A.K.A., where are the attack ads II?
http://www.dailykos.com/...
As a charter member of the "bedwetters and handwringers" club (wouldn't it be nice if David Plouffe was as creative in attacking his opponents), I have to say that the entire Obama general election ad campaign, including the ones I've seen today, has been atrocious. The McCain camp is running rings around Obama when it comes to advertising. I don't know whether it's the fault of the ad people, the strategists, or the candidate. Probably, it's all three. But who's ever responsible, it's not working. McCain's ads are direct and hardhitting. Obama's not so much. Plus, as noted below, they are more reactive than proactive.
Obama seems to be falling into the trap of response-centrism. If only they could respond the right way, they figure, all will be well. But it won't be. Because the game they are playing is reactive. Instead of changing the subject off Palin by launching some explosive new attack on McCain, all they do is respond, respond, respond. And the story, day after day, is Democratic Presidential nominee responds to Republican Vice Presidential nominee. The optics of that stink for them.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.co...
And when it comes to substance, it's even worse. Troopergate. No ad. Obstruction of justice in Troopergate. No ad. McCain laughing in New Hampshire when an audience member called Hillary Clinton a bitch. No ad. The Keating Five. No ad. Palin requiring victims to pay for their own rape kits. No ad. McCain's various flip-flops. No ad. Palin's refusal to protect the endangered polar bear. No ad.
If David Plouffe really has an ad game plan and strategy, I've yet to see it. Maybe he's relying on the debates. But then he's rolling the dice since only two of the eight series of campaign debates have arguably made a difference in the outcome of the election, 1960 and 2000. If he loses that bet, then Plouffe will join Susan Estrich and Bob Shrum in the Democratic general election campaign manager hall of fame.