Even though Hillary Clinton lost the battle for the Democratic nomination, it is wise of John McCain to adopt some of her strategies against Barack Obama.
The best example of a strategy that actually worked and that could help McCain beat Obama is the ‘3 A.M. attack’; it refers to the ad published by Clinton’s campaign in which something terrible happens and the president is called. Who do you want answering the phone? Some Chicago politician with no experience or someone with a bit more clout?
It is, of course, a nasty, negative attack. But it works. Clinton’s campaign has proven that. Obama was winning big time. Clinton was being soundly defeated.
But then they put out the ad, and suddenly she was able to come close. She started winning primaries after a big losing streak. People talked about her, and Obama fell, at least a little, back to earth.
McCain knows this and has adopted the 3 A.M. strategy. He is using it whenever he can.
From an intellectual perspective not good, from an opportunistic perspective it most certainly is.
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Comments are closed.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
So, you advocate using the fear strategy? Scare the American public into voting for McCain, because if they vote for Obama, nukes will fall on American cities?
Both Democrats and Republicans have used the fear strategy. LBJ’s re-election was secured partially because of it, as was George Bush’s.
Yet, fear has also been used in non-election settings. WMDs, for example, were given as a rationale for going to war with Iraq.
Fear does work, but to me, it smacks of desperation, by someone who thinks they can’t win on their virtues. Instead, they feel they must scare everybody to win.
It works – unless your Clinton. He stuttered, but then came back against it. And her mindless has-been husband with his – well she was tired it was 11pm – didn’t help her fake image either.