The Race Card?

Back in early June I pointed out how Obama would have to deal with racism in this campaign. The goal of the GOP, I noted, would be to try to make Obama seem risky and “strange.” As I put it then: “One will simply be to try to paint Obama as somehow strange. Strange name. Look at his former church. Weird background. Lived awhile in Indonesia…subtext: is he really one of us?”

It’s clear that the biggest impediment to Obama beating John McCain is the possibility that Americans will think this rather inexperienced strange black candidate is just too risky. After all, being President is a huge responsibility, if doubts can be cast on whether or not Obama is really qualified, or if people can start to question just what kind of person he is, swing voters might put McCain over the top.

Obama can’t beat around the bush here, he has to tackle this head on, saying “I know they’ll try to make you think I’m strange, risky, etc.,” and then make a convincing case as to why he is not. That case ultimately will have to include his Vice Presidential choice (I still think Wesley Clark would be a good pick) and the people around him. But already he is stating this clearly, and confronting this weakness of his candidacy. The response of the McCain campaign: to accuse Obama of playing the race card.

Huh?

Now, I can see why the McCain campaign would rather Obama not confront this issue effectively. But to accuse him of “playing the race card” by just mentioning that he’s black, well, that’s a bit over the top. The McCain campaign has also very quickly gone negative, focusing on calling Obama a glitzy star like Paris Hilton or Brittney Spears (note the choice of people not held in high esteem by most of the public, especially not swing voters) who lacks substance. Obama meanwhile goes on a world tour and generates considerable media coverage, while McCain seems so outside the loop that Jon Stewart’s theme song for McCain is “All By Myself,” in a series called McCain’s “quest for attention.” Obama speaks in Berlin, McCain answers outside the “Haus of Fudge” in Wisconsin. It almost seems surreal. What’s going on? Is the race card being played? Is the media being unfair? Does Obama have substance?

At this point Obama’s team — the people organizing his campaign — are waging a much more effective battle than McCain’s. Yet, as the polls show, McCain is very resilient despite Obama’s efforts. All of this points to a really intriguing election ahead.

Obama does lack experience, he is relatively unknown, he does have a funny name, and a lot of people like him, but aren’t sure if they really want to vote for him. McCain is old, has a reputation for a nasty temper, and has been prone to gaffes. Yet he is respected, liked, and seems Presidential. Obama’s trip to Europe and the Mideast is meant to try to erase that sense that Obama is inexperienced and lacks substance. He’s being accused of acting like he already is President because he wants to appear Presidential — he is addressing his weakness.

McCain recognizes that given the basics of the campaign, the election is all about Obama. Here’s why: Political science may be an inexact science, but it’s been well known for a long time that external factors rather than the candidates often determine an election’s outcome. If the economy is down, if the public is in a sour mood, and people want a change, then they will vote for the candidate from the outside, whether he’s Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton. In all three of those cases there were real questions as to whether the former actor or peanut farmer, or promiscuous small state Governor was up to running the country. But the mood was one of change, and people welcomed an outsider. Once the public decided they could trust the outsider, it was all over — Carter beat Ford narrowly, but Reagan and Clinton had surprisingly comfortable margins of victory.

This year, on paper Obama is easily set to beat McCain, especially given McCain’s age and lack of resources (Obama may outspend him two or three to one). Even the close polls are misleading. Carter led or was very close to Reagan up until the end; structural factors were behind the late break to Reagan. The same can be expected for Obama this year. Yet unlike Reagan, Carter or Clinton, Obama is truly different. He is black. His middle name is Hussein and his last name sounds almost like Osama. His old church had a radical pastor. He has lived abroad. In fact, these negatives are so powerful that in any other year he probably would not have been the nominee; if this was like 1972 his prospects would be akin to those of George McGovern.

Hence the fascination at this election: from one angle, Obama looks like a shoe in. From another angle, he looks risky and destined to lose to someone as well liked and respected as John McCain. Either angle could become reality in November. For once, the campaigns really matter.

For McCain the strategy is simple: if the election is about the qualifications and character of your opponent, go negative. Be vicious. Yet even that is problematic, since McCain has run as a “different” kind of candidate, someone appalled by the tactics of Karl Rove, which destroyed his 2000 bid against George W. Bush. Yet it’s a price worth paying; going negative usually works, even if the public says they don’t like it.

For Obama the strategy is also simple: stay positive, be Presidential, and respond to the negatives as they come, letting surrogates attack McCain. Yet while this sounds simple, it’s much harder to pull off than going negative. I’m sure Michael Dukakis’ staff thought that riding in a tank looked Presidential, when actually it turned into a caricature. So far, Obama’s campaign has been run in a very impressive manner. They have made few errors, and seem to be executing a well designed strategy, with a very disciplined candidate. At this level it’s more marketing than politics, and Obama’s people understand that.

McCain’s campaign has been sluggish, but going negative doesn’t require the finesse that trying to stay positive while fighting off negative attacks does. And that brings us to the race card. It’s clear the McCain camp knows that the most effective counter to the effort to “make Obama appear strange” is for Obama to address it head on. They have decided to respond in a way designed to make it appear Obama is “playing the race card” if he even acknowledges race as part of what causes some people to be uncomfortable with him. In that sense, it’s really the McCain camp who played the race card, but I think they overplayed it. Negative campaigning works, but doesn’t guarantee victory. After all, it’s usually the underdog who has to go negative.  Obama’s team is running a more effective campaign so far. Unless McCain’s campaign improves, Obama still could prove to be the Democratic Reagan.

Explore posts in the same categories: 2008 Election, US Politics

13 Comments on “The Race Card?”

  1. Josh Says:

    Hi Scott. I enjoy reading your blog everyday!

    It does seem (to me) that it is risky to honestly criticize Obama at all without fear of being misunderstood. Without being accused of painting “Obama as somehow strange.”

    Would you agree that this is at least partly true?

  2. Scott Erb Says:

    I’ll go one step farther. The argument that he’s strange and risky is a valid one! My post on June 1st went too far, I think, in suggesting that anyone who doesn’t vote on that reason reflects racism (I think that post was inspired by something I read which was pretty vehement, so I went a bit far). I’d prefer it get made openly because everyone knows that it’s his weakness. I’m not worried about Obama being strange because he has very establishment people all around him, but look at Trinty, Rev. Wright, his short political career, and there is a lot for people to validly be worried about. Same about McCain’s age and temper. So painting Obama as somehow strange is itself a valid criticism (and of course there are other valid policy criticisms; just about every conservative argument against Obama’s liberalism is as valid against Obama as it would be against Edwards, Clinton or Kerry). What fascinates me is the way that Obama and McCain are trying to play this in their campaign. McCain needs a bit more finesse and perhaps be willing to actually make the argument openly. The danger for that is it gives Obama a chance to respond effectively.

    I obviously prefer Obama to McCain (though I think the choice is between two good candidates this time), but I suspect that fiscal realities will prevent Obama from implementing much of his campaign agenda if he’s elected.


  3. I don’t think it is right to equate the experience issue with the race issue. Maybe you don’t mean to do that.

    Talking about a candidate’s experience–both in terms of time and in terms of quality–is a completely valid thing to do. In fact, responsible voters have an obligation to consider it. It is also something objective. Obama has been in the Senate for only one term. That’s not an attack or a matter of “character assassination” or “identity politics.”

    Maybe we should drop the term “race card” altogether. Although it has emotional impact, it isn’t objective. A canddiate either talks about race or he doesn’t. Again it is in the realm of fact. And whether it is right or wrong to do so is a separate issue.

  4. sittingduck Says:

    The ‘race card’ can’t be avoided. It’s too huge. Human beings are racist by nature, and it can’t be avoided in this day and age.

  5. Josh Says:

    But Scott, don’t you agree that there still may be a risk in, as you say, “openly” criticizing Obama. Don’t you think there still may be folks out there who are afraid of openly and honestly criticizing him directly because they don’t want to be accused of playing the “race card?”

  6. Scott Erb Says:

    Why are they afraid? I think it’s a campaign dance. If the Obama campaign can get away with intimidating people not to criticize in that way because they are afraid of being accused of bringing race into it, then they’re really controlling the conversation (which a campaign wants to do). So of course Obama will want to play it that way; obviously, McCain wants to play it the other way, where Obama’s defense is considered ‘playing the race card.’ I’m not sure how best to handle it on either side, but if one campaign gets the other side to be afraid to have open criticism, then the they’ve scored a coup.

    Sittingduck: I doubt people are racist by nature, race like any division is a social construct. Skin color, hair color, class, religion…all these things can divide. In former Yugoslavia slavs defined fellow slavs as being ’subhuman’ because of cultural divisions. Just as people ignore a airline crash in Germany unless someone from their home state was on board, people naturally identify with people they relate to. Race seems to matter because of the cultural differences. So people by nature probably relate to people they identify with, but that isn’t necessarily race (and probably race will play less of a factor as globalization continues to mix cultures and ethnic groups).

  7. Scott Erb Says:

    BTW, there are other times people self-censor: after 9-11 the fear was that one isn’t “patriotic” if they criticized the government. A student — a conservative student from a military family — got lambasted and even threatened for using facsimiles of flags on the floor of the student center here at UMF in April. So it seems that emotional issues like race, nationalism, religion and the like often create fear because taking a stand might cause an emotional reaction by the other side. This gets exacerbated by our polarized political culture, where one side almost always sees the other side as evil or horrible. The only way out of it is to listen to other perspectives, be respectful, and not be afraid of disagreement. Still, one can’t help if other people get overly emotional.

  8. Josh Says:

    So you believe folks who are afraid of criticizing Obama because of the race card are overreacting. This must mean you believe Obama’s campaign and his supporters have not overreacted at all or have become overemotional about direct criticism toward him?

  9. Scott Erb Says:

    I’m sure supporters of all campaigns get overly emotional — I’ve mentioned that quite a bit. I suspect the Obama campaign is tactically trying to make it seem difficult to directly criticize Obama — that’s a rational effort for them to make. They also hope that if they can paint attacks on their candidate as racist or unfair they’ll get more money from supporters who will be emotionally upset. The thing about campaigns is that, be it Democratic or Republican, they are Machiavellian. They will try to do whatever works, especially when the stakes at hand are so high. So I think this campaign might get nasty on both sides before it’s over — the dynamic seems to be heading that way.

  10. Jeff Lees Says:

    Remember that McCain didn’t accuse Obama of using the race card when he said “hey everyone, I’m Black!” He accused Obama of using the race card when he said that “my opponents will try to scare you be telling you that I’m black, and that I don’t look like the guys on the dollar bill.”

    Obama is obviously black (DUH), and pointing that out isn’t racial politics, but Obama said basically what you said in this blog entry; that people are going to try to be racist. He said that his opponents (McCain) will try to insight racial tensions to swing peoples votes (which is not true, in my opinion) and that IS playing the race card.

    Saying that he’s black isn’t playing the race card

    Saying that his opponents are going to tell you not to vote for him because he is black is playing the race card.

    I have to agree with Scott that this campaign is going to get ugly.We have already seen some of the nasty things against Obama in the primary (is he Muslim, ext…) and if you search the “left” blogosphere, you can easily find many nasty things about McCain. These come from the “moveon.org” people who in my opinion have no respect for George Bush, or anyone they don’t like (McCain). I know that Obama wont lower to that level though, I believe that his is a honorable man, as is McCain. But I belief McCain supporters will be less likely to get “ugly” because of fear of getting labeled racists, correctly or not.

  11. Jeff Lees Says:

    ???

    I have no idea where that Smily Face came from, it is supposed to be a ), whatever?

  12. Scott Erb Says:

    LOL! I’ve had smileys appear like that too. Something with wordpress, I think. Oh yeah, McCain and Obama are both honorable, and frankly, they’re each trying to figure out how to get the most out of all these issues. I’m not sure what the “race card” is; I don’t think Obama was playing it, and the only reason I said McCain did was because he used the term in accusing Obama (or someone in his campaign did). I think Obama’s quote (at least what they showed on the Daily Show was only that “I don’t look like the guys on the dollar bill” (did he really say “I’m black” before that?) Jon Stewart said, “well of course not, you’d have to be green, and neither candidate…” and then a green hued picture of John McCain came up. Stewart also had fun mocking all the people who see hidden racism in the McCain campaign. I am convinced that the McCain campaign will try to convince voters that Obama is strange, different, and a risk. Moreover, McCain would be foolish not to do so, since those are Obama’s weaknesses. Obama will try to finesse that to saying it’s really race — which is also logical, since that will deflect from his inexperience. C’est la politique. I don’t fault either one for that — what I fault them for is in my blog entry today “What, Me Worry?”

  13. Jeff Lees Says:

    Those quotes I gave were not direct quotes, I should have mentioned that.


Comment: