Who attacks who?

Poblano at fivethirtyeight.com took a look at the press releases:

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/05/incoming.html

Clinton wins with a factor of six.

great way to start my morning thx!

:kick:

:kick:

although he hasn't done as well when campaigning one against two.

1. It's manifest that the big break in the Democratic campaign came in February. Obama took just 10 incoming hits in January, but 51 in February, as both the RNC and the Clinton campaign significantly ramped up their efforts against him.

2. Clinton's incoming hits peaked in January, and have since dwindled basically to nothing. She hasn't been the subject of either an RNC or a McCain press release since March. Overall, since March 1st, Obama has taken 151 incoming hits, McCain has taken 144, and Clinton has taken 9.

3. The Obama campaign does very, very little attacking (quite possibly too little), at least in the form of press releases. That doesn't mean that they won't go negative, but they prefer to wait for an opportunity to counter-punch and/or to do so somewhat surreptitiously. But what they won't usually do is to try and dictate the course of a news cycle with an attack.

4. In contrast, the Clinton press shop is always operating at a fever pitch, and much of that involves attacking their opponents. During March and April, the Clinton press shop was hitting Obama nearly once a day. But the Clinton campaign has also delivered considerably more hits on McCain than the Obama campaign has (at least through its press releases). Also, note that Clinton has considerably cut down on her hits on Obama for the past several weeks.

needs to be seen

I really like Poblano because of that. He gives us the numbers.

as well in that it shows Clinton is in fact, on its own terms, making a transition away from the supposedly scorched earth mania. Without too many noticing either which is a successful double game.

More nerve racking is the Obama campaign attack defense mode. Gore and Kerry never found the perfect balance, never set the agenda as difficult at the corporate MSM makes that. While the tone may be popular and absolutely correct, the public that tunes in will never be allowed to see that and receive instead an unacknowledged wave of GOP toned propaganda. The media itself must be literally stormed with a presentation that yet maintains the noble tone. Passivity and silence in the media outlets will not be a sustainable toward the deserved voter response. It might also be recognized that the MSM will never be the only and central means to make the message work, but at the least they must be kept pinned down. Already public distrust of the media has morphed into recognition of their true bias, a big step considering the "liberal press" meme of the past. The trouble is where do most people go for any information and how many people still are unduly influenced by the mere slant of the news? Where, besides the might Wurlitzer is there any unity or national coming together of message?

The media assault should be constant, widespread populist engagement, as consistently Obama positive as possible, accentuate and join in their own critiques of McCain, severely fair critiques of the media role in war and Bush crimes(and its professionalism) to keep THEM on the defensive and their viewers critical.
Don't let stories die. The McClellan thing was to follow the usual stomr and fog and character assassination into quick silence. Wexler springing immediately to its legal significance restores the pursuit of much buried evidence and evasive witnesses.

Our machine is government in action, the masses in activism for justice and democracy. We need Dems who will use it fiercely, not enable or merely imitate the obstacles.

It appears that the DNC was carrying the water against McCain. One thing, I wouldn't infer from the Obama campaign's actions against Clinton that he will not aggressively go after McCain. We have already seen the beginning of that - he will go after McCain on policy, and tie him as closely as possible to Bush and to K Street. We will have to, of course, press the media hard to get our message out - but this will be extremely difficult to do as long as Hillary Clinton is in the race.

things never change. That is vague but after the past two thefts we are going in again on a lot of faith and supposition, this time with a semi-newness gamble that needs some boldness and quick adaptation to back it up.

Kerry promised to fight and knew those swift boaters well from past campaigns. We got a lot more of the same buried in vague faith and no strategy at all worth a damn to face well exposed and varied fraud. Kerry in fact shrugged off any notion of Gore's victory and the consequences for 2004. I think I heard Obama assuming the expected tsunami will take care of the fraud threat. That is as big an assumption as the tsunami itself and I would hate to see even the mandate diminished by silently conceded theft of millions of votes. Then the totally expected revolting MSM skew toward GOP political desires. That too is a grand game of pretend journalistic legitimacy slouching onward to November without much direct confrontation.

if even half of them are really even democrats-I keep posing the question "so who are you voting for in Nov for president?" and they NEVER answer-some do but most won't...hi EE, PL, and NJS

I think you know who I'm talking about.