Mastering the Art of Losing
I’m not sure Matt isn’t wrong in his criticism of Matt’s scoffing at McCain’s upbeat talk about the status-of-forces negotiation going on. But I don’t know how useful it is to be cute about this sort of thing if the Democrats actually call him on it. From one perspective, it may be good that opposition to a long-term U.S. presence is uniting Iraqis. But not if a long-term presence is one of the U.S.‘s primary objectives! In other words, McCain can only make the sotto voce claim Matt Feeney thinks he hears to the extent that he is willing to be obscure about what, actually, we’re doing in Iraq. Which is a point the Obama campaign could easily make, and win with.
More to the point, it’s a point Matt Yglesias can make. I’m genuinely surprised at how much Yglesias likes going in for the “McCain is senile,” “McCain is ignorant” and “McCain is dim” memes. Has he not noticed that almost precisely these attacks backfired badly when deployed against Reagan and against the current occupant of the office? All he’s doing is lowering the bar so that any time something McCain says can be interpreted to be canny, it discredits a whole line of attack against him.
If the Democrats really want to win this year, they’ll steer clear of giving McCain easy opportunities to do the kind of ju-jitsu that the GOP has always excelled at. Walking around like you’ve got your SAT scores tattooed on your schvantz is an excellent way to lose elections in America.
I think, Noah, Yglesias’s point is less that “McCain is senile”, etc and more that “McCain is a just a usual conventional Republican politician, whose straight talk is much over-rated, and whose shining white knight image is more muddied than it looks when, say, the MSM writes its glowing articles about him”
— scritic · Jun 16, 04:54 PM · #
From Yglesias’ post: I saw on teevee yesterday that it’s “ageist” to say that John McCain is being “confused” when he repeatedly makes statements that are at odds with reality, so maybe he’s just dishonest or dim-witted.
That’s the kind of line I’m talking about.
— Noah Millman · Jun 16, 05:02 PM · #
<em>I’m genuinely surprised at how much Yglesias likes going in for the “McCain is senile,” “McCain is ignorant” and “McCain is dim” memes. Has he not noticed that almost precisely these attacks backfired badly when deployed against Reagan and against the current occupant of the office?</em>
I dunno, I’m not in charge of political messaging from the DNC — I’m a writer trying to tell the truth as I see it. Would it be better for me to hedge my remarks more in the direction of what history teaches is politically effective? That would seem like an odd choice.
— Matthew Yglesias · Jun 17, 03:50 PM · #
Matt: It’s a little more complicated than that. You’re not Marc Ambinder; you’re a partisan opinionator. Which means a lot of what you’re up to is putting together arguments. So I would emphatically not expect you to hedge your remarks. Rather, I’d expect you to call it as you see it and also construct arguments you think are effective.
Anyway, I’m one of your readers, and I want higher-quality mockery.
— Noah Millman · Jun 17, 06:35 PM · #
I’m a writer trying to tell the truth as I see it. Would it be better for me to hedge my remarks more in the direction of what history teaches is politically effective? That would seem like an odd choice.
Huh? A self-identified partisan, who wields partisan “truths” for a living, abdicating the tactics which might see his partisan agenda enacted? That is odd.
— JA · Jun 17, 06:38 PM · #