Kotin
05-28-2008, 06:05 PM
I didn't think too much of all the stories last week about John McCain's campaign being run by lobbyists at basically all levels. I mean let's face it, everybody's campaign is associated with lobbyists (or former lobbyists) in some way (yes, Obama's campaign does have former lobbyists in high ranking positions).
But the latest report, that McCain's economic advisor Phil Gramm was advising McCain on his subprime mortgage bailout policy while AT THE SAME TIME working as a registered lobbyist with the bank UBS, one of the major players in the subprime mortgage mess, is just about as bad as it gets. This story is going to stick with McCain from now until November, as Democrats and Barack Obama probably will never let it go. To make matters worse, McCain's subprime mortgage bailout policy amounted to basically telling people suffering from the mess "tough luck." Obama is going to have a field day talking about how a lobbyist like Gramm probably advised McCain to put out the policy he did in order to protect banks like the one he represented as a lobbyist. It's sticky, sticky stuff. And the McCain camp probably knew it was, which is why Gramm quietly ended his tenure as a lobbyist with UBS in April (he is still serving as the UBS Vice Chairman), but that doesn't change the fact that he was helping McCain craft one of his major economic policies while at the same time being paid to look out for the interests of UBS, a company directly impacted by said economic policies.
Forbes Magazine has reported that UBS is one of the worst hit banks by the global credit crisis, especially when it comes to the US subprime market. That means that they would have the most to gain from the type of policy McCain put out, and there you have Gramm, advising McCain and at the same time working to ensure the interests of UBS. And I think it's a pretty safe bet that UBS was/is paying Gramm much more than McCain is. So who is his loyalty to?
I didn't think the lobbyist ties from last week mattered much because most of the lobbyists who were named were tied to dictators from countries that Americans probably don't think about much. And even if they do, not countries that anyone views as legitimate dangers like, say, Iran. But this is much, much different. The economy is going to be the #1 issue this November. We already know that McCain isn't strong on economic issues. We also already know that the sitting White House party almost always suffers in elections held during the start of bad economic times (just look at George H.W. Bush and Al Gore, for example). And now we have McCain's economic advisor tied to the banks that have a huge role in the current economic mess. Obama couldn't have wrapped this up in a nice little package better if he had of planned it himself.
But beyond that, this really hits directly at McCain's straight shooter/maverick image. One of the ways Obama was able to differentiate himself from Hillary Clinton and paint her as a "typical politician" was because she accepted money from lobbyists. This goes way beyond that. Obama feasts on issues that allow him to portray himself as an outsider reformer and paint his opponent as a Bush-lite insider who is "in on it" with the big corporations and Washington sleazeballs. Regardless of what you think about Obama, that has been his strategy and it worked well against Clinton. And now, all these McCain lobbyist ties are making Obama's job much easier.
This past week was also a real wake up call to the McCain campaign which, for the past two months, has enjoyed a free pass from the national media because of their obsession with the Obama/Clinton race. Nobody really reported on anything relating to McCain while Obama has been in the spotlight for months now with the Rev. Wright scandal, the "bitter" fiasco, etc. With Clinton now fading, the media is going to bite into John McCain as he is basically the freshest story they have at this point, and it's obvious that there is a lot of meat there.
McCain is in a very tough position. He is trying to portray himself as a maverick "change" candidate while still sticking to typical Washington ways and refusing to distance himself from one of the most unpopular Presidents in American history in George W. Bush. Yes, McCain needs the Republican base, but he is starting to cross the line of no return. It is in these early weeks of the general election campaign that the media fixes in on their narratives. Obama was the "change" candidate well before he won Iowa. Clinton was the "experienced, inevitable" candidate well before a vote was cast. The media has pegged Obama as "elitist." And John McCain is quickly being branded as the "third term of Bush," and once that title is fixed in, he is going to have an impossible time changing it. Just ask Hillary Clinton who did everything she could to not be the "experience" candidate once she realized it was the losing label. She tried to change herself from the "Washington candidate" engaging in "old politics," but she couldn't. The media has a habit of sticking with labels. And Obama going out every day and rattling off reasons why McCain is a third term of Bush won't help matters since Obama's speeches basically get roadblocked cable coverage lately.
McCain is walking down a dangerous road here and Obama is getting everything he needs to position himself exactly how he wants to be positioned -- the anti-Bush, change candidate. And in this election, the "anti-Bush change candidate" is a good label to have.
But the latest report, that McCain's economic advisor Phil Gramm was advising McCain on his subprime mortgage bailout policy while AT THE SAME TIME working as a registered lobbyist with the bank UBS, one of the major players in the subprime mortgage mess, is just about as bad as it gets. This story is going to stick with McCain from now until November, as Democrats and Barack Obama probably will never let it go. To make matters worse, McCain's subprime mortgage bailout policy amounted to basically telling people suffering from the mess "tough luck." Obama is going to have a field day talking about how a lobbyist like Gramm probably advised McCain to put out the policy he did in order to protect banks like the one he represented as a lobbyist. It's sticky, sticky stuff. And the McCain camp probably knew it was, which is why Gramm quietly ended his tenure as a lobbyist with UBS in April (he is still serving as the UBS Vice Chairman), but that doesn't change the fact that he was helping McCain craft one of his major economic policies while at the same time being paid to look out for the interests of UBS, a company directly impacted by said economic policies.
Forbes Magazine has reported that UBS is one of the worst hit banks by the global credit crisis, especially when it comes to the US subprime market. That means that they would have the most to gain from the type of policy McCain put out, and there you have Gramm, advising McCain and at the same time working to ensure the interests of UBS. And I think it's a pretty safe bet that UBS was/is paying Gramm much more than McCain is. So who is his loyalty to?
I didn't think the lobbyist ties from last week mattered much because most of the lobbyists who were named were tied to dictators from countries that Americans probably don't think about much. And even if they do, not countries that anyone views as legitimate dangers like, say, Iran. But this is much, much different. The economy is going to be the #1 issue this November. We already know that McCain isn't strong on economic issues. We also already know that the sitting White House party almost always suffers in elections held during the start of bad economic times (just look at George H.W. Bush and Al Gore, for example). And now we have McCain's economic advisor tied to the banks that have a huge role in the current economic mess. Obama couldn't have wrapped this up in a nice little package better if he had of planned it himself.
But beyond that, this really hits directly at McCain's straight shooter/maverick image. One of the ways Obama was able to differentiate himself from Hillary Clinton and paint her as a "typical politician" was because she accepted money from lobbyists. This goes way beyond that. Obama feasts on issues that allow him to portray himself as an outsider reformer and paint his opponent as a Bush-lite insider who is "in on it" with the big corporations and Washington sleazeballs. Regardless of what you think about Obama, that has been his strategy and it worked well against Clinton. And now, all these McCain lobbyist ties are making Obama's job much easier.
This past week was also a real wake up call to the McCain campaign which, for the past two months, has enjoyed a free pass from the national media because of their obsession with the Obama/Clinton race. Nobody really reported on anything relating to McCain while Obama has been in the spotlight for months now with the Rev. Wright scandal, the "bitter" fiasco, etc. With Clinton now fading, the media is going to bite into John McCain as he is basically the freshest story they have at this point, and it's obvious that there is a lot of meat there.
McCain is in a very tough position. He is trying to portray himself as a maverick "change" candidate while still sticking to typical Washington ways and refusing to distance himself from one of the most unpopular Presidents in American history in George W. Bush. Yes, McCain needs the Republican base, but he is starting to cross the line of no return. It is in these early weeks of the general election campaign that the media fixes in on their narratives. Obama was the "change" candidate well before he won Iowa. Clinton was the "experienced, inevitable" candidate well before a vote was cast. The media has pegged Obama as "elitist." And John McCain is quickly being branded as the "third term of Bush," and once that title is fixed in, he is going to have an impossible time changing it. Just ask Hillary Clinton who did everything she could to not be the "experience" candidate once she realized it was the losing label. She tried to change herself from the "Washington candidate" engaging in "old politics," but she couldn't. The media has a habit of sticking with labels. And Obama going out every day and rattling off reasons why McCain is a third term of Bush won't help matters since Obama's speeches basically get roadblocked cable coverage lately.
McCain is walking down a dangerous road here and Obama is getting everything he needs to position himself exactly how he wants to be positioned -- the anti-Bush, change candidate. And in this election, the "anti-Bush change candidate" is a good label to have.