I understand.
People are criticizing McCain's decision (or his approval of his strategists' decision) to turn the campaign full-tilt negative. They say it's not what the country needs or wants; it will alienate voters; it's the wrong tone given the times; it won't help the country with the current mess, and it might hurt, regardless of who wins. They're right.
But they're also wrong. From a strategic point of view, McCain has to go negative. Here's why: For the first time in the campaign, a candidate is polling above 50% with some consistency. And that candidate is Barack Obama (Gallup has him above 50%, as do Rasmussen and CNN). This means it's no longer enough to win undecideds. If every undecided broke for McCain, he still might lose. They need to bring people over from the Obama camp. And they can't do it just by making McCain look good; the economic situation has seen to that. They have to introduce negatives about Obama, worries about him, to counter the various reasons (mostly economic I suspect) people will cite as cause for their recent decision to vote for him.
It's a logical tactical decision, but very conventional (perhaps not what is needed). Once someone has made up their mind, especially after delaying doing so for so long, you can't just be better, the other guy has to be worse. So McCain needs to pin his hopes on fear and aversion, the notion that Obama is too risky a choice. So we get attack ads and scare tactics, a last ditch attempt to coerce an electorate that is in the process of making up its mind. More than ever in my lifetime, America wants a change, and McCain is out of new ideas--for the campaign, and for the country.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
While you're probably right about the negative ads, to me they make me even less inclined to pick McCain. Not that I would anyway, but if I was unsure who to pick, the fact that Obama has a plan (positive ads) compared to McCain's apparent lack of a plan (since he only is showing negative ads) would probably decide for me.
When I saw Palin first speak, where she was sarcastic and critical and downright mean, I felt even more turned off by the republican party. This just adds to that aversion.
I guess my response would be "exactly." So it alienated you; you weren't going to vote for him anyway. The target audience for the negative ads is probably well under 10% of the population (could be as small as 3-4% if they're the right 3-4%).
And I doubt any of the people targeted are among the ones who are interested enough to read and post on blogs that contain political analysis.
I also think you've got a good point about reactions to the Republican Party. I'm a Republican for Obama, and I've seriously considered changing my party affiliation more than once during this election cycle.
Post a Comment