…what, exactly? Palin’s not in Congress, so she has no say in the financial crisis. Biden’s vote may not be needed, and it’s not hard to schedule a vote that doesn’t interfere with the debate schedule (and that goes for this Friday, too).
McCain is clearly engaging in a disgraceful political ploy. No question about that. If he thought of the country’s interests as being above all else, then he’d have avoided gambling politically, stopped deceiving voters with false ads attack Obama, and focused on issues of concern to voters, not on distractions like the “lipstick on a pig” saga. Otherwise, he is merely playing politics, trying hard to take control of the narrative and win at any cost.
This is not the candidate America wants and deserves, period.
Teezy, the problem is with the House GOP hard core conservatives. Their attitude is: “Wall St created the mess, let them take the hit”. Reid can’t do anything about that, and neither can Obama. This is all staged, and in the end McCain screwed it up by asking to move the VP debate! Bush has scuttled in at the last moment to create an after the fact rationale for both of them to be in DC, in an attempt to validate McCain’s original ploy.
Anyone on either side who thinks that in dealing with these maneuvers, their candidate is being statesmanlike rather than acting intensely political just fell off the turnip truck.
“Ah, how does “involvement” necessitate calling off Friday night’s debate?”
- They might still be working on the bill and the debate would be a distraction for everyone involved, obviously.
“One can voice one’s support from wherever one is.”
- Apparently, Obama agrees and is content to phone it in, ala-Bush during Katrina.
“when bipartisanship is the order of the day, it might be easier to reach an accord by keeping presidential politics out of the room.”
- Again, Democrats were demanding McCain help them out. Now he is. Be careful what you ask for.
“Oh, and the justification for delaying the scheduled VP debate is…what, exactly?”
- Rescheduling the first debate in its place would be the least disruptive since all the ground work has already been done. Since there is only one VP debate, it would be the easiest to move. If a bill is worked out Thursday or early Friday, then the debates would go on as scheduled.
“the problem is with the House GOP hard core conservatives.”
- No kidding. That’s why Democrats were desperate for McCain’s assistance (as the video link above clearly shows). With his involvement in the process, it will be easier to get more Republicans on board, which is what Democrats wanted.
Teezy - getting involved does not mean having to be in DC all the time. As McCain admits he doesn`t bring much economic knowledge to the table. I think he can spare 2 hours for the debate or can`t he multi-task?
“I think he can spare 2 hours for the debate or can`t he multi-task?”
- Just what America wants, a President who will take time out of working on a serious crisis to attend to campaign matters that could otherwise be postponed. Congrats to Obama on his Bush-esque governing style: Politics First.
Why make this a political issue? There is a financial disaster on our hands, and I hear everyone trying to blame the other or score political points. This disgusts me, and it disgusts many of the electorate. This is a time that Republicans and Democrats alike need to put their petty differences away and try their best to resolve this financial crisis.
I’m not at all a Bush fan, but I thought he did a good job last night delivering his script. His words used didn’t give me any extra confidence that a solution would be found, but his delivery was really neat. I love it when a President can deliver a message without hearing all of the partisan rhetoric we keep hearing from officials that are in front of a camera.
They might still be working on the bill and the debate would be a distraction for everyone involved, obviously.
Oh please. They can all Tivo it. Or read the transcript. The debate isn’t going to prevent any of them from actually doing their work. And, as I wrote above, injecting presidential politics into the room may be the real distraction.
“One can voice one’s support from wherever one is.”
- Apparently, Obama agrees and is content to phone it in, ala-Bush during Katrina.
The problem wasn’t Bush not going to New Orleans. The problem was a lack of action by the relevant federal agencies. When Bush did go, he took resources away from the rescue effort. Not going would have been the better move for actually getting things done.
Again, as I wrote, “involvement” doesn’t mean “drop everything and come to DC no matter what else is on the schedule.” At least I don’t think that’s in the dictionary definition.
Moreover, McCain isn’t on any of the relevant committees and says economics isn’t is forte anyway. He could send his economics advisers.
Oh, and the justification for delaying the scheduled VP debate is…what, exactly?”
- Rescheduling the first debate in its place would be the least disruptive since all the ground work has already been done. Since there is only one VP debate, it would be the easiest to move.
I still see in that paragraph no justification for moving the VP debate.
For that matter, I see no justification for McCain’s actual presence in DC, or why, if he went to DC, he couldn’t spare a few hours for the debate.
Debaters know when to concede a point which isn’t defensible. I think this is one of them.
Teezy: That’s why Democrats were desperate for McCain’s assistance (as the video link above clearly shows).
What the video doesn’t show is that Republicans wanted McCain to take a stand too.
According to Matthew Cooper’s news analysis piece in today’s NY Times, McCain’s “increasingly populist” tone had worried Republicans who were being asked to go out on a limb by supporting an unpopular president and risked being undermined by their presidential nominee who could sit back and then oppose whatever deal was eventually adopted, leaving them exposed to a backlash from their constituents.
Still doesn’t call for calling off the debate, though.
Dsimon–you are feeding the trolls.
The truth of the matter is that Obama is most likely our next President, and it upsets some people.
Trolls? In other words, if you’re for McCain you are a troll?
I thought this was supposed to be a non-partison blog.
“I still see in that paragraph no justification for moving the VP debate.”
- I pretty much spelled it out for you.
Perhaps another option would be to have back-to-back Pres and VP debates on the same night, that way none of the pre-planning would be wasted. I’d watch three hours, no problem.
“They can all Tivo it. Or read the transcript. The debate isn’t going to prevent any of them from actually doing their work.”
- Oh please. The back-n-forth of a debate could have disastrous effects if the negotiations are on-going. There would be no better way to inject partisanship into the process. Though, if the plan is worked out today, then it won’t be an issue.
“For that matter, I see no justification for McCain’s actual presence in DC.”
- Again, Reid told McCain to get Republican support for the bailout. His presence will have a greater effect on persuading the Republicans that are resistant to the bailout. Hence, Reid and Nancy will more likely get the bipartisan support they wanted. Its not that complicated.
“, or why, if he went to DC, he couldn’t spare a few hours for the debate”
- What kind of President would take a few hours away from dealing with a national crisis to engage in campaign activities? Barack Obama: Politics First.
“I still see in that paragraph no justification for moving the VP debate.”
- I pretty much spelled it out for you.
You said it would be the easiest to move. That doesn’t mean there’s a reason for moving it.
What’s Palin’s role in crafting legislation for the bailout plan? Did she get elected to Congress while I wasn’t looking? Is Biden’s presence needed? What is the justification for moving the debate?
The reasons for canceling Friday’s debate are weak. The reasons for moving the VP debate are practically nonexistent.
The back-n-forth of a debate could have disastrous effects if the negotiations are on-going.
Do you really think they’ll have TV monitors on as they put the package together? Please. If they’re so easily distracted, they have no business trying to develop a plan in the first place.
“For that matter, I see no justification for McCain’s actual presence in DC.”
- Again, Reid told McCain to get Republican support for the bailout. His presence will have a greater effect on persuading the Republicans that are resistant to the bailout.
Again, garnering support does not require actual presence. You just assume it does. And, as I argued and to which you did not respond, injecting presidential politics into the negotiating room can be counterproductive.
“, or why, if he went to DC, he couldn’t spare a few hours for the debate”
- What kind of President would take a few hours away from dealing with a national crisis to engage in campaign activities? Barack Obama: Politics First.
I bet they take time to eat. To sleep. To talk with their families. A few hours will simply not be to the detriment of the nation, especially when McCain has no significant role in developing the plan under discussion. “Country First” would be to talk with Americans about what one would do as president, not spend time posturing on a subject about which one said one was not an expert. Again, I’d like to name something that McCain was asking us to do to put country first, but I can’t because he doesn’t have a single policy that asks us to lift a finger. Some of us actually believe in country first; McCain is using it as a punch line.
If assumptions are put forward as facts, and if there is little attempt to come up with facts to back up assumptions, then it’s hard to engage in the issues. And if there’s nothing about McCain that one would not defend, no matter how indefensible, then it’s not worth having a discussion.
As a prior poster said, don’t feed the trolls. I won’t from now on.
“Trolls? In other words, if you’re for McCain you are a troll? ”
No, not at all. If you don’t provide evidence to support your position, but instead throw out red herrings for the sole purpose of discrediting your opponent, then yes, you are a troll. If you care to share your ideological beliefs that are conservative and support McCain, then you are not. Pretty simple, eh?
I thought this was supposed to be a non-partison blog.”
“non-partisan” and “blog” don’t go together. There is nothing “non-partisan” about a blog.
Teezy, if the man was serious about this, he would have been in DC three days ago. He apparently had his epiphany after Obama initiated the call. It’s fair reasoning that he decided to one-up Obama. Bush then gave him cover by ‘validating’ the need for them to be in DC. Congress didn’t want them hanging around in the first place.
So now they can both have ritual photos taken after all the hard work is completed. See, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/26/business/26bush.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin. And please don’t now tell us that the threat of McCain coming in off the trail drove Congress to reach agreement:
““I now expect we will indeed have a plan that can pass the House, pass the Senate, be signed by the president, and bring a sense of certainty to this crisis that is still roiling in the markets,” said Robert Bennett, Republican of Utah. “That is our primary responsibility, and I think we our now prepared to meet it.”
And Mr. Bennett, one of the senior members of the banking committee, made a point of describing the meeting as free of political “posturing” in remarks that seemed aimed at Mr. McCain, who announced on Wednesday that he was suspending his campaign and returning to Washington to help secure a deal.
“I appreciate very much my Republican colleagues who participated in the meeting and added tremendously,” Mr. Bennett said. “We focused on solving the problem, rather than posturing politically and it was one of the most productive sessions in that regard that I have participated in since I have been in the Senate.””
Zoot, everyone knows (unless in denial) that McCain’s intent was to gain political mileage and not on the American taxpayer.
I’m sure McCain will say something to his collegues in congress using the buzz words “My friends….”. Most of the republicans in the senate have reservations on his leadership. Thad Cochran, overall a good GOP senator from Mississippi, states that he doesn’t know if McCain has the temper to become commander-in-chief. When you have guys like Cochran voice concerns, we need to listen.
If John McCain cared much about the economic crisis, he’d have immediately headed to DC or done something to help avert the crisis from going down further. Unfortunately, he chose to wait to see what the polls say and then decide few days before the debate that something needed to be done — and done in order to restore his political standing in the polls. And to make the decision to go to DC so suddenly is a clever poltical strategy meant not only to steal the focus away from the economy but also to try to get rid of the VP debate because he senses Biden will crush Palin during the debate and ultimately deliver McCain a stinging defeat in November.
Anonymous 2:19 mentions something that is of far more concern than policies or political alignment, and that’s temperament. Read George Will’s column at http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/mccains_temperment_fails_again.html
Will has his own issues with McCain, but he nails a major concern - McCain’s impulsive nature and ultracombative personality, combined with a stubborn refusal to move away from deeply ingrained certainties (not principles) framed by his life story.
Richard Cohen has a column today on American exceptionalism at http://tinyurl.com/3ms5fx. While it focuses on Palin’s short-comings, its relevant to McCain, too, in pointing out how much the world and the US role in it has changed, and underscoring the flexible mindset needed to deal with new realities. There’s a point at which stubborn adherence to a preconceived world view, combined with intellectual inflexibility and an impulse to play King Canute, becomes highly destructive. We’ve had 8 years of that, and don’t need another 4.