« veep contender #1: biden | Main | hillaryland on what the hell happened »

May 17, 2008

three men in a fight

Throughout his campaign Obama has said he will, as president, talk to leaders of rogue states. The conventional foreign policy wisdom is that the president should only engage with leaders acceptable to the US and the international community. Obama's position was attacked by Clinton early on in the campaign, who saw it as an opportunity to present him as weak and naive. Rather than taking it on the chin he came back strongly, linking her adherence to conventional wisdom with the decision to go to war in Iraq. The exchange served notice that Obama can play political ju-jitsu pretty well, using the energy of an opponent's attack to strike back, strengthening his own positioning in the process.

This week President Bush, speaking in Israel to mark its sixtieth birthday, jumped into the presidential race with both feet, making a none-too-subtle allusion to Obama by comparing those Democrats who believe in speaking to America's enemies with the appeasers of Hitler. McCain wholeheartedly endorsed Bush's remarks. On Friday Obama used a set-piece speech to respond to both in very strong terms. I won't go into the detail of their arguments (you can read/watch the remarks yourself) but we can draw some conclusions from this scrap:

- President Bush, if he's not careful, will end up playing Bill Clinton to McCain's Hillary in the general. McCain delivered a major speech about his vision for the country on the day Bush made his remarks, but Bush's intervention ensured it got no coverage whatsoever (it's not clear that McCain's people were informed of Bush's remarks prior to them being made). Arguably Bush handed Obama a gift, allowing Obama to sound forceful in response, rallying Democrats to Obama's side, and giving Obama another chance to bind Bush and McCain together in the public mind.

- The argument about how to deal with American's enemies will be a key theme of the coming election. The Republicans know that they are in deep trouble. The Republican brand is badly damaged, the economy is in the toilet, the war drags on. The biggest card they have to play is an oldie-but-goodie: we know how to keep you safe, they don't, we are strong, they are weak. If McCain wins in November it will be because he persuaded enough voters that Obama is too inexperienced to be Commander-In-Chief. So although the terms and timing of this skirmish may not have been at McCain's choosing, it is an argument he wants and needs to have.

- Bye bye Hillary. The person coming out worst from this is Hillary Clinton. Bush's implicit attack on Obama squeezed her out of the debate, and the whole exchange highlighted her current irrelevance in the starkest terms. She could only look on as Obama, Bush and McCain squared up to each other.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/2856286/29173136

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference three men in a fight:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Post a comment

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In

My Photo

where (else) to go for the 2008 skinny

  • toby harnden
    the Daily Telegraph's US correspondent is one of the sharpest British observers of this race - and he keeps a good blog.
  • the page
    the best site for 24-7 election news, instant analysis, and links to new stories
  • new york times
    heavyweight journalists and commentators
  • washington post
    more heavyweights
  • marc ambinder
    clever chap from The Atlantic
  • the stump
    thoughtful commentary from The New Republic's team
  • swampland
    the blog of Time's political team
  • andrew sullivan
    highly idiosyncratic but always entertaining
  • abc: the note
    comprehensive daily round-up of the media's stories, plus sharp commentary
  • politico
    the best general US politics site with two excellent (Dem and GOP) bloggers

election relief

my other places