Meet Mr. Vague Generalities
If this is the direction in which John McCain wants the campaign to go, Democrats are even luckier than I had hoped.
As he did Tuesday night, McCain focused much of his criticism on Obama, Tuesday’s winner on the Democratic side.
“I respect him and the campaign that he has run, but there’s going to come a time when we have to get into specifics,” McCain told reporters Wednesday on Capitol Hill. “I’ve not observed every speech he’s given, obviously, but they are singularly lacking in specifics.”
Now, as we discussed the other day, the claim that Obama lacks specifics is, on its face, false. Obama’s campaign has presented detailed policy prescriptions on almost every issue under the sun. If McCain wants to argue that these policies are wrong and offer alternatives, more power to him. But to pretend they don’t exist is just silly.
But the more important point is that McCain is going after Obama on one of his own biggest weaknesses. We’re talking about a candidate who’s running on a powerful personal story, but whose understanding of policy details is almost Bush-like. Last year, for example, McCain explained his position on Iraqi reconciliation this way: “One of the things I would do if I were President would be to sit the Shiites and the Sunnis down and say, ‘Stop the bullshit.'” This is what passes for “policy specifics” in John McCain World.
Jonathan Chait added today, “McCain takes a strong interest in foreign policy, to be sure, but his main public appeal has been to endless remind voters of his history as a POW. On economics, he’s repeatedly admitted that he knows very little. And on social issues, he doesn’t even know what his own positions are. (See this hilarious report from last year.)”
If this campaign boils down to which side is prepared to offer policy specifics, McCain will be lucky to even carry Arizona.
On the broader point, it is interesting that McCain seems to be focusing most of his attention on Obama, not Hillary Clinton. Nico Pitney pulled together some of the examples, including the one referenced above. There was also his speech after his primary victories last night.
“Hope, my friends, is a powerful thing. I can attest to that better than many, for I have seen men’s hopes tested in hard and cruel ways that few will ever experience. And I stood astonished at the resilience of their hope in the darkest of hours because it did not reside in an exaggerated belief in their individual strength, but in the support of their comrades, and their faith in their country. My hope for our country resides in my faith in the American character, the character which proudly defends the right to think and do for ourselves, but perceives self-interest in accord with a kinship of ideals, which, when called upon, Americans will defend with their very lives.
“To encourage a country with only rhetoric rather than sound and proven ideas that trust in the strength and courage of free people is not a promise of hope. It is a platitude.”
This isn’t entirely encouraging for Hillary Clinton, who probably wishes McCain were attacking her, too.
Yeah, well I think specifics might be a stretch for a man who doesn’t know what his own religion is.
So ironic, that the presumptive GOP nominee seems to be having a harder slog than Obama in a neck-and-neck race between two powerhouses.
The speeches Obama has given lately, especially, do show a “new” approach to politics, and differentiate him from the spineless Bush enablers of the old mindset.
But lets take Obama’s unambiguous stand against torture, probably the uniting policy of the Republican Party, I like to call the new abortion. How, exactly, does McCain rile up the torture-under-any-circumstance crowd with straight talk and conistency? Sure, he’s got the media in the bag, but let’s see how brazen they want to be about their partisanship with the prospects of dems with a lock on the FCC, deregulation, etc. We might want to revisit that telecom immunity and break-up the Clear Channel monopoly. No more shutout of non-Republican voices, or we’re bringing back the fairness doctrine!
Murdoch is totally soulless and will kiss anyone’s ass that will get him what he wants, and he’s going to need the government on board at some point and has a lot of boot-licking to make amends.
McCain is so fading into the distance if he runs with this tactic.
If this campaign boils down to which side is prepared to offer policy specifics, McCain will be lucky to even carry Arizona.
True.
McCain can’t even decide if we should stay in Iraq for 100 years or 1,000 years. Someone really needs to pin him down on the specific details of his insanity.
Tranlslation to English:
Hope, my friends, is a powerful thing. I can attest to that better than many, for I have seen men’s hopes tested in hard and cruel ways that few will ever experience. And I stood astonished at the resilience of their hope in the darkest of hours because it did not reside in an exaggerated belief in their individual strength, but in the support of their comrades, and their faith in their country.
= I used to be a POW.
My hope for our country resides in my faith in the American character, the character which proudly defends the right to think and do for ourselves, but perceives self-interest in accord with a kinship of ideals, which, when called upon, Americans will defend with their very lives.
= Every man for himself, except for the military.
To encourage a country with only rhetoric rather than sound and proven ideas that trust in the strength and courage of free people is not a promise of hope. It is a platitude
= Obama doesn’t trust free people.
Sorry, but Obama has way more vague generalities than McCain:
Obama won’t say when the last U.S. troops will be pulled out of Iraq, whereas McCain laid down a firm 10,000 year timetable.
Obama has been maddeningly vague about what to do in Iraq if the surge fails, whereas McCain firmly stated “I have no Plan B.”
Obama has made vague speeches about “talking” to our adversaries without every specifying what he would say, whereas McCain has firmly asserted that we will have more wars.
Obama has spewed endless platitudes about a new way of doing politics, but McCain gave a firm hug to the man who crapped all over him in South Carolina in 2000.
It’s no contest.
This could be an effective avenue, even leaving aside the argument of whether or not it’s true, since most people respond to Barack Obama purely on the basis of packaging.
Obama Rocks
Barack Obama’s string of eight consecutive victories over the last week with increasing margins seems to suggest that Obama’s message is beginning to resonate with all Americans. The breakdown of voters last night was fascinating. He increased his vote amongst women, white males and Latinos. All three categories will play a major part in Texas & Ohio primaries.
Obama’s speech last night in Wisconsin was his best so far. It seems he is just getting going and now there is a possibility that the ‘Obama Movement’ will capture the hearts of Wisconsin voters where Hillary had unassailable lead until recently. Which begs the question, why is Hillary in Texas and not in Wisconsin, shouldn’t she focus on Wisconsin first where the primary is on Tuesday? Some more people in her campaign team need to be fired!
The Americans are taking a good look at Barack and they like what they see. Last night CNN showed Senator McCain’s speech immediately after Barack’s and what a comparison. McCain seemed tired, unenthusiastic and spent.
If John Edwards is considering endorsing Obama, he better do it soon or he will be irrelevant.
The truth and what the media reports as true are different beasts. You have been doing this too long not to realize that they will faithfully regurgitate whatever McCain chooses to give them. Obama is weak on specifics. Just accept it now because it will be the narrative.
I am thrilled with the direction this is starting to go. Hillary isn’t getting too negative (though she is lashing out a little) and the more Barack and Hillary debate each other the more irrelevent McCain looks, whimpering about how neither provides his great advantages… if being a Bush clone is an advantage. This i sjust as hard for him because he doesn’t know which one to debate.
Both Obama and Clinton have put on stellar performances while the Republican debates have been an almost sad show of who can generate the greatest fear and spout the most outrageous patriotic, jingoistic statements.
As long as they don’t go ridiculously negative they will both come out of this a thousand times stronger than McCain. He will be a laughable debating opponent for either of them, even if somebody tells him what his policy is.
Of course I thought Bush was a laughable debating opponent to Gore. We can always hope that the nation wakes up.
I know Obama’s speeches are inspiring, but seriously, we all knew republicans would eventually start attacking him because he never gets into specifics about what he is going to do.
Expect more of this, actually, expect a lot worse if he gets nominated.
It also doesn’t help Obama’s image that he is refusing to debate with HRC, and before you Obama fans start calling me names, it really does matter to people what is said, because most people will not take the time to visit his web page to read what he or his staff has posted.. and it sounds a bit ridiculous to say that you should have to go read all of his plans in order to get a feel for what he will do.
Mordoormat wrote “Of course I thought Bush was a laughable debating opponent to Gore. We can always hope that the nation wakes up.”
He was.
Obama may not inject into his stump speechs his detailed proposals as Clinton would. But that neither means he doesn’t have specifics nor that he does not no them.
Though he really stumbled on driver licenses for undocumented at the second debate it came up.
McCain had better not be spouting this off right before a big debate. It will blow up in his face.
Thank you for verbalizing what I have been thinking about Weathervane McCain and his plans and policies for our nation..or lack thereof 😉
As for Obama’s major address today..it was quite detailed and included a similar type of bill that is currently languishing in committee..the Dodd-Hagel National Infrastructure Bank Act of 2007. The speech specifics are here:
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/samgrahamfelsen/Cmzm
Skeptic @ #6:
Great comment! You nailed it.
…it sounds a bit ridiculous to say that you should have to go read all of his plans in order to get a feel for what he will do.
Yeah, you guys. Quit insisting that people try to become informed before they complain that there is no information available to them. That is ridiculous to the max.
Now I am off to call the my state DoT to complain about how they didn’t magically install driving lessons into my brain and so I can’t get a license.
When I hear Obama speak it takes my breath away! I write as a person who did not want to select him in the first place, believing that this country is too racially divided to elect a black president. He has proved me wrong, not by his rhetoric, but by the results he has produced. I am so in awe of the American people for their good and sound judgement, and if we lose this election, it will be because it was stolen.
McCain can’t even get the members of his own party to support him, in part because he has not held on to his own principles, but mostly because he is so damn boring. What democrat or thinking republican would actually vote for a hundred year war? Fundamentally, I don’t think he has thought the problems facing America through, and that is scary. We have already had seven years of lack of thought, I don’t see another stupid and incurious person getting elected President.
It also doesn’t help Obama’s image that he is refusing to debate with HRC, and before you Obama fans start calling me names, it really does matter to people what is said, because most people will not take the time to visit his web page to read what he or his staff has posted.. and it sounds a bit ridiculous to say that you should have to go read all of his plans in order to get a feel for what he will do.
The eighteen debates we’ve already had so far isn’t enough? Really? He’s agreed to a 19th in Texas. (Will we learn anything new in that one that we haven’t learned in the previous eighteen? I doubt it.) In any case, we all know Hillary considers the debate format to be one that benefits her and Obama considers the personal appearance to be a format that benefits him. Please don’t pretend that they haven’t debated or that the issue of holding even more debates is a neutral issue.
And personally, I find it ridiculous that anyone would expect a politician to cram all the details of a housing program or a mortgage rebate or whatever else into a live stump speech. I find it wholly reasonable that we, as intelligent voters, should be encouraged to go read the proposals of all candidates in depth.
But there are two kinds of voters out there — ones who crave wonkish details from the candidates and ones who rely on gut-level reactions, like “shares my values” or “has character” or whatever. Personally, I find it depressing that we have a lot more of the latter than we do for the former — especially since it gave us President Have a Beer With — but those are the facts. And given that those are the facts, why should Obama tailor his speech to please the smaller group when the current format is working so well for him, his candidacy, and by extension the party? Especially when the people who care about details can easily look them up?
Yeah, you guys. Quit insisting that people try to become informed before they complain that there is no information available to them. That is ridiculous to the max. -socratic_me
Slow clap. Bravo.
After working through 100+ comment posts on this site where there have been furious battles between Obama and Clinton supporters about all the specifics that each candidate is putting forth about Iraq, healthcare and the economy, but to name a few things, it’s hard to believe McCain actually said that. For the less wired in this nation McCain’s comments may resonate more because of the way the media is oohing and ahhing over Obama’s speeches and spoon-feeding crap to the public.
That McCain thinks he’s been talking about specifics proves he hasn’t been battle tested at all in these primaries and he’s in for a very, very rude awakening with the looming general election.
When have anyone’s campaign specifics ever come to any kind of fruition? It reminds me of the famous quote from Citizen Kane when Kane is giving a gubernatorial campaign speech and says:
“I’d make my promises now if I weren’t too busy arranging to keep them.
TR, what I meant is that the average American will not take the time to research the candidates issues, and very well may beleive any republican smear campaign that he lacks substance because he doesn’t get into details.
We all know that Obama is not that superficial, but unless he starts talking in more detail about his plans, this type of smear campaign will start to sound valid, agreed?
That’s what I meant before: packaging.
Specifics aren’t part of the narrative. He gets away with saying crap like “We need to end partisan bickering in Washington because that won’t do,” and so far, no one ever calls him on it. Won’t do? That’s inspirational? Ummm, OK. If you say so. But even Barack Obama’s campaign slogan, “Change you can believe in” kind of begs the question of why, exactly, anyone should believe him.
Up to now no one has really questioned to any meaningful extent whether Barack Obama has any plan to actually accomplish any of these vague promises he throws around or if there’s any real reason to assume he could pull off such plans if he has them. I really don’t understand why Clinton hasn’t hit that point harder because it’s a pretty obvious soft spot. But if she doesn’t, someone else certainly will. Barack Obama may continue to try and write off anyone who raises legitimate questions about his readiness to be president as “cynics” but it’s anybody’s guess how much mileage is left in that tactic.
CaID @ 22: I agree, but in this blog be prepared to be attacked for your point of view.. a lot of people here are so blown away with Obama that they fail to see what you and I do, and just like Obama fail to see how the general electorate will demand more of their President.
TR, what I meant is that the average American will not take the time to research the candidates issues, and very well may beleive any republican smear campaign that he lacks substance because he doesn’t get into details.
We all know that Obama is not that superficial, but unless he starts talking in more detail about his plans, this type of smear campaign will start to sound valid, agreed?
I’ll agree there’s a potential danger there, but to stress my earlier point, most voters really don’t care about details. Sad, but true.
Look at the exit polling data on the GOP side. McCain is the most pro-war candidate out there, and in many races, he won the majority of Republican voters who were against continuing the war. He’s reliably voted pro-life, but he won the votes of Republican pro-choicers. Most voters don’t care about the issues, they care about the fuzzy vague b.s. that surrounds candidates.
a lot of people here are so blown away with Obama that they fail to see what you and I do, and just like Obama fail to see how the general electorate will demand more of their President.
No, they won’t.
The American people bought “compassionate conservatism” and “reformer with results.” They bought “it’s the economy, stupid.” They bought “morning in America” and they even bought “bring us together” when it was Nixon selling it. They bought “New Frontier” and “Fair Deal” and “New Deal” and “New Nationalism.”
They bought all those even though they were short on details and long on rhetoric. Hell, they bought all those precisely because they were short on details and long on rhetoric.
TR, he’s up against HRC now and it seems to be working and he has momentum, but against McCain it will matter.. and there is no momentum to be had on election day, everyone votes the same day.
There’s a big difference between Democratic primaries and the General Election.. and the Republicans who don’t support McCain’s views, but support him figure he’s better than the democratic alternatives.. that’s why it seems like they don’t care about the issues.
Up to now no one has really questioned to any meaningful extent whether Barack Obama has any plan to actually accomplish any of these vague promises he throws around or if there’s any real reason to assume he could pull off such plans if he has them.
Plenty of people have questioned both. They’re important questions and I’ve investigated them and my findings are:
1. Yes, Obama has plans for each of the issues he speaks about. They’re just a few mouseclicks away.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues
2. Yes, Obama can pull off the plans. He has a history of being amazingly persuasive and able to overcome stiff political odds. Read about it here:
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-brooks15dec15,0,6358191.column
TR, I hope to God you and everyone else speaking up for Obama is right, because as much as I’d like to see HRC get nominated, it is seeming less likely by the day, so for God’s sake I hope that middle America becomes as enamored with him as you have become.
Tamalak, I’ll just refer you to my previous comments.. you and I care enough about the issues to read Obama’s official statements online, but you can’t count on the independent voters doing so (the rest of them, not the ones coming out to support Obama). The very same ones which will believe that he has no substance because the smear campaigns say so, and because they will not take the time to research online themselves.
He has to be able to win over enough of them in battleground states to win the election..
TR, he’s up against HRC now and it seems to be working and he has momentum, but against McCain it will matter..
For the answer to that, I refer you to Steve’s original post above — McCain is the king of empty phrases and next to Obama, will look like the shallower one.
Except for Iraq, where he has specifics that will horrify people.
Greg,
You make a good point, I wasn’t trying to refute it.
I agree 100% that Obama needs to weave more wonk into his speeches. His inspirational speeches are as well-delivered as ever but they are getting both repetitive and tiring. Fortunately, he seems to be realizing this himself. His victory speech in Maine was his most wonkish to date. And he seems to be going after McCain hard on actual issues.
I am just tired of people like CalD who hang around and whine that “nobody” questions whether Obama has substance behind him, while infact I have heard that question hundreds of times on blogs. Furthermore, almost nobody who questions his readiness to put his ideas into action has shown any indication that they’ve actually looked around (at his website, speeches, debates, etc) to ANSWER THEIR OWN QUESTION. They’re too lazy to do anything but repeat their first impression of the man.
Tamalak, people will believe what they hear if it reinforces something they may already think.. and if the truth is that he doesn’t get very specific in his speeches, it becomes easier to smear him in that way.
nice to have an intelligent discussion about this without being flamed by people who would rather turn this into an Obama love fest 🙂
CaID @ 22 and Greg @ 23
What you seem to be asking is that Obama not give speeches, but lectures. Has any candidate effectively won using this strategy? Would anyone listen? It didn’t seem to work very well for Perot.
I just got back from the “town meeting” in Waukesha, WI. During the Q & A session, Obama gave detailed answers as to how he would address Health Care reform and
Social Security.
I’ve actually read up on his history as a community organizer and as an Illinois senator. He actually has a pretty good track record of accomplishing what he sets out to do.
I really like McCain’s plan for reconciling the various factions in Iraq:
“Stop the bullshit.”
That sounds great, and i do believe that it would be useful in many other places. He should start by using it in the Senate…see how it works before he tries it on the Iraqis.
Yeah, that’s change that i can believe in: stop the bullshit.
I would suggest he make it his campaign slogan, but i guess that it could be taken the wrong way.
America happily voted for Nixon and his secret plan to end the war.
America happily voted for Reagan because of his sunny insistence that ‘it is morning in America’. (I still have absolutely no idea what that means, except that it sounds optimistic, while Carter was more realistic and negative, so people liked it.) He occasionally spouted stuff that sounded like specifics, except that he invented them on an as-needed basis, with no regard for the reality of the universe we all actually live in. Still, no one cared so it evidently didn’t matter.
(I’m tempted to be snarky and note that America happily voted for Bush the Father, who no doubt had lots of specifics, but the only one that stands out over the mists of history is that he apparently didn’t like criminals, particularly black ones, or possibly blacks, particularly criminal ones. I’d be tempted to continue to be snarky and agree that Clinton specified lots of things, albeit with emphasis on specific people and what he didn’t do with them. But I’ll forego that.)
Bush the Calamity specified lots of stuff, except about his personal history, but pretty much all of them were bald-faced lies. Most of his specifics were nonsensical and unbelievable from the outset, but America felt that they’d rather have a beer with him than Gore.
During that period, I happily supported people who had lots of great specifics. There was Tsongas, and Mondale, Kerry, Gore of course, Biden, Dukakis, and quite a few others whose names are fading from my memory. You see immediately where that got me in terms of presidential success. Clearly, great wonkitude is not the tune to which the rest of America dances. So if Obama can attract support across a broad range of the populace and create a winning coalition without displaying his inner wonk, I’ve decided it’s fine by me, and I’m not going to push him for specifics.
***Steve Benen***you still aren’t listening. They (McCain and others) are all talking about HIS SPEECHES. He doesn’t give specifics in HIS SPEECHES. Usually one must go to his web site to see how he plans to do what he claims he wants to do in his speeches.
Um….bjbotts, he does give specifics IN HIS SPEECHES. He gave a bunch of economics-heavy SPEECHES just yesterday.
So vague!!!
caid and greg, u guys make a point but u are obviously on the internet regularly enough to check out his message. I would assume you are literate because u read this article and responded coherently, so have u gone to his site to read for yourself? If not whats stopping u?? Why not take the initiative to educate yourself, then speak your own mind instead of attempting to guess what others that you do not know will do. I think its kinda ridiculous frankly to complain about him not being clear on his position when his position is very clear and available in a multitude of places. How deep your desire is to arm yourself with the facts seems unclear to me.
If he was specific in every speech about the great many improvements we need to make as a country he’d be as boring as HIllary or John “Corpse” McCain. He is way more prepared than the corpse to provide solid answers. Can he do it? Will we really know until he is in office or any of the others are in office? Everyone says they will do stuff on the campaign trail that they cant or wont? I aks, who has never changed their position, who is the guy that people in washington and on the street WANT to cooperate with and are turning theri trust and hard earned money over to? THis guy is getting donations from people who neeed their money the most. If u have a couple million, how hard is it to give up a couple thousand? If u make $50, 000 a year, u have way less in the bank and 10.00 means more to you. It is not power perceived but actualized. I have no doubt that Obama’s powers of hypnosis will bleed over into his presidency. He will be diplomatic, prolific and ｐｏｔｅｎｔ as a president, I can’t wait.
Ask me how I know? See, I’m a dem, but I’m a NYer and we have a habit of electing rep mayors and governors I mean we put hill in the senate and she was born in Chitown and first lady of Arkansas. She was not a NYer. But we vote to the issues. we like hill and bill here & I debated who to vote for until about 30 mins before polls closed and decided on Obama after going online and getting facts for myself because I was not familiar with his policies and positions but I knew the Clinton name. That being said,there is this thing with the experience argument that bothers me.Whose presidency is it? hers or his or theirs? What experience does she bring in this role that is more relevant? Her husband was pres not her! and as far as healthcare, she has been talking about it since 93 and has not gotten it for this country or for NY for that matter and that her main issue so how does this play to her theory of being “tested”? How do we know she can do it?
This country is screwed financially for generations to come and a man who admittedly knows squat about economics and has been a senator since 1987, never cared to educate himself all this time? This is at least his 2nd run for office, he didnt even try to bone up the last time and when the hell is he gonna get started? I mean damn, isnt the economy like the main issue besides the war in this country? The mortgage crisis is in the news everyday and I do not want to have as my president a guy who basically helped destroy almost every savings and loan bank in the country in the 1980’s. Talk about grandstanding…if u dont know anything about the issues that the voters find most important, why the hell did u convince yourself that u r the right guy?
To my mind the average person who favors Obama is not well read on his policies (unlike the posters here). For the average Obama voter I see them falling into the Cult of Personality (see lyrics to the Living Colour song below)
Look into my eyes, what do you see?
Cult of personality
I know your anger, I know your dreams
Ive been everything you want to be
Im the cult of personality
Like mussolini and kennedy
Im the cult of personality
Cult of personality
Cult of personality
Neon lights, a nobel prize
The mirror speaks, the reflection lies
You dont have to follow me
Only you can set me free
I sell the things you need to be
Im the smiling face on your t.v.
Im the cult of personality
I exploit you still you love me
I tell you one and one makes three
Im the cult of personality
Like joseph stalin and gandi
Im the cult of personality
Cult of personality
Cult of personality
Neon lights a nobel prize
A leader speaks, that leader dies
You dont have to follow me
Only you can set you free
You gave me fortune
You gave me fame
You me power in your gods name
Im every person you need to be
Im the cult of personality
Look into my eyes, what do you see?
Cult of personality
I know your anger, I know your dreams
Ive been everything you want to be
Im the cult of personality
Like mussolini and kennedy
Im the cult of personality
Cult of personality
Cult of personality
Neon lights, a nobel prize
The mirror speaks, the reflection lies
You dont have to follow me
Only you can set me free
I sell the things you need to be
Im the smiling face on your t.v.
Im the cult of personality
I exploit you still you love me
I tell you one and one makes three
Im the cult of personality
Like joseph stalin and gandi
Im the cult of personality
Cult of personality
Cult of personality
Neon lights a nobel prize
A leader speaks, that leader dies
You dont have to follow me
Only you can set you free
You gave me fortune
You gave me fame
You me power in your gods name
Im every person you need to be
Im the cult of personality