ALBUQUERQUE, New Mexico (Reuters) - Republican nominee John McCain said in an interview aired on Sunday he would bring Democrats into his Cabinet and administration as part of his attempt to change the political atmosphere in Washington.
"I don't know how many, but I can tell you, with all due respect to previous administrations, it is not going to be a single, 'Well, we have a Democrat now,'" McCain said on CBS' "Face the Nation."
"It's going to be the best people in America, the smartest people in America," he said in an interview taped on Saturday.
Well, you could have seen that coming a mile off. First, McCain tries to steal "change," and now he's trying to steal "post-partisan." What next, "unity"? The problem is that all these buzzwords are so vacuous that stealing them is easy.
Is there anything that McCain won't be able to steal?
Yes.
"It's the economy, stupid."
People remember the Clinton years -- Democratic years -- as good times. And they are right to do so.
Maybe Obama will figure that out in time, and trump Palin's populism of resentment with genuine populism. Or maybe not.
- lambert's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Front page
Comments
USA-Today anyone?
"McCain has narrowed Obama’s wide advantage on handling the economy, by far the electorate’s top issue. Before the GOP convention, Obama was favored by 19 points; now he’s favored by 3." in the internals
Anyway, there aren't that many Repubs to stock the WH with right now. There will be a need to find others for Cabinet and many other jobs.
Lieberman, I assume
is on the post-partisan list.
Fwiw, on appeal alone, I think this sort of appeal: "I'll use the best and brightest, no matter the party" is a lot better than this sort: "We have to dump the partisan fights of the past". Not sure why.
Broder's in heaven
-- http://www.realclearpolitics.com/article...
for Change
-- Obama, McCain Will Have a Mandate
Peter is to Valhalla is to Amberglow as?
Tinker is to Evers is to Chance.
Ok, I just figured out why McCain's
appeal is better.
McCain short: I care about doing the right thing, no matter what.
Obama short: I want it quiet, no matter what. Not fighting, regardless what the fight is about, is more important than fighting.
Neither appeal is necessarily truthful. But Obama's appeal is rebutted by Barney Frank's excellent response to the underpinnings of the postpartisanship riff.
Also, the appeal dichotomy seems to mirror the transformation over at TL the last couple of weeks.
Political Niches and Palin's new spot
Maybe I'm slow, but it just occured to me why the Obama camp is so vehement towards Palin -- and scared.
She took Obama's niche. Nearly everything you can attack her for can be leveled at Obama -- almost everything. The only thing he's left with is her gender, and that just puts him in the wrong place, too. He cannot attack her for anything, and neither can his supporters, without the same arguments thrown back in their faces.
Of course, this goes both ways -- she is equally incapable of attacking Obama. The only thing she can attack him for is being black, and he's tried to call her out on that one already, just as she's already called him out on the sexism. Both of them are saying 'you KNOW that what they REALLY meant was...' hoping for some traction.
But here's Palin's ace in the hole: SHE'S ONLY THE VEEP CANDIDATE. This would be stronger if McCain was younger, but it still holds.
Sorry if everyone figured this out before I did, but I had to say it to make it real in my mind.
McCain Doesn't Have a Choice
McCain may be putting on post-partisan clothing because he believes in it (and I truly believe he does), but he doesn't really have a choice. Unlike the other side that can take the risk of alienating the base to pull in folks from the center and still win, McCain has not only to energize his base, but pilfer the middle. He has absolutely no margin for error. He has to run as far as he possibly can from his party, but still only so far as to keep his base.
Obama could very easily and simply energize the base and go straight partisan, and still have a mandate, and a stronger and more legitimate one than he'd have with playing footsie with conservatives like he's know doing.
reinvention
Obama could very easily and simply energize the base and go straight partisan, and still have a mandate, and a stronger and more legitimate one than he’d have with playing footsie with conservatives like he’s know doing.
Not even Madonna reinvented herself so many times as Obama has over the last couple of months. So I don't think tha an attempt to go heavily partisan will work.
The time to "solidify the base" is after the primaries; instead, Obama lurched to the right (not the center), not merely raising questions among those who supported him during the primaries based on the perception that he was a progressive, but failing to get those in the party who doubted him on board.
Going "partisan" now (as he is trying to do with the abortion issue) is extremely problemmatic because it again raises the question of who he really is -- and makes it possible to ressurect his rather radical past. Obama's efforts to make his "Wright/Ayres" period disappear during the primaries will come back to haunt him now -- instead of acknowledging his past and saying he's evolved since then, he denied he ever involved with/promoted 'far left' ideas.
Obama has painted himself into a corner -- and his corner keeps getting smaller and smaller....
Change I Can Believe in.
I detest the cynicism of Palin's nomination, and I hate everything she stands for, and I hate the GOP as strongly as I ever have, and obviously our economy is about to drop out from under us, and [snip the long screed about how I'm genuinely a Liberal
democrat]...
but ...
I can't help it. I see Palin up there, and the phrase "Change You Can Believe In" resonates with me for the first time in this whole exercise. Esp. the "believe in" part, because McCain went and put his money where Obama's mouth was.
And it's not just about the gender wars, but the class warfare - he put a woman on the Republican ticket with the kind of experiences and tribulations that real American families have. (The fact that she doesn't bear the same economic burdens probably won't bother anybody. Don't forget - IOKIFYAR.)
While the FACT of the matter is that this is a cynical shot across the bow in the ongoing class war - much moreso than the creation of down-home Gentleman Rancher Bush ever was - it may just work.
The country only has 8 weeks to tire of her. I don't think any machine can accomplish that unless she helps them in some way. You're right. The Democrats DO have to start making like the Big Dawg and talking about the economy.
But the Anointed One said just yesterday that we don't want to rush into rescinding Bush's tax cuts, what with the recession and all.
[sigh]
We're going to lose, aren't we?
it's less cynical than "Rancher, folksy" Bush --
Palin really does hunt and do all that stuff--and they do it as a family, too.
Bush is afraid of horses.
Obama-Bill Clinton lunch
BTD has an interesting post over at TL today, suggesting that the way Obama can get the media attention back and hit hard on the economy is to get Big Dog to go out on a few high-profile campaign stops with him.
Stroke 'o genius, I'd say, if Obama can swallow his ego enough to do it.
AP reports (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5izQos...) that Bill Clinton and Obama are going to have lunch on the 11th when Obama is in town for 9/11 commemoration events.
doing that shows more weakness--
just like sending women out to deal with Palin does.
The whole country knows that Obama trashed him and his presidencies -- and successes -- for all of the past year.
It Won't Show Weakness
if Obama appears with Bill. If he just sends him out, then he will looks weak. Not so much because he needs Bill, but because he will look too insecure to campaign with Bill. The key is doing it together. Whether Obama is up to that, I don't know.
i don't think they'd do it together--
ever.
I Tend To Agree
but then that's a huge mistake for Obama, assuming at this point Bill would be willing to do it. Actually, getting to the point where Bill Clinton, who loves campaigning for Democrats, might not be willing to do it, just shows how many mistakes the Obama campaign has made in terms of setting itself up for the GE.
At some point, Obama is going to have to decide how important winning in November is and whether he's willing to suck it up to get it done.
Palin freed McCain to go to the middle--
she locks down the millions in the religious base and their GOTV stuff--and McCain gets to stop pandering to them (badly) and can go back to his "maverick who bucks his party" stuff.
"GOP activists report with relief ...."
"... GOP activists report with relief that socially conservative voters who might have stayed home on Election Day say they will turn out now, while others say they will campaign more actively for the ticket. Among those coming out of the woodwork, activists say, are some who have not been active before, such as parents of special-needs children who feel a bond with Palin. The reaction was slower for less-religious Republicans, including ones with military backgrounds who wondered about Palin's qualifications, but after her tough convention speech, many of them are also energized. ..." -- For the Republican Base, Palin Pick Is Energizing -- http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con...
And That's the Real Danger of Palin
in one move, McCain locked down and energized his base. The evangelicals are going to donate and turn out in force.
Now he's freer to
lie tocampaign for the middle.totally--
compare and contrast with the shitty Biden pick.
Wrong Question
I don't think the question is whether Obama would be brave enough to campaign alongside Bill. I've always been of the opinion, and I think Obama has shown this quite a few times throughout the campaign, that he'll do just about anything for his own self-advancement. No, the question is whether he'll be able to put on a good enough show to convince Bill that he's worth it.