Democrats are increasingly worried Barack Obama is not hitting back hard enough against rival John McCain and missing opportunities to tie the Republican candidate to the Bush administration.
As we all know, Obama now has three strong commercials, the last of which is the strongest.
But, should Obama dig in deeper?
Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, who first endorsed Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) for the party’s nomination, said there are a lot of nervous Democrats around, and he is one of them. "That element exists — there’s no question," Rendell told The Hill. "Even I called some Obama people and said, ‘Hey, let’s get on the air and hammer this guy (McCain) for being the biggest hypocrite there is." Rendell said he lamented the Obama campaign’s response to the McCain offensive on offshore drilling, noting that the Arizonan was until recently opposed to the energy policy.
"We let them nail us on that stuff, and we haven’t come back as aggressively as we should," Rendell said.
I have read so many diaries that mirror the sentiments of old school politician Rendell. I personally believe that it is too early to go very negative. But, of course there is a risk that McCain will gain too much ground if you do not. I live in the south and there are those who will believe anything. It does not take much convincing. On the other hand, I am sure, some will say that Obama is doing just fine and that the ads that he recently put out do the trick. But, here is what other strategist are saying.
"I think there’s definitely some trepidation," one Democratic strategist said. "The Obama people definitely need to worry about McCain setting the terms of the debate. There’s no reason any week should go by without hearing why McCain is an extension of the Bush administration, and that’s what happened last week."
Obama's camp responded by saying
"Anytime somebody distorts Sen. Obama’s record we push back quickly and forcefully with the truth."At the same time, we’re not going to let the daily tit-for-tat distract us from our fundamental message of change."
The tit-for-tat explanation may explain why there was no response to the Hilton or The One ads.
Chris Lehane, a Democratic strategist said,
"I think they realize, like they did in the primary, at the end of the day the brand or image of Obama or the character of Obama is what comes through," Lehane said. "I think there’s a way to hit back and to hit back in a way that’s consistent with your brand."
But, Bill Richardson dismissed this notion,
"They lined up the interviews," Richardson said. "My sense is that Obama does hit back rapidly, effectively. I think they hit back hard, and they’re very effective with surrogates."
My personal opinion is that Obama's surrogates have a neutral effect. But, McCain's surrogates have been horrible.
What do you think? Should Obama drop the new politics rhetoric and go after McCain every opportunity? Is it time to start driving McCain's negatives up? Will attacking forcefully hurt Obama's brand? Where you satisfied with Obama's attack ad responses?
Comments are closed on this story.