Obama, Throwing Heat

"Mr. Obama used the address to reach out to lower-income and lesser-educated Americans who rejected him in the Democratic primaries in favor of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, who formally conceded the race on Saturday and pledged her support for Mr. Obama."

The L.A. Times version: "With recession in the air and gasoline over $4 a gallon, presumptive presidential nominees John McCain and Barack Obama focused on the economy today, each accusing the other of not understanding how it works. Obama launched his 'Change That Works for You' tour in Raleigh, N.C, where he blamed much of the nation's economic troubles on the Bush administration and policies that he said are 'little more than the worn dogma that says we should give more to those at the top and hope that their good fortune trickles down to the many who are hardworking.'

"Stronger government investment in health care, education, energy and the infrastructure could have lessened some of the economic impact on families, he said . . .

"The McCain campaign charged that Obama's economic solutions would 'further weaken our economy. While hardworking families are hurting and employers are vulnerable, Barack Obama has promised higher income taxes, Social Security taxes, capital gains taxes, dividend taxes, and tax hikes on job creating businesses' campaign spokesman Tucker Bounds said."

McCain offered this jab with Brian Williams: "Obama says that I'm running for a Bush's third terms. It seems to me he's running for Jimmy Carter's second."

There's some interesting shadow-boxing going on over McCain's proposal for them to appear at a dozen town halls. Both campaigns blew off ABC's request for a session to be moderated by Diane Sawyer. They don't want "media sponsors," which means they don't want to give any one network an exclusive. They want it to be open to widespread coverage, as the fall debates are. The reality is that while cable news would be all over it--albeit with less enthusiasm than if Wolf or Brit or Chris and Keith were the moderators--no broadcast network is going to give up lucrative prime-time hours unless its journalists are running the show.

Sponsorship aside, will the Obama camp ultimately agree to this? McCain needs the forums more than Obama does, both because he's the underdog and because he can never come close to matching the Democrat's oratory as he speechifies around the country. And anyone who's seen McCain work the town halls in New Hampshire, as I have in two campaigns, knows that's his best format.

On the other hand, doing a series of no-frills, substantive appearances, long a goal of goo-goos in the media and elsewhere, may hold a certain appeal for Obama. And it would liven up the summer.

Liberals, though, are turning thumbs down. The New Republic's Noam Scheiber:

"I've heard all the arguments for why the joint forums would actually benefit Obama--they'd highlight McCain's old age and diminutive stature; holding his own against a war hero would give Obama gravitas; etc.

"There's something to this. But even if you think Obama would win on points in such a format, that doesn't make it a good idea for him. To make the right strategic call, you have to compare a race in which Obama does the forums to one in which he doesn't. And I don't think that comparison is even close. Under the joint forum scenario, Obama may do marginally better than McCain, but McCain won't be a disaster. Without the joint-forums, McCain has to give a high-profile speech every time he wants serious media attention. (Big media outlets just don't care much about low-key town hall meetings.) And, as we saw Tuesday night, he performs hideously in those settings.

"So, at best, you're looking at a slight advantage for Obama under the joint-forum scenario versus a huge advantage for Obama without them. Seems like a no-brainer to me."