On McCain and offshore drilling, and the Obama pushback
One of the real openings that John McCain has, if you believe the polling, is on energy/gas prices. He's ranked way down on healthcare, economy, etc, but the offshore drilling pitch has been pretty successful. It's the one valid avenue he has into voters' economic concerns.....
So, I'm not surprised to see this story coming out, "Multiple Oil Company Executives Gave Huge Contributions To Electing McCain Just Days After Offshore Drilling Reversal." ($285,000 all from Hess folks on just June 24th.)
(Later: An office manager and her husband, and Amtrak worker, also went in for $57,000. (How much does an Amtrak worker make?))
Put that story in as the second slam after the Obama campaign ad slamming McCain for receiving donations from oil companies, and I think we have ourselves an Obama campaign push to try and undermine McCain on energy/offshore drilling.
This is the way the Obama campaign "plays dirty." They tried to argue against the policy on the merits, but were losing the spin war, so, now, they throw up alot of chaff and sorta coopt the position.
And if the McCain campaign tries to yell, "they're flipping to our positions," the Obama campaign replies, "yeah, but you were only there because you're dirty with oil money."
This is pretty good politics, but it takes patience to set it up.
So, I'm not surprised to see this story coming out, "Multiple Oil Company Executives Gave Huge Contributions To Electing McCain Just Days After Offshore Drilling Reversal." ($285,000 all from Hess folks on just June 24th.)
(Later: An office manager and her husband, and Amtrak worker, also went in for $57,000. (How much does an Amtrak worker make?))
Put that story in as the second slam after the Obama campaign ad slamming McCain for receiving donations from oil companies, and I think we have ourselves an Obama campaign push to try and undermine McCain on energy/offshore drilling.
This is the way the Obama campaign "plays dirty." They tried to argue against the policy on the merits, but were losing the spin war, so, now, they throw up alot of chaff and sorta coopt the position.
And if the McCain campaign tries to yell, "they're flipping to our positions," the Obama campaign replies, "yeah, but you were only there because you're dirty with oil money."
This is pretty good politics, but it takes patience to set it up.
posted by mikevotes at
2:37 PM
17 Comments:
The thing is that McCain's offshore drilling schtick isn't anything more than a sound bite. He has no follow through on how this would actually help Americans today or this winter. Nor can he explain how this helps us even 7-10 years down the road. It's like the whole gas tax holiday thing. In the end it's just a bush league gimmick.
So I think there's an initial uptick for McCain on this drilling issue, but it sort of ends there. McCain has to get people to believe that a vote to open the gates to offshore drilling today will mean they'll be paying $1.25 for gasoline and heating oil tomorrow.
I think Obama actually has the opportunity to cut this issue out from under McCain by treating drilling not as an issue in and of itself but as merely a small element in a broader energy strategy, or plan.
The trick for Obama is to get the electorate thinking big, about "energy strategies", not about little details like drilling a well here or there.
McCain is good at the easy-sell lip service stuff. Playing the the audience du jour with bromides and smart ass asides. He's not so good at the whole details thing. Classic GWB.
Obama is more a "big vision" candidate and his policy ideas don't fit nicely into a 5 word headline. People have to be interested enough to read (or listen) past the sound bit and into the third paragraph.
So far, however, McCain has devolved into running a campaign of throwing rotten vegetables at Obama's ideas and heaping scorn and ridicule upon his person. Without any fresh ideas to actually DO something, this has to get stale after awhile. Even to those who initially like the whole Grumpy Old Man schtick....
By
-epm, at 4:10 PM
Right. Agreed. The reality is that the McCain plan is virtually useless for a number of reasons, BUT..... it is working as a campaign issue.
You may say there's only an uptick, but understand it's the only economic/domestic issue where McCain holds a polling edge, and that makes it a big deal. You don't want McCain running on any domestic issue.
So, they kicked it back, made him look dirty, and coopted the issue. (I lengthened the post to reflect this.)
No matter the realities on the policy here, this is an issue where McCain was gaining polling traction. So, the Obama campaign pushed back.
Let's watch how it plays out.
By
mikevotes, at 4:26 PM
I think it is already working. Obama has moved to a more sane position where he has said he will compromise and is now more open to increasing domestic production. It is/was an issue with very strong public sentiment, and Obama has been on the wrong side. That does not appear to be the case anymore.
This leaves Nancy Pelosi with her "foreign oil imports ONLY" argument as the odd man out.
By
realist, at 5:08 PM
Exactly. This needs to be viewed through a political lens.
Again it was McCain's one issue, so coopting it is a political must.
(Although if you listen to Obama's language of "limited" drilling, it sounds like a flexible assertion. Could be none.)
By
mikevotes, at 5:34 PM
Mike, Libby has ejected me from your shared Impolitic blog. I guess that if anyone is a member of the 50% or so of the public who does not share her worldview, they must be a "Troll". I guess she must think that anyone who will vote for McCain is a "troll" too. Very closed mind and foolish... , but it is her blog so why stay.
For all I know you feel this way about differing views and I am also the unwanted troll here. Say the word and I am gone from this blog also.
By
realist, at 5:42 PM
I'm a little surprised the Dem's use-it-or-lose it issue with regard to the tens of millions of acres the oil companies AREN'T investing in didn't catch on more. It's probably because the congressional Dems are inept at party discipline and political theatre... Certainly when compared to the shameless showboatism of the congressional Repubs.
It will be interesting to see if Obama's energy policy gets traction with the media. I think there's a lot there to chew on.
As an admitted partisan in this fight, it seems to me that Obama has been able to take McCain's issues (foreign policy, drilling) and leap frog him by presenting a much larger, over arching theme. McCain's simplistic and vague "we'll stay in Iraq until we achieve 'victory'" was surpassed by Obama's global road trip, complete with engaging heads of state and making public, pro-American speeches calling on Europeans to gird up for the long haul fight against violent extremism.
Now McCain's simplistic and vague "If only we could drill in the Gulf of Mexico, all our energy problems would be solved" is co-opted as one small piece into Obama's much larger vision of clean energy AND energy independence from Mideast oil. And, as you point out, Obama makes McCain look like a Big Oil stool pigeon to boot.
Obama, to me, looks presidential and McCain looks a main of small (and not original) ideas.
By
-epm, at 8:29 PM
Realist, aw, c'mon.
I don't think anyone is being rude to you, just disagreeing. We've got the one flare up over commenting rules, but it's not like anyone has been slamming you.
I feel like (other than that one incident) I've been talking back and forth..... aw well...
....
EPM, Yeah, I think you're right about the acreage not being drilled, part of it is message delivery. There wasn't a chorus. The message wasn't "clear" black and white and one sentence long.
And he has taken some ground on some of the issues, but, just as an exercise, think about that strategically. If they are "the same" on big issues, it's a personality contest and who likely wins? Ask Hillary Clinton about that.
(I don't think they are "the same" on the big issues, but Obama is taking rhetorical ground on the issues where McCain polls well. Well, really only two, energy and terrorism.)
By
mikevotes, at 5:36 AM
MikeVotes: No, I wasn't whining about treatment on this blog. Not at all. Just wanted to clarify if your blog was a dissent-free zone like "impolitic" and if you wanted me gone from here like I am now gone from there at the wishes of Libby.
The question comes up because of how that blog is run, and you are on the team there. It has nothing to do with the Empire Crest blog.
By
realist, at 8:06 AM
On the topic, a couple of months ago Obama was calling for increasing taxes on oil companies, which would have been directly passed on "at the pump" to consumers. I can't see how this idea would make him popular. Near as I can tell, McCain has not been campaigning with an idea to inrease gas prices.
"If they are "the same" on big issues, it's a personality contest and who likely wins? Ask Hillary Clinton about that."
There was another difference: Obama is clean, and Hillary has a legacy of crime, corruption, and scandal. Now Obama is matched up against McCain. Obama is still cleaner, due to the "Keating 5" crime ring McCain was involved in. I guess the question is, was Keating 5 too long ago? Probably most think so.
By
realist, at 8:25 AM
RE: Cleaner
Forget Keating 5, I think the Big Oil money/stool pigeon, K Street lobby money, consultants who have (or had) contracts with unsavory governments, and the whole subordinating of the McCain brand to the Bushian establishment goon squad, all add to the dirtying of McCain.
By
-epm, at 8:57 AM
The pigeon thing was too hard to parse, Obama has seen lobbyists and has also gotten contributions, Obama has also associated with unsavory characters, and that last one was too vague (was probably an attack on McCain for being in the same political party as George W. Bush). All seems like guilt-by-association. The other side has attacked Obama on that also. It counts a lot less than they say it does.
The only thing that stands as actual corruption on McCain is Keating 5.
By
realist, at 9:36 AM
Realist, as long as anybody stays civil, they're welcome. The line crossers for me are profanity, attacking other commenters, or stuff that I deem substantially, racist sexist, etc. It's all my judgement, but disagreement is fine so long as everybody plays nice.
And, nobody really talks about the Keating 5. I don't think the Obama folks bring it up unless they're really desperate, so, I don't think it'ss be a factor.
....
EPM, that is a little bit cryptic, but I think what you're saying is that McCain is tarnished as part of the corrupt Republican brand. Abramoff, Stevens, Cunningham, the perception of pay for play with big business, industry lobbyists in regulation roles, etc.
By
mikevotes, at 10:08 AM
Obama, as much as he runs as a Democrat, is tarred by the same sort of thing involving the Democrats in Congress. But Obama certainly is not tied to the negatives of the most recent Presidential administration of his party as McCain is: Bill Clinton, who even now can't take responsibility for how racist language damanged Hillary's campaign, makes that so easy for Obama.
By
realist, at 10:34 AM
It's not just that "McCain took lobbyist money" It's that he got a HUGE injection from oil interests immediately following his flip-flop on offshore oil drilling. And it's not that there's a lobbyist or two down the line on his staff, it's that he's surrounded himself with lobbyists and corporate insiders. Some (many?) who have been forced to resign.
It's in the degree of the sin, so to speak.
I'm not simply saying that McCain is tarnished by the broader Republican "culture of corruption" in guilt by association way. I'm saying I believe he has openly abandoned the management of campaign to the darker side or the Republican dirty-politics of destruction wing. McCain has made himself a tool of the party, rather than it's standard bearer. Contrast that with how Obama grabbed the reigns of the DNC and set new standards.
This will only be an issue if Obama (or his surrogates) make it an issue, however.
By
-epm, at 10:35 AM
"Obama, as much as he runs as a Democrat, is tarred by the same sort of thing involving the Democrats in Congress."
While this could be the framing of a McCain ad, it isn't the reality. As I mentioned above, Obama has really broken ranks with the DLC and the traditional, big pockets players in the DNC. He has actually forced change (to appropriate a phrase) in the party, rather than be manipulated by its parochial power structure.
By
-epm, at 10:38 AM
This comment has been removed by the author.
By
-epm, at 10:38 AM
This comment has been removed by the author.
By
dmarks, at 10:45 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home