Icepicks and Nukes

This is not the score of a lopsided basketball game. That’s the number of events Obama/Biden have made in swing states compared to McCain/Palin. From the Wall Street Journal:

Sen. Barack Obama, his running mate and his wife have appeared at twice as many events in swing states as their Republican counterparts, which may help explain the Democrat’s lead in many battleground-state polls.

In the five weeks since the fall campaign officially began, Sen. Obama, his wife, Michelle, and vice-presidential nominee Joe Biden have appeared at a total of 95 separate events in states that both sides are contesting.

Sen. John McCain and his running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, have appeared at 55 events in those areas, with Cindy McCain, the nominee’s wife, adding only one more to the total, according to a Wall Street Journal tally based on schedules provided by the campaigns.
Stopping By Swing States

See how many times the candidates, their running mates and their wives have stopped by hotly contested battleground states.

The gap makes a difference in the amount of press that each ticket gets in critical markets — and is mirrored by a similar disparity in TV advertising. Sen. Obama outspent Sen. McCain and the Republican National Committee on ads in 15 states for the week ended Oct. 4, according to the Wisconsin Advertising Project, an initiative at the University of Wisconsin. The Republicans spent more in just two states.

The effect: The Democrats are being seen much more often, in free news coverage and in paid advertising, in the states that will determine the winner.

The article also includes a handy chart keeping track of both campaigns’ ad spending in key swing states. Obama is outspending McCain in all of them (in some cases, by a rate of nearly 4 to 1) except Iowa and Minnesota.

John Lewis went there. From NBC’s First Read:

Georgia congressman John Lewis — a civil rights leader and a man once deemed by John McCain as one of the “wisest” men he knew and one whose advice he would seek as president — today likened the “negative tone” of McCain’s campaign to that of incendiary segregation advocate George Wallace in the 1960s.

“What I am seeing reminds me too much of another destructive period in American history,” Lewis wrote in a statement first posted on Politico’s website. “Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin are sowing the seeds of hatred and division, and there is no need for this hostility in our political discourse.”

Noting that Alabama governor and presidential candidate George Wallace “never threw a bomb” but “created the climate and the conditions that encouraged vicious attacks against innocent Americans who were simply trying to exercise their constitutional rights,” Lewis attributed the 1963 bombing of a Birmingham church to the racial division sown by Wallace’s political rhetoric.

“As public figures with the power to influence and persuade, Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin are playing with fire, and if they are not careful, that fire will consume us all,” the statement continues. “They are playing a very dangerous game that disregards the value of the political process and cheapens our entire democracy. We can do better. The American people deserve better.”

The McCain campaign responded with a strongly-worded statement calling Lewis’s remarks “brazen and baseless,” and asking that Obama “personally repudiate these outrageous and divisive comments.”

Although Lewis and others are well within their rights to attack the McCain campaign for the vitriolic rhetoric they are stoking among their supporters, Lewis went too far here. Yes, Wallace had a long and well-documented history of inflammatory rhetoric (“Segregation today, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever,” anyone?) but to try to compare or associate McCain/Palin with it is coming dangerously close to calling them racist.

Every campaign or public figure has their fringe supporters, regardless of the issue or where they fall on the political spectrum. While the words and actions of a handful of bigoted individuals has drawn the attention of the national media and the blogosphere, their misguided views should not be attributed to the candidates they support.

At the same time, the McCain campaign need to realize that they have to be careful in what they say by energizing an angry, hyper-partisan element of their base who believe the most outlandish conspiracy theories and Internet rumors about Barack Obama. Use of specific codewords or phrases triggers a response from them similar to Pavlov’s dog experiment. They need to cool down their rhetoric before things get out of control.

Not a good sign, especially in a critical swing state.

Conservative activists, operatives and officeholders are anxious about John McCain’s Nevada campaign, fearing the Arizona senator lacks the ground operation and commitment to win Nevada.

Concern grew last week after McCain canceled a Nevada visit. A new Reno Gazette-Journal poll showed McCain trailing by 7 percentage points, with Democratic challenger Sen. Barack Obama competing in traditional Republican strongholds here.

“People I talk to wonder where the campaign is,” said Chuck Muth, a conservative activist who regularly speaks to dozens of other conservatives — north and south — through his newsletter.
…
The McCain camp won’t say how many paid staff members are here. Rogich said he did not know the exact size of that staff, but said it is “close to 30.”

The Obama campaign has about 100 paid staff members in the state.

A few Republican operatives, who declined to be named, offered blunt criticism.

The McCain campaign is “a joke,” one said. “There’s not a campaign in Nevada. A couple of guys, running around, being incompetent. Or even worse, arrogantly incompetent.”

The consultant said there was no discernible McCain ground game, which is political jargon for the massive effort needed to find likely supporters and get them to the polls.

He did hedge a bit, saying that if some earth-shattering event were to occur, McCain could still win in Nevada. Otherwise: “There’s not one single positive note for Republicans. I couldn’t be more pessimistic.”

The gloom is not surprising, given national polls showing Obama opening a lead and McCain playing defense in traditionally Republican states, which had included Nevada until Democratic registration drives have given the party an advantage of 80,000 voters.

The numbers and energy of a campaign’s field operation are often more telling than any opinion polls.  Obama has more paid staffers on the ground in Nevada than McCain, and they’re a lot more fired up than their Republican counterparts.  If this becomes a pattern that is being repeated in other swing states, McCain had better start practicing his concession speech.  (Hat tip to Jonathan Martin)

Every Barack Obama Internet myth that was discussed and debunked back during the primaries is coming back with a vengeance.

Some of the McCain surrogates, and on occasion Sarah Palin herself, whip up their supporters into such an anti-Obama frenzy that, depending on your perspective is reminiscent of George Orwell’s “Two Minutes Hate” or this sequence from the Pink Floyd movie “The Wall.” Highlights of recent events include McCain supporters yelling out “treason,” “terrorist,” or “kill him” when Obama was discussed.

After his surrogates began reviving the Axis of Ayers/Rezko/Wright, McCain said that the gloves would come off for the second debate.  But during the 90 minutes he was onstage with Obama, he never mentioned Bill Ayers, Tony Rezko, or Jeremiah Wright.

But they were all back with a vengeance during McCain/Palin events on the campaign trail a day later.  The McCain campaign produced a web ad hitting Obama for his ties to Ayers.  The difference is that a web ad costs nothing to get on the air, they email supporters who watch it to their heart’s content and the talking heads on cable will play it because it gives them something to talk about.  This gives the McCain the best of both worlds – they get the Ayers message out to a wider audience while at the same time they don’t have to spend any money to get a full-fledged ad on the air.  Note that the web ad includes the requisite “I’m John McCain and I approve this message” disclaimer so he does put his own name and image behind this attack.

It looks as if the Obama campaign is now trying a new strategy to get under McCain’s skin in the runup to the third debate: question his manhood.

Obama during an interview with ABC News:

“I am surprised that, you know, we’ve been seeing some pretty over-the-top attacks coming out of the McCain campaign over the last several days, that he wasn’t willing to say it to my face. But I guess we’ve got one last debate. So presumably, if he ends up feeling that he needs to, he will raise it during the debate.”

Joe Biden at a campaign event:

“All of the things they said about Barack Obama…on the TV, at their rallies, and now on YouTube, and everything else they’re doing before the debate, all the things they’re saying after the debate as recently as this morning, John McCain could not bring himself to look Barack Obama in the eye and say the same things to him,” said Biden.

This puts McCain into a box.  Obama and Biden have thrown down the gauntlet and essentially dared him to bring up the subject(s) during the final presidential debate.  If McCain goes there, he gives Obama an opening to defend himself and bring up the subject of McCain’s relationship with Charles Keating before a nationally televised audience of millions.   If McCain ignores the subject, it will be seen as backing down from Obama’s challenge or disassociating himself from the attacks being done by supporters in his name.

The media narrative of the hostile crowds at McCain events is beginning to pick up steam, but the partisan media blogs on the left are taking Obama’s “say it to my face” message further, accusing McCain of cowardice.  Former Republican John Cole was one of the first out of the gate, but the liberal but normally cautious Josh Marshall has also bluntly called out McCain for his cowardice for fanning the partisan flames for his supporters but not hitting Obama with it directly when he had the chance.

Regardless of whether McCain wins or loses this election, his personal reputation and image will be damaged, possibly beyond repair.