BBC NEWS | The Reporters

The spin cycle

Gavin Hewitt
8 Oct 08, 10:58 PM GMT

Nashville, Tennessee: Spin Alley has become part of the ritual of the Presidential debates. Five minutes before the debate ends the camera crews and reporters crowd together waiting for the candidate's inner circle to come and make the pitch. The campaign managers, strategists and communications directors have heralds who arrive with large boards carrying their names.They're like Roman senators or prize fighters waiting for the standard to be placed and for the the contest to begin.

The spinners arrive within minutes of the debate ending. In the world of 24-hour news it is vital to get the line out there, to shape the news agenda. Even so it is surprising to stand there and to listen as these spinmeisters are asked "Who won?" as if they might opine that their candidate had had a bad night.

My expectations were slight yet last night in Nashville there was a rare ray of candour and it came from the Republican camp. Standing under his banner was Steve Schmidt,
John McCain's campaign manager. Yes, he said, we feel very good about John McCain's performance but then the candid assessment: "It remains a very close race," he said, but John McCain had a "tighter hill to climb than his opponent".

"We understand the difficulty," he said, in having an "R" next to your name. He was making the point that the Republican brand was hurting his candidate."We're still behind," he acknowledged, "but we remain in striking distance."

Privately the McCain team believe that if the focus remains on the economy they lose. In the congested space of Spin Alley I bumped into Fred Thompson, the former Presidential candidate. He thought McCain had had a good night but went on to say that the fate of the economy would determine the election. "To the extent it (the economy) goes down, it will hurt John."

The McCain campaign are wrestling with the problem. Just three weeks ago McCain was ahead or even. With the markets in free-fall the mood is growing that America is on the wrong Track. It is hard to make the case that you are the candidate of change when your party have controlled the White House for the past eight years.

That is the Republican dilemma and they're not disguising it.

And as the economy works in his favour, Barack Obama tries to reassure, to look Presidential. No magic needed. As their communications director, Robert Gibbs, said to me last night, "we couldn't be more thrilled".

Comments

1. At 00:10am on 09 Oct 2008, Dennis Junior wrote:
Gavin:
The spin doctors are becoming an important
thing in the political scene...

Complain about this comment
2. At 11:12am on 09 Oct 2008, eightypercent wrote:

If the Republicans believe that they need to get off the subject of the economy, why on earth did they get McCain to propose his $300 billion mortgate-foreclosure proposal ?

It has opened up a whole new field for debate on the issue of - what? The economy, stupid !

That is a case of letting your candidate open his mouth and put his foot in it. What on earth are they up to ?

Maybe Governor Palin will be able to explain the complicated details to us all.

Complain about this comment
3. At 1:07pm on 09 Oct 2008, icetayoa wrote:
I am surprised that senator john Mcain and the American people have allowed this ridiculous soap opera to go on for far too long. in my opinion the race would have been a no-contest a long time ago if the mcain people had not listened to the media and their ‘experts’, and had focussed on the most important issue a lot of people have overlooked.. if the mcain people had focussed on character vis a viz Senator Obama, I bet he would have been exposed a long time ago for the fraud that he is.
Character goes to the heart of everything, be it the dire economic situation, terrorism, patriotism et al..The problem on wall street is as a result of the deficiency in character of the major players in wall street and Washington..Obama in my opinion is a sitting duck when it comes to issues on character. he has a busload of indiscretions that are already in the public domain. They can be used to good effect to put the benefit of doubt in the mind of the voters. i am not referring to incoherent personal attacks but a more articulate and sustained discourse on his bad judgement in the past that could cost the American people dearly if elected president.

One such indiscretion is his association with that radical pastor of his. This is a relationship that dates back many years. For his pastor to have uttered such nonsense after the attacks of September 11 it must follow that he harbours such resentment towards America. that statement must not be treated in isolation as a moment of passion or madness by the pastor, because it goes into the core of his mindset and belief. By my understanding, that statement is not a recent one. It was made a long time ago even before obama thought of running for president. This goes to the heart of Obama’s judgement, because I am at a loss as to why he did not denounce the pastor then ( if he did not share such a belief ) when it was not politically expedient to do so?? why denounce the pastor now when it is politically expedient to do so?? Obama cannot tell me that he was not 1) aware of the pastor’s comments 2) aware of the pastor’s beliefs 3) aware of the pastor’s political leanings?? This is a Pastor he respects and a church he regularly attended.
The logical thing he should have done was to severe ties with the pastor if he didn’t share the pastor’s toxic views long before it was politically expedient to do so. How many people is Obama going to severe ties with because they hurt his inordinate ambition to become the first black president, how many? There is an old adage that says, show me who your friends and acquaintances are and I will show you who you truly are! Americans, don’t be fooled by Obama, the media and his campaign people, that his actions are just mere indiscretions. THEY ARE NOT! They go to the heart of who he truly his. He is an opportunist, a calculating and dangerous person, who will deny past associations that hurt his inordinate ambition to make history

Complain about this comment
4. At 2:19pm on 09 Oct 2008, endorfin wrote:
#3

Ice, it's poor form to just copy and paste the same rant onto several different blogs.

Complain about this comment
5. At 4:07pm on 09 Oct 2008, Grapevyne wrote:
Iceredneck, sorry, icetayoa

have you listened to what Rev Wright actually said and not the soundbyte nonsense that Fox news drip fed you? Have you ever tried to read and understand the history of the black people in America or does that not interest you at all?

Please show some intelligence and do not try to race bait or incite violence here. The only people who are dangerous are you and the McPalin camp.

Complain about this comment
6. At 4:12pm on 09 Oct 2008, Y_K_Hui wrote:
It seems that everyone is repeating the same line: If the economy is bad, the Democrats will win.

This is in parallel with: If the security in Iraq deteriorates, the Democrats will win.

Do you not see now, that the Democrats get elected if America fails?

The truth is that the business cycle or financial crisis has a life of its own, and it is not caused by one person, namely a Republican President. Both Democrats and Republicans are responsible for the less than good economic policy. The reality is that booms and busts are the way an economy functions, given human nature. No one is immune from greed. Many Americans borrowed and spent excessively from the home equity they had in the last few years. A slowdown or recession is a way to correct our own excesses.

Now is the time to become more rational, not more emotional and be tempted by a Democrat who is extremely skillful in promising us everything.

Please use your intelligence when you cast your vote.

Complain about this comment
7. At 4:13pm on 09 Oct 2008, Ticketboy wrote:
icetayoa everything you've said show why Obama will win.

Half the stuff you mentioned is in the public domain and people have made there minds up about it. It's been almost to easy for The Republicans to throw accusations of this kind around. The arrogance of an organisation to start telling people what is un-American is enough to put anyone off. The Man is running for the Office of President. He knows more people than I ever will and becuase of a comment that the Republican's consider un-American you consider him dodgy and unsuitable for the job. That is just not good enough. If anything it show a weakness in McCain if that's the way he exspects to win this election

Complain about this comment
8. At 11:00am on 11 Oct 2008, icetayoa wrote:
Most Democrats on this board dont get it. As human beings, we are all entitled to a few indiscretions in life. to suggest that someone can be squeaky clean is ludicrous. the point however, is that as a human being one must acknowledge those indiscretions and make peace with them long before they become a burden to ones ambitions in life.

My point being, i wont have had any problem with Obama if he had long distanced himself from his Pastor, before it became a burden to his blind ambition not to do so. Is Obama suggesting that if he were not running for President, he would not have found his pastors comment offensive? what does that say of him as a person? he worshipped in a church for so long with his family, was aware of his pastors comments and political leanings..he agreed by association with those leanings and comments to further his political career and just suddenly drops it like a hot potatoe when it presents itself has a stumbling block to his aspiration. Are any of you aware of what is referred to as guilty by association?

Obama is not only disloyal to his pastor and church members, he is also an opportunist that will readily deny links with anything or anyone in his past, that constitute a stumbling block to his blind ambition.

Complain about this comment
9. At 11:49am on 11 Oct 2008, icetayoa wrote:
i have a funny feeling my comments are being censored..so much for bbc's fairness.

Complain about this comment
10. At 12:27pm on 11 Oct 2008, icetayoa wrote:
Unbelievable! So I am now a racist and a redneck because I have rightly chosen to highlight Obamas frequent bad judgement calls through is past liaisons?? Why am I not surprised? The only way the democrats and their supporters can win the forthcoming us election is to deflect objective criticism of Obamas character by accusing observers like us of being red necks. My question to you all is simple. Are all the accusations against Obama fact or fiction? Did he know and have relations with Rezko, Ayers, ACORN, wright & co or not? When did he deny those relationships and severe ties with them, was it a long time ago or more recently? Why did he severe ties with the aforementioned group, was it because a) they hurt is political ambition or b) he honestly wanted to, ambition or not?
As for those of you that ignorantly refer to me as a racist and redneck, BREAKING NEWS! I am a black African, a Nigerian to be precise. However unlike most of you, I have not let my emotions get the best of me because of the prospect of Obama being the 1st black president in US history. I had rather settle for a competent person with a track record., A stable person who wont deny existing ties at a whim because they hurt is inordinate person.

Complain about this comment