BBC NEWS | The Reporters

Fighting dirty

Gavin Hewitt
7 Oct 08, 10:49 PM GMT

Nashville, Tennessee: Here's a question: if your opponent gets dirty, do you join him in the mud?

It came up in the media centre, or "Spin Alley", in the hours before the debate in Nashville.

Robert Gibbs, an Obama strategist, was chewing the fat with a few reporters. Spin, these days, is a 24-hour business. It precedes a debate and goes into over-drive afterwards.

Gibbs was wondering out loud which McCain would show up tonight. Would he be angry and desperate, or the candidate who thrives on town-hall meetings?

And then Gibbs was asked about going negative. The Obama camp believes we are entering a new phase in the campaign. The gloves have started to come off and the Republicans want to make the election a referendum on Obama the man.

They regard Sarah Palin's comment that Obama was "palling around with terrorists" as straight out of the nasty bag. So you might think that with Obama pulling ahead in some of the key states, his campaign would stay out of the street fights. But Gibbs saw it very differently: "If they want to get dirty - we'll go there with them."

Barack Obama is of the same mind: "We don't throw the first punch but we'll throw the last."

So, when the Republicans raised Obama's links to the former radical Bill Ayres, the Democrats hit back by high-lighting McCain's links to Charles Keating and the savings and loans scandal.

So why not stay out of a "slug-fest"? Imprinted in the Democrats' DNA is what happened to John Kerry and the attacks on his time in Vietnam in the Swift boats.

While his opponents questioned Kerry's war-time story and his heroism, his campaign said little. That enabled the story to take root. The Obama campaign believes not only in instant rebuttal but fighting back.

It's an interesting strategy because, as the ailing economy has worked for Obama, so he has tried to be reassuring and presidential. That has so irritated some Republicans that they've accused him of "coasting" to the White House. So, they would like nothing better than to draw him into a tough fight.

Comments

1. At 00:07am on 08 Oct 2008, Grapevyne wrote:
The Repubs and all who support them are pathetic. The country is falling down around them and all they want to do is fart about with non-issues. Sadly the American people are so gullible and easily distracted that they don't care about the future of their children's children. Sad!

Complain about this comment
2. At 04:38am on 08 Oct 2008, Dayvine wrote:
I am repeatedly shocked by these 'debates', specifically by the poor quality of the republicans.

I admit that I disagree with their policies, but they have little chance of winning me over if they can not string a coherent argument together justifying their positions.

The root of the problem is the American media which, on balance, must be seen as the sick man of the worlds free press.

'Taking the gloves off' is nothing more than an attempt to get wider coverage from a system geared to sensation rather than sense.

Complain about this comment
3. At 10:29am on 08 Oct 2008, climateoffear wrote:
Actually grapevyne, I think if you read about the polling numbers across battleground states at the moment, you will find that the American people aren't being gullible and easily distracted at the moment. The people falling for McCain-Palin are in the minority for the first time ever. The biggest issue of the moment is actually the BIGGEST issue of the moment. The majority of Americans are motivated to get the economy under control and are looking for the right man to do so.

Complain about this comment
4. At 11:20am on 08 Oct 2008, sharpski SOFBTRC wrote:
For the last two elections the Republicans have gone negative early, repeatedly and often while knowing what they said it was less than gospel

Obama has to fight this, he has to hit back!

HIT Mccain on his warmongering, on his support for the supremely wealthy, his belief that you cant see a doctor if your poor, or get an abortion if your raped

Obama cant sit back and say negative attacks dont work, Bush proved you can even smear a straight as an arrow war hero and people will believe you

Its like nuclear weaponry, you dont want to use them but if someone else does (see mccains ridiculous "obama wants to teach 3 year olds about sex, take all your money, burn US flags and eat puppies" attack adds) you only have one option.

Complain about this comment
5. At 04:42am on 11 Oct 2008, Kolgon wrote:
Today, following the Troopergate report, I imagine 'palling around' becomes 'Palin around'?

Complain about this comment
6. At 3:31pm on 13 Oct 2008, icetayoa wrote:
6 reasons why I am voting for Obama by an unsuspecting independent voter

MY DISDAIN FOR MCAIN IS A TRANSFERRED AGGRESSION FROM MY LOATHING OF GEORGE W BUSH?

A VOTE FOR MCAIN IS A VOTE FOR BUSH, BECAUSE GEORGE W BUSH IS ON THE BALLOT FOR THE NOVEMBER ELECTION

I WILL VOTE FOR CHANGE REGARDLESS OF WHO THE CLOWN IS

OBAMA IS A CHANGE AGENT REGARDLESS OF MY SCANT KNOWLEGDE OF HIS TRACK RECORD

I AM BLACK AND THIS IS OUR REALISTIC CHANCE OF PUTTING ONE OF US IN THE WHITE HOUSE

OBAMAS CHARM AND RETHORIC, HAS WON ME OVER DESPITE THE FACT THAT I KNOW HE HAS LITTLE ELSE TO OFFER?

Complain about this comment
7. At 6:50pm on 18 Oct 2008, mobytom2 wrote:
The US President is a highly politicised position with much more opportunity to create and meddle in policy than a lot of heads of state, but is not the legislature. Even though Bush has managed to get the President much more power than in the past, the President in most cases can't do much except propose and veto (as I understand it).

The US Presidential candidates don't have the sort of party machine to develop policies as do political parties in the Westminster system. So when they do propose policies, they are less well-developed and there's no guarantee that their party in the legislature will suppport them.

I think that's why presidential elections seem so shallow to those of us in other countries (such as here in Australia). An awful lot of fuss and expense with very little substance.

Given all that, Obama does seem to have prepared a much more cohesive set of policies than his opponent, and much better suited to help them get through the recession.

But Obama also seems to be winning on 'hope' and charisma. Not a bad thing, especially when the US Bush/Cheney government has managed to get itself such an abysmal image in the rest of the world. A charming, more diplomatic and consensus-building head of state might help get nations working together to get out of this mess. Although at the moment it seems that Europe is leading the charge, more so than the US.

Complain about this comment
8. At 7:04pm on 19 Oct 2008, glueonhair wrote:
Seeing as how Mr. McPain is/was part of the problems which have befallen the US, rolling your eyes at every utterance your opponent makes, taking on a running mate that professes to have more experience than Obama/Biden put together? Need i go on?, you all know the rest.An angry old man and a horky mom? A party that has professionals in it that authorised torture at Guantanamo and elsewhere? Then when the judiciary tried to curtail the practice , had a President that signed a bill curbing the power of the courts, effectively pre-pardoning the Servicemen and Women that were involved? How much of the above have you heard or seen Obama mention or use as a election grabber? The citizenry of the US should really get their thinking caps on and consider the issues and forget about what underwear the candidates have on!

Complain about this comment