Surviving Is Not Winning

Sarah Palin survived tonight. She did not freeze or make any significant gaffe and anybody tuning in to see the final nail go into the coffin left disappointed. But avoiding another deer in the headlights, future SNL moment is a rather ridiculous measuring stick. Putting expectations aside, to suggest that Palin somehow won this debate by not falling flat on her face is simply laughable.

She appeared nervous, especially early on, and frequently rambled to the point that most answers lacked a coherent train of thought. The over-coaching led to stock answers and produced a candidate who completely avoided several questions and seemed fearful to veer off of her talking points. At one point, it seemed like every other word to escape her mouth was "maverick." Palin wasn't particularly effective in defending or espousing McCain's record and seemed largely out of her league during some of the foreign policy segments.

It wasn't all lemons tonight for the Republicans though and if we're judging simply on pass-fail, she certainly passed. Beyond the nervousness and the uneven delivery, Palin did display a certain charm and freshness that voters should find appealing. Unlike her running mate last week in Mississippi, she looked directly and almost exclusively into the camera and projected a positive mood. She spoke effectively to "Joe Six-Pack" early on, connecting her story to that of the average American. She did better to pivot her answers to more favorable ground, but this remains the part of her game that needs the most work. She kept the Obama attacks coming--some were more effective than others--and tried to portray a divide between the two Democrats.

Joe Biden seemed somewhat unsteady in the early stages--unsure of how forceful he should be, not looking enough into the camera, and appearing somewhat listless. He remained rather sober throughout and eventually hit his stride with relentless attacks on John McCain. As Obama did in his debate, Biden let no attack go unchallenged, arguing in lawyerly fashion. He showed a depth and range of knowledge that Palin wasn't able to match without appearing too senatorial or arrogant. Like Palin, he focused on the middle class during the economic segments and at times displayed a passion and connectedness that equaled his opponent.

Overall, neither candidate was exceptional. Palin was shaky, but passable. Biden was knowledgeable, but forgettable. I don't think any votes were won or lost and this meeting should ultimately prove meaningless (just like every other VP debate). The race has clearly become Obama's to lose, but 30 days, two debates, and the great unknown still stand in his way.

Cross posted at Political Realm.

Economic Crisis Puts Politics On Hold?

As you have probably heard by now, John McCain has moved to suspend his campaign as of tomorrow in order to return to Washington to focus on the economic crisis. From McCain's campaign:

America this week faces an historic crisis in our financial system. We must pass legislation to address this crisis. If we do not, credit will dry up, with devastating consequences for our economy. People will no longer be able to buy homes and their life savings will be at stake. Businesses will not have enough money to pay their employees. If we do not act, ever corner of our country will be impacted. We cannot allow this to happen.

Last Friday, I laid out my proposal and I have since discussed my priorities and concerns with the bill the Administration has put forward. Senator Obama has expressed his priorities and concerns. This morning, I met with a group of economic advisers to talk about the proposal on the table and the steps that we should take going forward. I have also spoken with members of Congress to hear their perspective.

It has become clear that no consensus has developed to support the Administration's proposal. I do not believe that the plan on the table will pass as it currently stands, and we are running out of time.

Tomorrow morning, I will suspend my campaign and return to Washington after speaking at the Clinton Global Initiative. I have spoken to Senator Obama and informed him of my decision and have asked him to join me.

I am calling on the President to convene a meeting with the leadership from both houses of Congress, including Senator Obama and myself. It is time for both parties to come together to solve this problem.

We must meet as Americans, not as Democrats or Republicans, and we must meet until this crisis is resolved. I am directing my campaign to work with the Obama campaign and the commission on presidential debates to delay Friday night's debate until we have taken action to address this crisis.

I am confident that before the markets open on Monday we can achieve consensus on legislation that will stabilize our financial markets, protect taxpayers and homeowners, and earn the confidence of the American people. All we must do to achieve this is temporarily set politics aside, and I am committed to doing so.

Following September 11th, our national leaders came together at a time of crisis. We must show that kind of patriotism now. Americans across our country lament the fact that partisan divisions in Washington have prevented us from addressing our national challenges. Now is our chance to come together to prove that Washington is once again capable of leading this country.

Barack Obama's campaign quickly followed up with a statement of their own:

At 8:30 this morning, Senator Obama called Senator McCain to ask him if he would join in issuing a joint statement outlining their shared principles and conditions for the Treasury proposal and urging Congress and the White House to act in a bipartisan manner to pass such a proposal. At 2:30 this afternoon, Senator McCain returned Senator Obama's call and agreed to join him in issuing such a statement. The two campaigns are currently working together on the details.

In making such a dramatic move, McCain is able to accomplish several things. It has become clear over the past week that his campaign has lost control of the race. McCain's post convention/Palin bounce has evaporated as economic concerns drove voters to Obama's fold. Instantly, he is able to change the story, or at least shift the fundamentals of it (and burying the Rick Davis lobbying story in the process doesn't hurt either). This move also allows McCain to display leadership on the economy (putting country first?). Not wanting to be outdone, Obama's camp was quick to point out that they had actually moved this morning to get with McCain on this issue.

It remains unclear just what McCain's move means for the campaign. McCain is pushing to delay this Friday's debate, which was to focus on foreign policy, while Obama's campaign is hesitant to push it back. Obama's statement mentions nothing of suspending his campaign, nor has his campaign signaled a willingness to delay the debate. "The debate is on," a senior Obama officially reportedly told ABC News. "We can handle both," Illinois Democrat Rahm Emanuel, who headed up debate negotiations for Obama, added. McCain's team is also suggesting that both sides pull their campaign ads for the time being--a move that would be difficult to pull of logistically with the ads already in circulation. Does McCain intend to really suspend all political activity? Will he close his campaign offices? Will he stop canvassing? Will he pull his surrogates off of the cable news channels? Will he stop fundraising?

And how will McCain's move affect the negotiations on the Hill? While, it's true that the combined power of the two presidential nominees could force Congress to move forward quickly on an agreement. But it seems more likely, however, that their presence would only further politicize this thing, potentially derailing it altogether. Neither McCain nor Obama has any significant expertise in dealing with issues of this nature and they haven't exactly been major players in the debate on the Hill thus far. The Congress has not rushed forward, instead reacting with a healthy dose of skepticism. While the failure to act may further propel this crisis, moving hastily to repair the damage would simply lead to problems down the road.

"While I appreciate that both candidates have signaled their willingness to help, Congress and the Administration have a process in place to reach a solution to this unprecedented financial crisis. It would not be helpful at this time to have them come back during these negotiations and risk injecting presidential politics into this process or distract important talks about the future of our nation's economy," Majority Leader Harry Reid noted this afternoon.

McCain's decision to suspend his campaign and delay the debate puts Obama in a difficult position. Should Obama push for the campaign and the debate to continue, he risks falling into a trap, appearing to have put politics over country. On the other hand, he could play this off as a political stunt from a desperate candidate falling in the polls. He could suggest, rightly so, that a president often has to deal with more than one situation at a time, calling for the campaigns and the debates to move forward even as the two sides work together to solve the economic crisis. Either way, Obama will have to maneuver cautiously. In going public, it looks like McCain is trying to force Obama's hand on this. He tried to get out in front of this to make Obama play on his terms, while Obama's campaign appeared content to work behind the scenes to reach a deal on the bailout proposal with McCain.

While I don't mean to question McCain's desire to solve America's financial crisis, it's difficult to deny the political benefits of his actions today. He's thrown another Hail Mary, but I'm not sure this one will be caught in the end zone.

Cross-posted at Political Realm.

(Over) Working The Refs

The McCain campaign has been working the refs for more than a week now with regard to the coverage of his running mate, Sarah Palin. With cries of sexism, Republican surrogates claimed the media was being unfair to Palin as they combed through the past of the largely unknown Alaska governor. Palin, they suggested, was the victim of the big, bad liberal elite media that was driven to destroy her.

The candidate herself said as much during her speech at the Republican Convention in St. Paul. "I've learned quickly, these past few days," Palin told the crowd, "that if you're not a member in good standing of the Washington elite, then some in the media consider a candidate unqualified for that reason alone."

Of course, Palin and her supporters did have some reason to be upset. Some of the coverage--most notably the questions about whether she'd be able to handle motherhood and the vice presidency--was clearly sexist (although no more sexist than the "is Obama black enough?" coverage was racist). Yet, that sexist reporting represented the minority of media reaction. The more fringe accusations (rumors that Palin's son Trig was actually her grandson) didn't even enter the mainstream. For the most part, the media was doing its job (just as it has done in covering the three other top candidates). There were legitimate questions about Palin's background, her readiness to become commander-in-chief, and about the vetting process in general.

But how dare they ask! Who is Sarah Palin? What does she believe in? Where is she on the issues? Is she qualified? Sexist, sexist, sexist!

The reality of the situation did not matter. The strategy for the McCain team was to work the refs for a variety of reasons. First, it would distract from the meaningful coverage of Palin. Why answer a question when you can question the motives of the person asking it? Doing so would also curry favor with the electorate, as evidenced by a new poll in which more than half of the respondents thought the media was trying to hurt Palin with their coverage. The outrage would also help unite the Republican party, rallying them against a familiar foe.

"I'd like to thank the elite media for doing something," former presidential contender Mike Huckabee said in his speech in St. Paul, "that, quite frankly, I didn't think could be done: unify the Republican Party and all of America in support of John McCain and Sarah Palin."

And so, the real motives of this faux outrage are clear and they could not be more shallow. It was all little more than a smokescreen, distracting the voters the issues at hand and the substance of Palin's record. Now the McCain campaign is crying more crocodile tears. It seems, so they would have us believe, that Barack Obama compared Sarah Palin to a pig yesterday.

"You can put lipstick on a pig," Obama said at a campaign event in Virginia yesterday. "It's still a pig."

Once again the outrage machine fired up, with the McCain campaign dispatching former Massachusetts Governor Jane Swift and the "Palin Truth Squad" (I didn't make that up). It didn't matter to Swift that Obama was clearly talking about the type of change the Republican ticket was offering, which he sees as more of the same. It didn't matter than McCain himself had used the line or something like it a number of times. No, of course not.

"She is the only one of the four candidates... who wears lipstick," Swift explained. "It seemed to me a very gendered comment." Thanks for enlightening us.

UPDATE
Obama has apparently had enough, responding to the "scandal" earlier today:

This happens every election cycle. Every four years. This is what we do. We've got an energy crisis. We have an education system that is not working for too many of our children and making us less competitive. We have an economy that is creating hardship for families all across America. We've got two wars going on, veterans coming home not being cared for -- and this is what they want to talk about! this is what they want to spend two of the last 55 days talking about.

You know who ends up losing at the end of the day? It's not the Democratic candidate, It's not the republican candidate. It's you, the American people. because then we go another year or another four years or another eight years without addressing the issues that matter to you. Enough.

I don't care what they say about me, but I love this country too much to let them take over another election with lies and phony outrage and swift-boat politics. Enough is enough.

Indeed.

Cross-posted at Political Realm.

McCain Has 10 Point Lead Over Obama

McCain over Obama 54% to 44%


John McCain is crushing Obama in the latest USA Today Gallup Poll. Among registered voters likely to vote in November, McCain leads Obama 54% to 44%.

Democrats are panicking. I have to laugh to avoid crying. But this is what I have been foreseeing for years. It's amazing that Democrats are now scrambling to figure out what is going on... when all they have to do is look at their Party and get a better understanding of the American voter. Democrats don't have much of a clue regarding either. And now they are once again standing at the edge of a cliff.

Everything is pointing in the direction of the Democrats this election year, yet they are fighting for their political lives in the Presidential race. Why?

I don't put much stock in National polls, since the General election is about 50 separate and unequal elections...all rigged and caged in different ways. However, when gaps are this wide in national polling it could spell trouble for the candidate with the lower numbers. Sure the Republican Convention is responsible for much of McCain's gain. However, that is probably not the only thing leading to the rapidly changing numbers. Voters have been successfully fooled by Republicans on the issue of domestic energy exploration (drilling). The "Drill Baby Drill" mantra was effective. Elementary...but effective just the same. Democrats have not been able to untangle the lies from the Republican misinformation campaign on this issue or on any other big issue for that matter.

The Dems could have preempted this (since they had to know this would be the Republican strategy) by conducting a massive voter education campaign about energy...informing voters of the Democratic Plan which is much more robust and comprehensive, and will create true energy self sufficiency, as opposed to the Republican proposal. Democrats could have used radio and TV ads, Televised Town Hall events, flyers & posters, and other means to explain to voters that domestic drilling would only be a win for the oil companies, and not the American consumer...and that it would take 10 years to get any relief and even then it would be financially insignificant. I heard an NPR report just today, where a bubba-like character (a McCain supporter) repeated the misinformation that drilling in Alaska would immediately lead to cheaper gas prices.

The McCain campaign advisers were correct last week when they mentioned that this election was not about the issues. They were absolutely right. And this is what Democrats don't seem to understand. I have been screaming this for years now (since the late 1990's). These elections are rarely about issues. They have not been about issues for a long time. These elections are about personality.

The American electorate is not very educated or informed when it comes to the issues. The vast majority of Americans are not issues voters. The average American voter would flunk an "issues" exam, as well as a foreign policy or geography test.

That's not how they vote! This is why Republicans use lies and distortions to try to fool voters- Because it has a track record of working in this Country. They know voters are not very knowledgeable about what the Hell is going on. The McCain campaign understands it and they are exploiting it for maximum effect. They figure, if they repeat the lies enough times.... folks will start to believe them and take them to heart. And it works! American voters fall for Republican games over and over again. Republicans have become masters at manufacturing their own reality and getting voters to eat it right out of their hands like sheep.

And since Republicans/Conservatives control large segments of the American media infrastructure, they are allowed to tell their side (to distort and lie) unimpeded. Establishing a media infrastructure is something that the Democrats still don't understand. This is one of the greatest failings of Democrats and Progressives in this Country...and it is a key reason why the Democrats lose big elections.

Republicans are much better when it comes to vision and strategy - not for helping the American people... they don't care about that. I'm referring to vision and strategy for winning elections and building the infrastructure to keep winning. They also tend to field candidates that Americans are most comfortable with... not necessarily the best candidate, but the candidate who best relates to the typical, White voter.

To add insult to injury, the Democrats decided to put forward what is basically an unelectable...or very difficult to elect candidate (as they so often do...Mondale, Dukakis, etc). Not that he is not a better candidate... he clearly is. But he is not someone who most White voters will support... not in a General Election- as I have mentioned so many times.

Another key mission for Democrats in the future (as I have mentioned many times) is voter education... educating the public about what is going on. This has to happen at the Middle and High School level and has to continue from there. Unfortunately the Democrats do not have an infrastructure that can take on a task this large. Voter education doesn't mean teaching voters how to vote...how to pull the lever. They know that already. Certainly that kind of education should be a part of any program. But what I am talking about is much more comprehensive, and includes adding certain things to the Middle and High School curriculum... such as Civic Studies, International/global affairs programs, Foreign cultures and religions, U.S. Politics and Current Events, International Politics, intense American government courses, Foreign policy studies, better World geography programs, etc. Americans should have a better grasp of events both at home and overseas...and they must have a seed planted in their minds that will keep them interested in domestic and world events and politics long after they leave secondary school. Once Americans are taught to be more inquisitive, we will have a more informed electorate (better not just for Americans, but for the entire World).

If the Democrats lose this time around it will be because they did not put forward the best "electable" candidate possible, still don't control their own message due to a lack of media parity, and as a Party they don't know their heads from their backsides.

Months ago, in my message titled "Obama's Fading Hope: America May Be Too Sick To Elect A Black Man For President", I pointed out many of these problems and described what the Republican angle might be in this campaign. And the Race factor can't be ignored. I still believe that this year wasn't the best time for a social experiment... that too much is at stake. I will believe that regardless of whether Obama wins or loses. I will always believe that it was too big of a gamble.

And this "take the high road" game that Obama is playing is a losing one. It's the same game that John Kerry played back in 2004... That may have worked in this country 30 years ago, but it doesn't fly today. Voters want to know how well you can fight for your position or if you're willing to fight for it at all. If it gets a little ugly, that is fine with them. It's a new Demographic. Kerry assumed that voters would respond to his "Shining City on a Hill" imitation of Reagan... again, another example of a Democrat imitating a Republican. That's part of Obama's problem right now - trying to be the "Shining City on a Hill Candidate". But voters don't respond to that in a big way. You saw the two dog and pony show Conventions. Voters hardly responded to Obama's staged grand celebration that unnecessarily wasted God knows how much money and resources. It ended up being a wash for Obama. He would have been better off in an arena- it would have been more intense and more intimate. But voters DID respond to the hate and vitriol spewed by the Republicans. Again... it shows how Obama and the Democrats don't understand American voters in terms of voting behavior, what they respond to, etc. Instead of avoiding the mistakes of 2004, Obama is attempting to provide a sequel for John Kerry's failed candidacy. Having a toned down (issues instead of attacks) Convention with no spark was a strategic blunder on the part of the Democrats.

That being said, I hope that Obama can pull off another miracle. But the task won't be easy. (see my posts "Obama's Fading Hope", and "Obama's uphill climb" where I pretty much predicted a tough time for Obama...in an election year that should be an easy win for a Democrat).

Is It Really Change?

The undercard of Thursday's closing act was so unremarkable I will waste no time dwelling on the performances of Tom Ridge, Lindsey Graham, and Cindy McCain. John McCain, the newly minted Republican nominee, would give the only performance that would matter.

As an orator, McCain is no match for Obama, or Sarah Palin for that matter, and tonight was no exception. It was standard McCain, style-wise--stiff, awkward, and struggling with the teleprompter, he worked his way through the speech. He struggled with his cadence throughout and at times it seemed even the speaker himself wasn't really interested in what was being said. The crowd was noticeably less enthusiastic than the night before, though it was clear he was not speaking to them (I'll touch on that in a moment). Even the much-maligned green screen even made a brief cameo (it apparently turns out that was a ridiculous campaign mistake). Of course, we knew McCain would not be able to match Obama stylistically, so what about the content?

McCain made a sharp break from the vicious attacks of the previous night, honoring Senator Obama's achievements and denouncing the "partisan rancor." Indeed, the speech was largely void of the partisan attacks we've seen all too often of late. He sought to rise above it all, casting himself as the agent of change in an effort to appeal to the independents his campaign desperately needs to win. McCain would describe himself as a maverick public servant, saying, "I've been called a maverick--someone who marches to the beat of his own drum. Sometimes it's meant as a compliment and sometimes it's not. What it really means is I understand who I work for. I don't work for a party. I don't work for a special interest. I don't work for myself. I work for you." The Arizona senator went on to talk about his fight for change in Washington, using some variation of "fight" well over a dozen times in a matter of minutes.

The change McCain would offer, however, proved to be very different from the message we heard out of Denver last week. He delivered meager admonishment of President Bush, only hinting at the need to reform his own party. In many ways, he was offering a return to Reagan conservatism. "We're going to recover the people's trust by standing up again for the values Americans admire," McCain told the crowd. "The party of Lincoln, Roosevelt, and Reagan is going to get back to basics."

The policy specifics would illustrate little change from the last eight years, providing mostly retread Republican ideas. He would eventually offer some red meat to the conservative crowd, touching on abortion, the courts, and education reform. On the economy, his efforts to reach out to anxious voters fell flat. McCain offered the same tax and spend argument that Republicans have for years and it just doesn't seem like that will be enough this time around. He barely tried to allay concerns about health care and even on the energy issue--one of the few areas where Republicans may have an advantage this cycle--he offered little beyond "drill, baby, drill." This speech could have been given by just about any Republican nominee over the past few decades. While the same could essentially have been said about Obama's address last week, the political landscape clearly prefers the generic Democrat to the generic Republican.

McCain was able to bring his speech to a rousing and emotional climax, turning again to his heroic biography. This time, however, he was able to explain how his experience had changed him. "My country saved me. My country saved me and I cannot forget it. And I will fight for her for as long as I draw breath, so help me God." It was powerful and moving, concluding with a call to join in the fight.

It wasn't the speech of a lifetime, but it probably did accomplish what McCain had hoped. Ultimately, his campaign wants this election to be about the character and experience of the two men seeking the the highest office in land. From that perspective, it didn't matter that McCain's concept of change was essentially more of the same. McCain was offering a new face for the Republican Party and the conservative movement, based not on policy, but on his own remarkable character.

Will voters buy into McCain's choice? I'm not sure. I thought the speech was too much about the past and not enough about the future. This election is about more than just character. It's about vision and McCain didn't offer that last night.

Cross-posted at Political Realm.

Republicans In MSP: On The Attack

After a sluggish start to their convention in the Twin Cities--day one was lost to Hurricane Gustav and day two was spent focusing on John McCain's service--Republicans showed their teeth early on Wednesday and didn't let up. While most of the attention was given, rightfully so, to the night's closing act, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, a series of former McCain rivals primed the rowdy crowd. They gave the crowd what they wanted, bringing life to the Xcel Center for the first time this week. It was a night of cliched attacks on liberal bogeymen and ad hominem strikes against the Democratic nominee. It may have thrilled the party faithful, but it did little to expand their potential electorate. Though the conservative (and liberal) base left united and energized--"she's our Obama" one commentator said afterward--McCain still has plenty to accomplish tomorrow.

Mitt Romney kicked things off with a rather ironic diatribe against East Coast elites--because Romney is the symbol of the middle class working man of the Midwest--before an extended rant against liberalism that would have made sense if this were 1980, 1988, or even 1994. Of course, it's 2008, so his attacks probably fell flat for anyone outside of the Bush 30%. Romney perspective was almost comical, painting Washington as a bastion of liberalism as if the last eight years never happened. He apparently forgot that Republicans controlled the Congress for 12 years before being swept out of power in 2006. It also must have slipped his mind that George W. Bush is the current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. That only two of the current Supreme Court justices were appointed by Democratic administrations probably isn't important to note either. That amnesia held throughout the night, as speaker after speaker came to the podium to denounce the status quo in Washington--a brilliant display of up is down politics that must have made Karl Rove happy. With his sights clearly set on 2012, Romney did little to advance McCain's cause.

Mike Huckabee followed with his customary folksy tone, repeating a line that I've heard often in the past few days--that Sarah Palin received more votes running for mayor of Wasilla than Joe Biden did running for president. It's a cute line, but isn't even close to the truth. The rest of his time at the podium was largely forgettable.

Rudy Giuliani was the third former presidential contender to take the stage, serving as the convention's keynote speaker. The former mayor went after Barack Obama with gusto, focusing on national security and taxes, while attacking the Democratic nominee's resume. He had to modify a favorite line from the primaries, pointing to Obama's lack of experience in saying, "He's never run a city, he's never run a state, he's never run a business." This time, however, Giuliani added "military unit" to his list of executive experiences so as to cover the Republican nominee. Later, chants of "Zero" and "Drill, baby, drill" rose from the floor as he derided Obama's work as a community organizer and painted him as a celebrity elitist. Giuliani was positively giddy by the time he left the stage, though by milking the crowd, he forced the convention organizers to cut a biographical video about Sarah Palin from the program. In doing so, he deprived the convention of a necessary opportunity to introduce their vice presidential nominee to the country--especially significant since Palin's own speech would dwell only briefly on her background.

Primed and ready, the crowd erupted when Palin finally took the stage. She remarked early on that the only difference between a pit bull and hockey mom was lipstick and she would prove it. Some of her attacks proved effective, because they came from a perspective where voters could relate to her. "We tend to prefer candidates who don't talk about us one way in Scranton and another way in San Francisco," Palin said, referencing Obama's "bitter" remarks at an April fundraiser. "There are some candidates who use change to promote their careers," she proclaimed, drawing a distinction between the two nominees. "And then there are those, like John McCain, who use their careers to promote change." Other attacks simply lacked any credibility and after a while it was all a bit too much sarcastic and petty. She had spent too much time trying to define her opponent and not enough defining herself.

The imagery was there. She was the average Joe (Jane?), the outsider, the hockey mom, and the spunky attack dog. Palin was able to rise above the soap opera that had surrounded her. Shots of the jubilant governor after the speech with her family on stage were certainly stirring for a number of voters across the country. Beyond the political theater, however, Palin glossed over the issues and did little to defend her selection. She deflected with criticism of the media and Obama's resume. When Palin did focus on her own record, she surprisingly claimed again that she had opposed the so-called "Bridge To Nowhere" even though her version of the story has been thoroughly debunked. She did touch on other points of reform as governor and mayor, but those points were drowned out by the attacks that followed. It was simply too much style and not enough substance from someone who remains a mystery to most Americans.

Palin's first week on the national stage proved a bumpy one, but she proved last night that she could handle the spotlight. It was a critical first test, but there will be plenty more to come. Her political skills and personal appeal will be tested as she travels to Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania in the coming days and weeks. Will her pit bull tenacity and girl next door quality woo working class voters and suburban women? Or will these voters question her readiness to be commander-in-chief and be turned off by her right wing stances on a number of issues? Thirty-seven million tuned in to her speech, nearly equaling Obama's audience last week, but at the end of the night a number of questions lingered.

John McCain is set to take the stage tonight and his objectives seem clear. He will emphasize his maverick record, using it to reach out to the independent voters that his convention has thus far ignored. McCain will also paint his vision of America's future, though any discussion of the issues will surely be slanted toward his perceived strengths--the troop surge in Iraq, offshore drilling, and taxes. His difficulties with formal speeches are well documented and he has a tough act to follow, but he needs to give the speech of his life for this convention to be deemed a success.

Cross-posted at Political Realm.

Dear Senator Obama

Dear Senator Obama,

I would like to write you an open letter here of 'constructive criticism' from the folks here at Mirror on America. We here at Mirror on America span the range of hardcore supporters to 'constructive critics', but never ' haters'. The following have been floated around here.

1. Your communications team is LACKING.
The response time, let alone the forcefulness of the counterattacks are lukewarm to awful. When someone like Paris Hilton can do an effective slapdown of John McCain on energy policy and your ads make people go ' eh', something's not going as well for you as possible.

John McCain is a walking ad. Just commercials on his flip-flops and 'gaffes', would be enough to take up a sizeable budget.

2. You're losing the surrogate battle.
You are indeed your own best surrogate, but you can't be everywhere, and you shouldn't be. You need effective surrogates who will do the verbal smackdown for you.
Best ones: McCaskill, Susan Rice, Biden, John Kerry (if he had been this way in 2004, he'd be President), Richardson to a degree. But, you need more. What you DON'T need is the group of folks on tv with Democrat by their name, and they either give a half-assed defense of you, or none at all (this group is too numerous to name).

3. Spread your message
It makes no sense that if you have a townhall, the ENTIRE Townhall isn't available at BarackObama.com. Folks going there don't want some 10-15 minute snippet of what someone else believes is your ' greatest hit' at the Townhall. If someone takes the time to actually search out your Townhalls, or a supporter sends someone to your website so that they can see for themselves, they need to see it ALL. You have the funds; there is NO EXCUSE for your Townhalls not to be available for viewing to the American Public IN THEIR ENTIRETY. You won this nomination in no small part due to your campaign's mastery of the communications tool that a website can be. Don't start falling down on the job now.

Just a few constructive criticisms from the Mirror on America family.