I don't know if what you're saying here is true or not. One sees so much external commentary on the strategy of campaigns, that it's hard to distinguish ahead of time what's prescient, from what is eloqently expressed but ultimately wrong. I TEND to think you're closer to right than to wrong, but that is mostly a gut guess.

Two points I'd like to make:

(1)Nobody "wins" this early. To the extent that mantra is allowed to prevail, it's most likely not good news for the front-runner. That monotonous story is not likely to be sustainable for four solid months.

(2)Whatever one might say about the overall effectiveness of Obama's campaign (I'd have to say pretty good. so far), I think the "Presidential Seal" idea was one of the dumber things I've seen. You don't have to be an ace campaign strategist to understand that the public hates PRESUMPTION on the part of any candidate. To the extent that ploy has any lasting effect on the campaign at all, it's hard for me to see it as anything but negative for Sen. Obama.

All your insights are right on in my opinion.

We see this problem every four years when a new nominee emerges for President whose campaign team either has little or no experience on the Presidential level or what experience they bring to the table is the worst DC has to offer of the lame consultant mindset that has sunk other Democratic campaigns. In short, they don't know what they are doing and they were a lot more comfortable running against Democrats than they are running against the Republicans.

I suspect that as Obama's team basks in the glow of it's own genius that the hubris and arrogance are almost too much to stomach. This too, has been a problem for Democratic campaigns in past years that have won the nomination but who don't realize winning the nomination isn't winning in November and the gears must be switched for the general election. If they are on the usual schedule of arrogant error, they will begin to clue in to what they need to be doing starting about two weeks after Labor Day. By the time the actual election rolls around and the Republicans have bashed their brains in three or four times, the Obama team will be perfectly prepared with an effective strategy (as the Kerry people were)but it might be too late.

Seems to me the Obama campaign, now fully absorbed by the Borg of DC Democratic cowardliness believes that victory will be won, not by drawing a contrast with the corrupt and criminal opposition, but because the Republicans are so rotten that people just won't vote for them. Of course, that's the worst possible basis for waging a November campaign but the evidence thus far seems to point in that direction. And of course, the dumbest mistake of all (given that they are relying on the Republicans to lose the election because they are so reviled)is to move further and further to the right so Obama looks more and more like the Republicans Americans find so distasteful. One reason, I think, the Obama economic tour has been so ho-hum is because they aren't offering anything different than the tepid, middle of the road, DLC economic boiler plate solutions--(in other words... no real change).

You are right that the Obama team should be focused on how to take charge of the agenda and message, but clearly their focus is elsewhere. Hopefully, they'll get a clue in time to eek out a victory in November, but if there's any party that could lose in a year tht should be a watershed realignment it's the DC dominated Democratic Party. That is what happens when you never play to win, but instead only play not to lose.

He's been a little too cocky throwing the left under the bus on the FISA issue so early too. He's never been strong on health care or social justice issues and he's beginning to sound like a DLC hawk. I've forgotten what I'm supposed to be believing...

With "concern trolls" like Theda, McCain doesn't need to do anything but stand by while Obama gets bashed for being a flip-flopper while McCain is still the "Straight Talk Express!"

I DO agree with many of the points here and admit to a certain amount of wariness of Obama's new push towards the right and away from his populist message.

Many of his recent positions on issues, especially on FISA, make him appear less like the liberal he projected in the primary, and more like another souless politician.

Thank you Theda,

I have been saying this for weeks -- the Obama campaign has been on the defensive on 80% of the news coverage we see on TV -- public finance, Rev. Wright, Ayers, Clintons. When was the last time Obama threw a punch? I know. I know. He throws a few now and then, but they are totally ineffective. He needs to get a new press secretary.

And why are we talking about defense here? With the Republican record what it is, Obama should be solidly on the offensive. Instead, he's letting McCain define the issues.

We will lose if we continue to fight on their turf. The Obama campaign needs to wake up.

Although Obama seems to be "up" in current national polls, McCain is actually doing a much better job of shaping the agenda to his advantage.

Stop right there. Obama is up in the polls, and that's not going to change just because people see Obama as overconfident. Even if McCain comes across as a reformer on energy, No one wants to go war with Iran.

And anyway, the media always picks on the frontrunner. The only way to get the media to stop bashing him is to start losing, and that's clearly not a good idea.

The media are NEVER going to pick on McCain, no matter what. They're his die-hard base, bringing him donuts and savoring his barbecue and getting all hot and bothered when they contemplate his sheer manly maverickiness. If media coverage is your criterion for who's really up and who's down, you can go ahead and write the next 4 monthly installments of this analysis right now, cuz that's not going to change.

Sadly, my3sons, you are probably right. But that doesn't mean Democrats should just give up.

The press will ensure that this is a horse-race right to the finish line. They're pro-McCain right now because he's down in the polls. If Obama were down, they'd be pro-Obama.

The NYTimes, CNN, MSNBC, FOX, etc...they all know that no one wants to watch a race that's already been decided. That doesn't draw ratings. The best baseball games, after all, are the ones where the teams are tied right up to the last inning.

The best way for the MSM to sustain an audience and profit big off this election year is keeping the candidates neck and neck.

It's irresponsible, and someone should call them on it, but I think it's probably the reality of the business. I don't know how some of these people go to sleep at night.

I guess it comes down to whether you think Americans love Cokie Roberts more than they hate the war in Iraq. I think you may be pleasantly surprised. But I could certainly be wrong. I've overestimated the ability of the American voter to see through media manipulation plenty of times before.

I almost don't know where to begin. This article bordered on nonsense to me. Everything McCain's been doing for the last two weeks has been in reaction to an Obama talking point (Public Finance, the War), or a lamebrained idea lambasted by the press or some in his own party (Oil drilling).

And how many more punches do you need to see Obama throw? I guess the whole "I'm not going to take advice from those who got us into the worst foreign policy blunder in our nation's history" thing was Democrats just being wimpy, and waiting to lose again.

The author is welcome to her opinions, but she's wrong.

Maybe they need to have Hillary run his general election campaign. It appears as if the BO is the one who has "lost his bearings". In the one month since he defeated HRC in the delegate count, he has done nothing to galvanize the country. With his cave on FISA, it appears that it will be more politics as usual. The big news today is that HRC will be joining him tomorrow for the Unity speech. How lame is that? Is this the guy that is going to get us out of Iraq? Will he be able to revolutionize our healthcare system? What a disappointment.

Superchimp is right that valuable state and local media coverage can happen even when the national media is ignoring something like the Obama economic tour. I don't discount the value of that.

Thanks for doing a good job of vocalizing exactly what I've been thinking for the past two weeks. McCain is beginning to control the media cycle with "fresh" ideas, and Obama isn't hitting back. Some specifics of what Obama should have done and can still do:

$300 million for a new battery technology: Obama should point out that this is less than we spend in Iraq in ONE DAY. He needs to call this what it is: a gimmick. And then he needs to explain why his energy plan is better.

Drilling: Obama needs to explain that there are already millions of acres open for drilling that would be profitable at current oil prices. He could perhaps lead an oil exec. who is giving testimony to explain this for him. He needs to point out that even many Republicans (Schwarzenegger) are opposed to offshore drilling.

Campaign finance: this is potentially huge. It needs to be made clear to the American people that John McCain is *BREAKING THE LAW*. If done successfully, this will connect McCain to all the other Republican lawbreakers from the last 8 years, and will permanently stain his campaign. It would be too self-serving for Obama to be directly involved, but FEC Chairman David Mason (a Republican) needs to be called before congress to explain McCain's violations.

And as others have pointed out, Obama should remember to do what he's best at- proposing new ideas, and explaining them in a narrative way that every American can understand. People like new ideas, even when they are utter crap (witness the coverage of McCain's battery proposal). But good ideas that people understand can win this election.

Alot of bandwidth for a lot of nothing.McCain is talking to Bush's base on every issue. He comes off as dry and detached and the only others who are listening are the media types getting free barbecue.
I don't know who this Theda person is but she comes off as a contrarian. If McCain has lined his ducks up so neatly where is his bump, anywhere. I'll admit though, Plouff played the Hope card effectively in the primaries and is playing reactionary to McCain's Foot in mouth Fest. The problem is imho, Plouff is used to playing defense and winning. The general may not be as forgiving should another shoe drop. The flip side is if Obama gets too aggressive, he may look like the greenhorn picking on the Old Man that the MSM will swallow whole. I forget who wrote it but the Obama campaign can not keep pointing out McCain's being out of touch as it may come off as agism. But then don't oversell McCain's getting a leg up when it's Bush's stead he is still trying to ride. And this thread is beginning to have all the charm of a "I can draft better than So and So's General Manager".

Actually, Obama has done a pretty good job defining McCain as the third coming of Bush. He is now seen by a huge percentage of Americans as the same as Bush on a lot of issues. I think part of the problem with the current situation is we're only seeing the tip of the iceberg. The Obama campaign is in the process of building a massive general election operation, one that will dwarf what McCain is doing and could have a significant impact on the election. Meanwhile, McCain is focusing much of his attention on the DC media, masking a certain hollowness in his organization. Yes, Obama has had a few stumbles of late. But the problem with judging a presidential campaign at this stage and from such a close vantage point is that it can be difficult to see what actually matters in who will win. Message is important, but machines win elections.

Obama campaign has had 3 weeks to truly start revving up and organizing for the general. McCain has used the last few months. Be patient, its coming.

Wow. This is so surreal. I expect to see this kind of hand-wringing on a website supporting John McCain, not one supporting the candidate that by so many metrics is doing just find in the face of many handicaps (race, funny name, long/bruising primary, relentless smear campaign, Fox News etc.)

I really have to wonder if we're watching the same campaign. I think your essay is one of too many examples of Democrats being so stuck in the failures of the past that you can't adequately appreciate how well you're doing now.

This is not to be mean, but do you have experience running campaigns? It's just that I think you're wrong on so many points. I'm wondering what qualifies you to say "this will not work."

And could you direct me to Axelrod's "arrogant-sounding" interview? I've been following this election pretty closely and I haven't seen it. And this is another thing that bugs me: So-called Obama supporters repeating GOP talking points. What gives?!

Speaking about national network coverage. I just did a survey of CNN's politics pages. There are over double the number of Anti-Obama/Pro-McCain articles as Pro-Obama/Anti-MCCain articles:

Anti Obama/Pro McCain

1. Rove, critics try to pin 'arrogant' label on Obama.
2. McCain applauds High court ruling, criticizes Obama
3. McCain releases Dr. No web ad
4. The ethics of Obama's switch
5. Factchecking: Lame claim on McCain money
6. Romney on energy prices
7. McCain: I put my country first
8. Sanchez: can Obama's money buy him love?
9. Will men decide the election
10. Crossing the Clintons
11. Political Cartoon: We are family
12. Nader: Obama Using White Guilt

Pro Obama:
1. Will Obama's name help a Republican senator?
2. Voters won't care much about Obama' federal funding decision (this could also be anti-obama b/c it suggests that readers should care)
3. Obama a symbol of progress, change
4. Time for Bill Clinton to get over it
5. Obama: McCain's energy plans 'gimmicks'

Neutral:
1. Obama splits with Supreme Court on rape case

McCain has been known to have a great relationship with the press. Obama would do well to improve his relationship with them.

I agree with much of what Theda Skocpol says about Barack Obama's campaign, but it seems to me remarkably premature to write Obama's political obituary just yet. Ms. Skocpol does not seem to take into consideration that John McCain has made an incredibly high number of stumbles himself, large and small, for a candidate who has traveled this road before (2000, anyone?), who is well-liked by the media, and who should know better than anyone else what it takes to run a smooth and successful presidential campaign with both the winds of GOP executive branch incumbency at his back and a personal narrative that would, in most circumstances, be a political consultant's dream.

"Pride goeth before a fall" is not a bad proverb for John McCain to keep in mind, either.

Markos of DailyKos posted a diatribe on Wednesday attacking the congressmen who voted to support Bush’s FISA Bill with telecom immunity. Kos was beside himself, calling them “bad Democrats” who have “forgotten who they serve.” They are “bad apples” and “shitty Democrats … more scared of Mr. 28% than of protecting the Constitution they swore to protect.” They had, Kos roared, “sold out the Constitution.” Markos called for them all to be primaried, his term for driving them from office by promoting Dem challengers. Kos was in high dudgeon, indeed.

A couple hours later Barack Obama -- Kos’ designated Netroots candidate and Progressive savior -- announced that although he had previously promised to filibuster any FISA bill such a this, he has now decided granting immunity to criminal telecoms is not really a big deal and he will vote to support the FISA bill in its present form.

That pathetic mutilated form you see over there is Markos twisting slowly in the wind. Obama just crapped all over his most ardent supporters. Yet so far, Markos reaction seems to be, “Thank you sir; may I have another!”

As usual, I learn from all the comments. Those who suggest I am writing Obama's "obituary" read too much into my cautions -- and those who say I am pushing Republican talking points really over-read the critique. I certainly appreciate the great strengths of the Obama candidacy and campaign, and have written often about them, but I still worry about the national media filter on any economy-focused message. And I believe that Obama and the Democrats must work hard to get a crisp, dramatic, practical economic message across to ordinary voters in the month to come. Especially to the many registering "undecided" in current polls.

At the risk of making many commentators irritated, I am not so concerned about the pragmatic stances Obama is now taking on matters such as FISA immunity and Court rulings. I think he has to avoid providing fodder for attack ads -- such as an ad saying he is "soft on national security" which would follow at once if Obama voted against FISA over the immunity issue. I also understand that, in this period, Obama has to do some things to consolidate the moderate Democratic base, especially reaching out to HRC supporters.

But I still worry about the campaign's capacity to avoid triumphalism and proactively define issues and agendas of debate with McCain, especially to focus debates on practical bread-and-butter-issues. I see no evidence they have figured out how to do that. I make my comments only to urge humility and innovative strategizing going forward.

Theda S.

Mike 2,

Up until last week the Obama campaign was doing fine, I think that they were taken by surprise by the media's response to his decision to opt out of public financing. It also didn't help that his May numbers were not so great in comparison to other months. And the FISA capitulation could not have come at a worst time. Many people who were dejected by his support for this "compromise" are the same ones who are more likely to give small donations but as a result of this that may not be the case.

As I said earlier, the Obama campaign really needs to force the media to focus on his policy proposals. No one else is going to do it for him.

As I wrote previously, I agree with much of what Theda Skopcol said, although I think she oversells John McCain's success thus far in getting his many muddled messages to stick. I particularly agree with her contentions that Obama is prone to triumphalism and that his message is not crisp or pointed enough when he is triumphal (and right now his campaign is riding a somewhat triumphal wavelet). His campaign has tendencies to get stuck in the foxhole of tit-for-tat attack barbs (and that foxhole is exactly where McCain wants him to stay) and to fail to push its own positive storylines and overarching themes. I greatly appreciated reading Ms. Skopcol's further elucidations of her original post.

Gimmicks - agree in part, disagree in part. Obama doesn't do gimmicks. Perhaps he's too much of a wonk. Electric Car Contests and gas tax cuts - well that sort of thing will NEVER make it onto a "policy initiative" in this campaign, There is also a solid practical political reason to avoid gimmicks - the "experience" issue. Prhaps he has some leeway now but he can't leave himself open to charges of naive, meaningless policy baubles.

Clinton - It's only been three weeks! He has to go through this unity song and dance now. From the looks of things, McCain should have

Campaign finance - It's only been three weeks! Perhaps he should have set this up much earlier as you say but the error here lies in not preparing the field when he began to roll in serious cash in the first FEC quarter. Having taken the position that the issue wasn't ripe until he was the nominee boxed him in with Clinton. Having been burned more than once for "taking the her for granted" he couldn't very well take the nomination for granted, in the event, until the primaries and Hillary were finished. The Plouffe Axelrod pitch to big Hillary donors may not have been ideally timed.
He had to act promptly. Later would have been worse and screwed up general election campaign planning.

The Bush legacy leaves Democrats with an embarassment of riches. The trick when you're ahead as Obama appears to be, is to keep yourself and your campaign hungry for every vote. "How can we cleverly address this or that issue, grab free media, make an impression on soft or undecided voters?" Those should be the questions in the Obama camp. Maybe they are. But I think the campaign is coasting, resting on its laurels. Maybe they can afford to. But it unnerves me, because it looks from the outside a lot like Ned Lamont's primary win in Connecticut. He lost his momemtum and his supporters loss their fervor. Then he lost to Lieberman in the general.

I think Theda has hit some good points. I am a McCain supporter, but it does no good to view events thru self-biased glasses - I try to obtain a view of issues from an objective vantage point.

I think McCain's "$300 M prize for a new battery" is a good example of driving the agenda. It may not be very practical, but it grabbed attention and resonated with middle America - and it could work.

Frankly, I am surprised. I view this year as the year of the Democrats. And it is, except for McCain.

What a complete fear mongering ditto head. Always somebody trying to make a name or get an article published with the fear mongering of "oh no, McCain can win" etc.
So McCain is out there making a bigger fool of himself than ever before and we are supposed to be impressed. The fool is seen everywhere what is wrong with Obama?
Let the sky keep falling on your head with such absurd commentary exploiting "possibilities" of no importance in reality. Everything McCain says and does is wrong and makes him look like an old doddering fool who can barely remember where he put his keys which translates into Obama isn't doing enough.
McCain could never be seen as an activist or as different from Bush because he isn't by any measure and all attempts to pain Obama as anything fails completely except with the McCain base. You ignore all the evidence and replace it with a calculation of fear. What a waste of journalistic space.

IMHO, Obama has made a big mistake by deciding that his general election campaign has to take a new and different tack. For those of us who have supported him from the beginning, it's clear that there has been a philosophical shift, and I don't think it's good, because it raises questions about his integrity. If Obama is indeed "moving to the center," then he is being someone other than the person he sold himself as during the primary. For me, the central appeal of the Obama campaign is that I believed that he is the real deal, and not just another politican who blows with the wind. The nation is practically crying out for bold leadership, but what I'm seeing from Obama in the past month looks like mushy DLC-style centrism. It isn't very often that this country is primed for significant change, and I'm worried that Obama is going to squander the opportunity because some of his advisors are telling him that he needs to fuzz up the message to appeal to the general electorate.

This information is very useful! Thanks!
Best regards, Katya, CEO of microsoft hyper v, iscsi architecture