A hypothetical campaign

This week The Daily Show seems to have finally abandoned all pretense of non-partisanship in their election coverage. There is not necessarily a problem with this, in fact they've done some pretty brilliant segments in the last few days.

This one is especially remarkable, although not for being particularly clever (I could take it or leave it):



While watching this it occurred to me that this is exactly what the campaign against John McCain would look like if he were a democrat. To break it down:

1. Destroy his war-hero image by digging up some other Vietnam naval vets who will agree to pubicly question his competence as a soldier, making sure to frequently mention the number of planes he crashed and how much they cost.

2. Run another ad contrasting McCain's positions of four years ago with his positions today, in much the same way The Daily Show does here. The "straight-talker" becomes a John Kerry-style flip-flopper.

3. Make (if you'll pardon my word choice) liberal use of the clip from 2000 in which John McCain, gesticulating wildly, leans over the podium and repeatedly intones:

"I endorse Governor Bush!"

Allow me a slight digression, if you will. In 2004, the republicans ran a very effective (if upsettingly dishonest) ad in which a voice-over stated, one at a time, various provisions of a military spending bill. "Combat armor for our troops," she would say, or "new weapons and vehicles." After each item on the list, we heard the words "Mr. Kerry: no."

But when we heard the words "Mr. Kerry", we did not hear the voice-over actress. We heard an actual recording of Kerry's name, taken from a senate roll-call vote. The austere authenticity of this voice lent the whole scene an aura of weighty foreboding. I'm pretty sure there was also an ominous chord.

The McCain version should be obvious: just replace "Mr. Kerry: no" with "I endorse Governor Bush! I endorse Governor Bush!" and the military spending items with various policy categories:

Voice-over: On the economy?

McCain: I endorse Governor Bush! I endorse Governor Bush!

Voice-over: On alternative energy?

McCain: I endorse Governor Bush! I endorse Governor Bush!

Voice-over: On Iraq?

... and so forth.

The clip is perfect for this type of attack ad. Firstly, it drills home, with mechanical insistence, the central theme of the Democratic argument against McCain: his supposed connection to George Bush. Secondly, it erodes McCain's other great strength: his perceived "independent streak". But even better, it has a grating, maddening quality not dissimilar to the "Dean Scream" of january 2004. If Howard Dean had been the Democratic nominee that year, you can bet the scream (more of a yell, really) would have been used in exactly the manner lined out above (with other alterations to the script, of course).

The insidious genius of Republican presidential campaigns seems to be that they bypass the opponent's weaknesses (for the most part) and go straight for his greatest strengths. In 2004, they successfully dismantled John Kerry's war record, reducing him to a rich, whiny hippie who hates our troops. This year, they are claiming Obama's very popularity, the apparently monumental nature of his candidacy, as a reason to reject him outright.*

But like it or not, you will never see this strategy employed; for the Democrats will not use it. The Republicans, in all likelyhood, would. It worked very well four years ago. The hope this year lies in the fact that Obama is infinitely more appealling as a person than Kerry was, and that this will be enough.

*Taken to its logical conclusion, this seems to be an argument against electoral democracy in general, but such a suggestion would require a bolder blogger than I.