So John McCain is being bashed for his mendacious ad about Obama not visiting the troops because he could not bring cameras. Whoop dee doo. The problem is for three days that ad got run on free media. Dirty politics works and McCain has now shown who will go as far down in the gutter as it takes.

And why not? Dirty politics works. The Gallup tracker now has a once 9 point gap Obama held down to 4. Rassmussen has its Obama 7 point gap down to 2. Three guesses how that happened.

Keep waiting for the "new" politics and see where it gets you. Here is where Obama has lost his way - not in the positive side of his campaign, that's worked well. It is in his negative branding, or lack there of. When is the last time you have heard the Obama campaign use the words Bush and McCain together? This ain't rocket science. If the Obama campaign is not saying "Bush's third term" half the day, it is not doing its job. That's politics folks. Wishing won't make it not so.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

Trapper John has an interesting post on how Barack Obama MIGHT be approaching his VP choice. Trapper's bottom line? Obama will choose the "do no harm" option. I suspect that is the thinking in the Obama camp and likely the McCain camp (though clearly McCain will be more likely to take a risk for some upside). Here's the problem I see with Trapper's analysis - it is impossible for any choice to not do some harm.

I know they do not like to hear this at daily kos, but the day Obama announces his VP and it is not Hillary Clinton, that will cause Obama harm. It may be unfair, it may be wrong, but it is a fact. (My own view is that picking Hillary Clinton clearly remains the best choice for Obama, both on the positive and negative side. Clinton's supporters will be energized, her fundraisers will work their heart out, the Clinton brand will help with voters on the issue of the economy, she has become a first rate campaigner, etc. But he will not pick her for reasons only Obama can and will have to explain.)

More . . .

The Indictment (PDF)

Reuters reporting:

Sen. Ted Stevens from Alaska, the longest serving U.S. Republican senator ever, was indicted on seven counts related to his holding of public office, a federal law enforcement official said Tuesday. The U.S. Justice Department has scheduled a news conference for 1:20 p.m. to make an announcement "regarding a significant criminal matter." The official said the news conference would announce the criminal charges against Stevens that have been returned by a federal grand jury in Washington, D.C.

More from the NYTimes:

Mr. Stevens, 84, was indicted on seven counts of falsely reporting income. The charges are related to renovations on his home and to gifts he has received. They arise from an investigation that has been under way for more than a year, in connection with the senator’s relationship with a businessman who oversaw the home-remodeling project.

More . . .

The Washington Post and Chicago Tribune's Swamp are saying the same thing: Obama's veep vetting is focusing most heavily on Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine, Joe Biden, and Sen. Evan Bayh.

Problem: If Joe Biden is the nominee, count me out. I couldn't even clap for the ticket.

Other reasons: His saying we may need to rethink the military draft. His inability to cure rampant injustices in his own state, where one of every four prisoners who died in prison since 2000 died of AIDS-related diseases and the states' prisons suffer from an atrocious lack of medical care.

I'm just warming up. I so hope Obama doesn't pick Biden. He is the antithesis of change and the embodiment of your father's Oldsmobile. [More...]

Another flip-flop from John McCain:

Republican presidential candidate John McCain drew a sharp rebuke Monday from conservatives after he signaled an openness to a higher payroll tax for Social Security, contrary to previous vows not to raise taxes of any kind.

Another position changed to mimic a policy advocated by Barack Obama.

Obama has called for imposing a new payroll tax on incomes above $250,000. ... When Obama announced his plan June 13, McCain's top economic adviser, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, told reporters that as president McCain would not consider a payroll tax increase "under any imagineable circumstance."

Perhaps McCain's imagination has improved. But don't worry. McCain will switch back to his original position tomorrow. But he probably won't return to his support for the privatization of social security until later in the week. His policies depend on his mood, apparently. Or on his moment-to-moment sense of what will play to voters.

There is not much I agree with in Kos' post on Obama's potential veep pick. But one part really bothered me - his discussion of Bill Clinton's choice of Al Gore as his running mate. Kos writes:

Bill Clinton had it right, actually -- he bucked conventional wisdom ("must choose a northerner to 'balance out' the ticket") and chose another southern Dem (Al Gore) who reinforced his core message -- that he was a "new" kind of Democrat different from those northern urban elites. And they looked great together.

What Kos seems to forget is Al Gore was an experienced Washington legislator, 8 years in the House and 8 years in the Senate, with his own Presidential run in 1988 under his belt, when Bill Clinton tapped him for VP. To compare Al Gore in 1992 to Claire McCaskill, a first term Senator or Tim Kaine, a first term Governor, is simply ridiculous. Sure, the chemistry was important. Sure, the "new" Democrat message was reinforced. But most importantly, no one thought Al Gore was not qualified to be President. He was a well known commodity -- a respected statesman in his own right in 1992.

Let's compare Gore's 1992 bio to Claire McCaskill and Tim Kaine's today on the flip.

(213 comments, 817 words in story) There's More :: Permalink :: Comments