The Heck with Substance

By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 8, 2008 10:12 AM

NASHVILLE -- Here, as a torrential rain pelted the roof of the media tent after an unusually serious debate, is your press corps in action:

Newsweek's Howard Fineman: "What did you think of Senator McCain calling Obama 'that one'?"

"I thought it was odd. . . . Senator Obama has a name," said Obama strategist David Axelrod.

"Inside Edition" guy: "It didn't seem like there were any knockout punches."

Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs: McCain "didn't look comfortable. . . . He was pacing around. . . . I thought he looked agitated."

Reporter: "Are you saying he's temperamentally unsuited to be president?"

British reporter to McCain strategist Charlie Black: Obama people are grumbling about "that one" comment.

Black: "Please, tell them to talk about substance!"

British guy: We expected to hear about Bill Ayers.

Black: "You guys make this stuff up! We never said that."

Reporter to McCain strategist Steve Schmidt: What about "that one"?

Schmidt: "They're trying to turn a nothing into something."

Another reporter: What about Ayers?

Schmidt: "Unrepentant domestic terrorist . . . Mr. Obama has not been truthful about the dimensions of his relationship with Mr. Ayers."

Anyone who bought the pregame hype about how the candidate was going to go harshly negative doesn't understand how debates work. This was, after all, a town hall, with actual voters, not just Tom Brokaw, posing many of the questions. So even though the Arizonan had spent the previous 48 hours trashing Obama as a liar who once hung out with William Ayers, it was always going to be hard to press such personal attacks at Belmont University.

And the Dow had just dropped another500 points. So unlike some of my colleagues, I wasn't expecting blood on the floor.

What we got, instead, was a sober debate about the economy. No character attacks. No Ayers. No Keating. Disappointing the press, perhaps, but not, in my estimation, the viewing audience.

Obama hit his marks in the first two minutes: blame the Bush/McCain economy, crack down on greedy CEOs, middle-class tax cuts: you need someone working for you. (And not once did he say that "Senator McCain is absolutely right.")

McCain did as well (while quickly acknowledging Obama to avoid the crankiness rap of Ole Miss): energy independence, rein in spending, Treasury should buy up distressed mortgages. He said Fannie and Freddie got into trouble "with the encouragement of Senator Obama and his cronies." Obama said McCain has bragged about being a deregulator while he, the senator from Illinois, warned about a subprime crisis.

Obama wasn't Bill Clinton, but mike in hand, he probably did the feel-your-pain thing better than McCain, and more intently than he usually does. McCain pushed bipartisanship in one breath and accused Obama of a huge liberal spending record in the next. Obama accused McCain of offering big tax cuts to oil companies (actually to all corporations, but Big Oil's really unpopular). McCain attacked earmarks. Obama hit Bush for urging shopping after Sept. 11, 2001.

And then -- McCain compared Obama to Herbert Hoover, the Republican president who botched the Depression? Because, he said, Obama wants to raise taxes -- though McCain didn't mention the hike would hit the $250K-plus crowd. Then Mac got defensive and said he wasn't cutting taxes for the rich. But he is -- along with other income groups -- by extending the Bush tax cuts.

McCain accused Obama of wanting to fine employers who don't provide health insurance. Obama deflected the charge and got unusually personal in describing how his mother spent her final months fighting with insurance companies when she was dying of cancer.

For those following the campaign, the candidates didn't break much new ground. It was a lot of meat-and-vegetables and almost no light moments. They rehashed their differences on Iraq. McCain accused Obama of announcing an invasion of Pakistan and Obama chided McCain for singing "bomb, bomb, bomb Iran." The audience questions were awfully general and not very personal, depriving the session of the "moment" that the press loves to pounce on.

My prediction, as it's winding down: The pundits will say it was a setback for McCain because he's trailing and didn't get a (repeat after me) "game-changer."

***

Okay, it's half an hour later. Here's Politico: "The Republican still needs a game-changer, and he has only one more debate -- focused on the economy -- before election day."

NYT: "Tuesday night's presidential debate was remarkable for the dourness of its mood, for the frequently subdued demeanors of the candidates even as they tore into each other, which they did with somewhat less vigor and venom than expected, given how little time remains until Election Day, given how nasty the campaign had turned in recent days . . .

"There were a few moments during the long first hour -- and a few more during the quick last half hour -- when the exchanges grew more spirited and tense. Mr. McCain's apparent irritation with his opponent spiked as he exhibited condescension toward his younger rival."

LAT: "Seeking to turn around his faltering campaign after weeks of sinking polls, Sen. John McCain used tonight's presidential debate to unveil a dramatic new federal program to bail out homeowners struggling to pay their mortgages.

"The Republican nominee, who long has railed against excess government spending, outlined a program that his campaign said would cost roughly $300 billion."

Boston Globe: "Sometimes sarcastic and sometimes sincere, McCain seemed off-balance in a way that undermined his much-repeated claim of being "a cool hand at the tiller."

"Obama, who did not particularly excel at town hall-style debates during the primaries -- sometimes seeming lordly or professorial -- was better than McCain last night at connecting with audience members on their own terms."

USA Today: "Ninety minutes later, there had been no big flubs or knockout punches by either man, nothing that signaled the sort of 'game changer' that McCain needed at a time Obama is rising in polls nationwide and in key states."

There's that phrase again.

New York Post: "John McCain charged last night that Barack Obama would be the worst president for the economy since Herbert Hoover in Depression, by pushing tax hikes during a financial crisis."

And here I thought that was a silly line. Guess the McCain-endorsing tabloid set me straight.

Slate's John Dickerson: "Obama's likeability is good for him and bad for McCain, of course, but it also undercuts McCain's credibility. It exposes the picture McCain has been painting of Obama in the last few days as a caricature."

Time's Michael Scherer: "The key to the classic McCain town hall is that McCain is having fun. He did not appear to be having fun. Obama, meanwhile, did not seem interested in having fun. He was there to make his case, and he did it clearly."

Atlantic's Marc Ambinder: "CW says that John McCain had a 90 minute window to turn his campaign around -- to put into play the McCain Resurgence Strategy, if you will, and if that's the CW threshold, I don't think McCain met it."

New Republic's Jonathan Chait: "After the first debate, I didn't have a strong sense of who won. This time I do: Obama crushed McCain.

"I'll predict that two things broke through. First, Obama constantly invoked the lived experience of Americans and explained how his proposals would relate to them. McCain hardly ever did this -- even when he got specific, like on pork barrel spending, he did not relate it to peoples' lives. Second, McCain was just nasty--calling Obama 'that one' and delivering zingers like 'Did we hear the size of the fine' with a smile so forced it looked like it would break his face."

National Review's Michael Graham: "This was a lost 90 minutes out of my life, and a huge, irreplaceable, lost opportunity for the McCain campaign. Why is it that a maverick like McCain allowed himself to be led by the nose like this?"

Andrew Sullivan: "This was, I think, a mauling: a devastating and possibly electorally fatal debate for McCain. . . . All I can say is that, simply on terms of substance, clarity, empathy, style and authority, this has not just been an Obama victory. It has been a wipe-out. It has been about as big a wipe-out as I can remember in a presidential debate."

Joe Klein has hit this theme before, but he really ratchets it up here:

"I'm of two minds about how to deal with the McCain campaign's further descent into ugliness. Their strategy is simple: you throw crap against a wall and then giggle as the media try to analyze the putresence in a way that conveys a sense of balance: 'Well, it is bull-pucky, but the splatter pattern is interesting . . .' which, of course, only serves to get your perverse message out. I really don't want to be a part of that.

"But . . . every so often, we journalists have a duty to remind readers just how dingy the McCain campaign, and its right-wing acolytes in the media (I'm looking at you, Sean Hannity) have become -- especially in their efforts to divert public attention from the economic crisis we're facing. And so inept at it: other campaigns have decided that their only shot is going negative, but usually they don't announce it, as several McCain aides have in recent days -- there's no way we can win on the economy, so we're going to go sludge-diving . . .

"What a desperate empty embarrassment the McCain campaign has become."

Is the press shorting substance?

"Monday in Albuquerque, John McCain delivered an excellent speech that finally made the case that Barack Obama and the Democrats are primarily responsible for the current financial crisis," says Power Line's John Hinderaker. "McCain contrasted his own record, particularly as it related to Fannie and Freddy, with Obama's blank slate. He also accused Obama of a lack of leadership in the current crisis. The guts of McCain's speech related to the economy, but he made his economic points in the context of the broader question, 'who is the real Barack Obama?' Again and again, McCain argued, Obama's deeds don't match his words . . .

"But if you rely on the mainstream media for your news, you probably have no idea that McCain gave an important speech on the economy . . . The Associated Press headlined, "Character attacks emerge in McCain-Obama race." The AP's focus was on the negativity that was engaged in by both campaigns yesterday. In one sentence, the AP did at least acknowledge that McCain had referred to economic issues:

In Albuquerque, N.M., McCain delivered an unusually scathing broadside. He accused Obama of lying about McCain's efforts to regulate the home loan industry. And he suggested Obama is a mysterious figure who cannot be trusted.

But that's it: no discussion of the substance of McCain's speech."

But it's a fact of modern campaigning: If you want attention for a policy speech, you don't put out an ad that day calling your opponent a liar while your running mate tries to link him to a onetime terrorist.

On the what-if-McCain-loses front, Michael Schaffer muses about his future relationship with the media in this New Republic piece:

"John McCain recently took a shot at a reliable political target: The Georgetown cocktail party. In an interview with the Des Moines Register's editorial board, McCain dismissed the idea that some conservatives might be worried about his running mate's qualifications. 'If there's a Georgetown cocktail party person who, quote, calls himself a conservative who doesn't like her, good luck,' he snapped.

"McCain is surely not the first popular D.C. social figure to knock the hostesses and party-goers of 30th and N. But these days, the feeling is reciprocal: As the Republican's campaign has lurched from negative ads to faux controversies over the past month, he's found himself in the unusual position of being scolded by a group he has jokingly called his political base: The centrist establishmentarians of Washington journalism.

"With varying degrees of certainty and no shortage of chagrin, a host of onetime McCain media groupies have publicly abandoned their seats in the horseshoe-shaped couch aboard the Straight Talk Express. 'He has become the sort of politician he once despised,' declares The Washington Post's once-smitten Richard Cohen. 'John McCain is not a principled man. In fact, it's not clear who he is,' writes Elizabeth Drew, a woman who wrote a broadly positive 2002 book about who McCain is. 'I just can't wait for the moment when John McCain -- contrite and suddenly honorable again in victory or defeat -- talks about how things got a little out of control in the passion of the moment,' grumbles Joe Klein, who'd earlier predicted that McCain's nomination would assure an honorable fall campaign, but has spent much of the season denouncing the senator for various acts of dishonor . . .

"All this opprobrium! Will McCain never sip a martini in Georgetown again? Don't bet on it. As furious as a herd of admonishing columnists may sound when they're in high dudgeon, the scorn of the commentariat is highly impermanent. Win or lose, McCain should be safely back in the media's good graces by this time next year. And I suspect that apology Klein envisioned may not even be necessary."

Some liberal ladies are still conflicted over Palin, as we see in this Nation piece by Linda Hirshman:

"I have been feeling really guilty about not liking Sarah Palin. She's independent, her husband helps raise the kids, she's worked most of her life. I should luv her. But the minute she minced on stage in St. Louis Thursday, with her shoulder-length hair and stiletto heels, I realized why I don't: She's The Rules Girl.

"Remember The Rules: Time-Tested Secrets for Capturing the Heart of Mr. Right, Ellen Fein's and Sherry Schneider's explosively controversial 1995 book that upended thirty years of feminist teaching about dating? Forget all that equality and intelligence stuff, The Rules advised. Who wants to be Hillary Clinton? Men are simple, attracted to sexual symbols and bright, shiny objects. If you want them, they argued, you must sport long hair and wear sexy, attention-getting clothes. The suit Palin wore for the debate was some amazingly iridescent material, and she sported an eye-popping sparkly rhinestone flag pin. The Governor as the It Girl of the Nineties' singles scene.

"As the capital-letter Rules recommend, Palin seems Never to Leave the House Without Makeup. And, so far in this campaign, she has scrupulously followed The Rules for dealing with mainstream media suitors: Rarely Return Their Calls. Always End the Date First. Never Make a Date for Saturday Night after a Wednesday Date. Never Make a Date for Meet the Press at all."