Polls clearly show Obama is running away with the race. If anything, the MSM, in its ongoing attempt to present controversy where little exists in order to bolster ratings, routinely reports a tighter race than actually exists. We could be heading for a landslide in November!
But wait. Does anyone else hear a little voice in their head telling them that the Cheney/Rove machine is not disposed to yielding their station with grace and humility? Haven't these master manipulators proven time and again that no trick is too dirty - no stoop too low - to deter them from their power quest? Given their history, the most surprising October Surprise would be if they didn't try something big.
So what surprise might October hold? It appears that a hum-drum surprise -- raising the terror threat level, a standoff with Iran or North Korea that puts us on war footing, or even the capture of Bin Laden, would likely not be enough to sway a skeptical electorate. No. In my opinion we are beyond the point that a classic October Surprise results in a President McCain. What the GOP needs is something huge, unprecedented; something to break through the public's loathing and scare them like they've never been scared before. For lack of a better term, call it the October H-Bomb.
Of all the game changers to date, the real game changer is Obama having a lead approaching double-digits with a month to go until the election. Such a lead is, historically, nearly impossible to overcome. As Brian Schaffner points out:
In 2004, 94.5% of those who intended to vote for Kerry in September reported having stuck with their choice after the election, compared to 95.7% of those intending to vote for Bush who actually did so. The percentages of those sticking with their candidate are just slightly lower in 2000, but the overwhelming pattern here is that very few voters seem to change their minds in October.
The McCain campaign's previous doubling down has put the craps shooter way down to the house, with his credit line stretched to the limit. There may be time for one last long-shot gambit. So how do McCain and his handlers play it from here? It's clear that the final game changer, the October H-Bomb, is going to have to be one huge, ground-shaking, scorched earth, shock and awe play. This is no time for half-measures and no place for weaklings.
The last thing I want to do in this diary is engage in fear-mongering. But is it such a stretch to suspect that the production company that brought us such mega-hits as the pre-election threat level elevations in 2002 and 2004, and the Saddam Hussein verdict in 2006 might just have one more blockbuster to premier? After all, isn't it well established at this point that public fear, insecurity, uncertainty, and information deficit are the featured pages in the Rovian campaign playbook?
So what could it be? (Or maybe I'm way off base here and Karl is content with his Fox News gig and his web site.)
I'm thinking that the stuff that has already been tried can be eliminated from consideration. The electorate is, by and large, immune and desensitized.
The most oft-cited Surprise, the capture of Osama Bin Laden, as put forth recently by Bob Woodward, is probably even too little, too late. There has been enough anticipation and pre-publicity that it would almost certainly be regarded as political theater. It would have worked better in 2004. For all the joy and celebration it would create, there would an equal helping of repugnance towards a disastrous war policy that failed to produce him in years past. Besides, I tend to believe that Bin Laden died in 2001, 2005, or 2006.
What about a devastating personal revelation about Obama's personal life? One of his greatest political assets seems to be his squeeky clean background. No doubt they have been through his life several times with a fine-toothed comb and come up empty each time. Rezko didn't stick. Ayers was easily debunked. Muslim? Tried and failed. What's left? Nothing real, certainly. Something contrived but difficult to disprove?
The case could be made that we have already had attempts (see: game changers) since the primaries that have fallen short. Some thought that the Administration had a hand in the invasion of Georgia by Russia, giving Sen. McCain the opportunity to declare that, "We are all Georgians," and to dispatch his delegation to restore international order. That didn't work out so well.
Gov. Palin? I won't even go there.
Or how about the of the unraveling of the U.S. economy? What many economists had warned about for over a year suddenly required bold, immediate, and decisive action, with McMaverick leading the charge. However, a series of missteps on McCain's part turned that one into a plus for Obama. So what's a poor dictatorial-wannabe to do?
I don't have the answer, but that doesn't quell my uneasiness. I think that the original plan was to steal a close election, akin to 2000 and 2004. But that requires a close election -- one that comes down to just one or two states. In this case, McCain has proven to be such an inept campaigner that stealing the election has slipped out of reach.
So the October H-Bomb has to be something that causes a huge voter migration from Obama to the McCain camp, or, alternatively, something that warrants suspending the Constitution in order to cancel the election. Election cancellation rumors were running around the Internet and talk radio last week.
In the first scenario (voters change preference to McCain en masse), it would almost have to be something related to national security, as Obama owns all domestic issues at this point. I feel that only a terrorist attack on U.S. soil would have a chance of sufficing. Last year, Harvey Wasserman postulated scenarios whereby Bush canceled the election, including a terrorist attack on a domestic nuclear power plant. Although his writing is alarmist and conspiracist in nature (I know, look who's talking), the issuance of National Security Presidential Directive 51 (NSPD-51), granting to the President dictatorial powers in the case of a national emergency, caused alarm among many who were paying attention.
The easiest emergency to conjure up at this point would be a 1933-style run on the banks. It wouldn't take that much to push the current credit crisis past that tipping-point. But would that cause voters to jump to McCain? Given recent polls showing that Obama is more trusted to handle the economy, I doubt this would work. Could it be considered a national emergency justifying invocation of NSPD-51, and the resultant suspension of operation of branches of Government besides the Executive? It is safe to say that such an occurrence falls into the broad definition of an emergency under NSPD-51 (which gives the President the power to unilaterally decide which events qualify) to include:
... any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions ...
How likely is such a scenario? I will leave it to the reader to decide (see poll). However, it seems to me that, beginning with the 2000 election, the power grabbers have grown used to getting their way. Yes, they gave up ground in the 2006 elections, but are they prepared for full retirement (replete with shuffleboard, bass fishing, and/or shotgun hunting on a private, fenced reserve) in 2008? It's just hard for me to envision. Or maybe the plan at this point is simply to sabotage the country, shackling an Obama administration with tons of debt, as a prelude to triumphantly reclaiming the White House in 2012. How perverse that I find myself "rooting" for that scenario. (So pray for that, guys and gals. Oops, I went there.)
Finally, how should/would the citizenry react to cancellation of the election? Diarists have noted the 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team's reassignment, effective October 1, 2008, from Iraq to Northern Command (domestic), according to the Army Times:
The 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team has spent 35 of the last 60 months in Iraq patrolling in full battle rattle, helping restore essential services and escorting supply convoys.
Now they’re training for the same mission — with a twist — at home.
Beginning Oct. 1 for 12 months, the 1st BCT will be under the day-to-day control of U.S. Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command, as an on-call federal response force for natural or manmade emergencies and disasters, including terrorist attacks.
This marks the first time since Reconstruction that there has been a full-scale deployment of troops within the borders of the U.S.
Would citizens take to the streets against police and combat troops? If so, would such an uprising be easily put down? What roll would 2nd Amendment guns in private hands play? Your comments welcome.
My intent here isn't to go all tin-foily, but only to point out that in my opinion, the Republicans are, at this point, down to two choices -- 1) lose the election, or 2) loose the nukes.