Obama's Perfect Storm

I've written previously that I consider Barack Obama to be the strongest candidate in the Democratic field. He is not without his vulnerabilities, though. What's becoming increasingly clear to me is that the incredibly early media focus on the 2008 presidential race may prove disadvantageous to Obama.

Obama is the new face on the Democratic side, and as such, does not yet have an established "negative frame." By "negative frame," I mean a set of standard criticisms that his opponents use to caricature and mock him. It's not unusual for a primary candidate to have no consistent negative frame. The Republican strategy has typically been to plant a few seeds here and there but save the heavy artillery until after a candidate has secured the Democratic nomination. In 2004, for instance, the flip-flopping and Swift Boat themes used to attack John Kerry were not rolled out in full force until after the Democratic National Convention. In 2000, the framing of Gore as an overly-ambitious, serial exaggerator began much earlier. This was due partly to the strange hatred of Gore among the press corps and partly to the fact that Gore was the presumptive Democratic nominee for years.

The upcoming election cycle, however, promises to be unlike any other. First, it has begun much earlier than in the past. It's February of 2006 and the '08 election is already dominating the headlines. Second, and more importantly, Barack Obama finds himself in a very strange position vis-a-vis his Democratic opponents and potential Republican opponents. His chief rival for the Democratic nomination is Hillary Clinton, a well-organized and well-funded front runner who already has a well-established negative frame (she's "calculating," "Machiavellian," and "would do anything to get elected"). Her team almost surely views Obama as her primary obstacle to securing the nomination. It's very much in her interest, therefore, to help construct some anti-Obama narratives that will resonate with the public and the media. The same is true of John Edwards, who is trying to beat out Obama for the anti-Hillary votes.

At the same time, however, a weakened Republican party is watching the Democratic primary race with interest. And, at least based on anecdotal evidence, there appear to be many Republicans who are rooting for Hillary to win the nomination. These Republicans see her, whether correctly or not, as being very beatable in a general election and as a figure likely to rally a Republican party desperately in need of rallying. My hunch is that over the next year, we're going to see very few smears against Clinton that originate from right-wing circles. They'll hold their fire until she looks to be a lock for the nomination. In fact, I've noticed a number of pieces from right wing pundits lately that seem almost complimentary of Clinton. Consider, for example, this piece by David Brooks or this one by Fred Barnes.

Obama is not going to be as lucky. I sense that Obama's natural political talent and his knack for securing favorable media coverage really scares Republican strategists. I expect that over the next year, we'll see a number of anti-Obama stories, like the fake Madrassah smear, that come from the Right. Even now, it's clear that the usual suspects on the Right (Limbaugh, Hannity, Fox News, etc.) are searching for ways to mock Obama; they're searching for an effective negative frame. For a perfect example of this, watch this clip from Fox News' new Daily Show knockoff. In the course of a few (very unfunny) minutes, the anchors experiment with a number of different negative frames for Obama (he used drugs, he's got a Muslim sounding name, he's inexperienced and unaccomplished, he's an ivy league elitist, etc.). It almost seems like an effort to focus-group test various lines of attack.

These attempts to frame Obama will only intensify if he starts to gain on Hillary in the polls. That will create a 'perfect storm' situation in which the interests of Obama's Democratic rivals and his prospective Republican opponents are temporarily aligned. Everyone will be trying to bring him down a notch.

On top of that, there are signs thats some members of the press corps may be souring on Obama. In a post over at Politico.com, Ben Smith cites an article in the Los Angeles Times this morning as "confirmation of how fast the relationship between the media darling and the media is going downhill." I think he's overstating things somewhat, but he's far better connected than I am (for the record, the LA Times story seems pretty weak; here's the Obama campaign's response).

There have been a number of these mini hit pieces appearing in newspapers lately. Stories like this almost never just appear. The factual nugget that forms the basis for such stories is almost always unearthed by someone with an agenda, who then shops it around until a reporter bites. In the months to come, it's likely that operatives for both Democratic and Republican campaigns will be shopping around these kind of stories about Obama. His campaign staff is going to be on the defensive much more than they'd like to be.

That said, Obama's team has done a pretty good job so far responding to these kind of stories and keeping them from getting legs. Critics of Obama often point to the fact that he is relatively "untested" as a politician, having only won one major race, and against a mediocre opponent. It seems likely, however, that in the coming year, Obama is going to be tested unlike any candidate in recent memory. If he manages to emerge from this minefield as the Democratic nominee, at least he'll be able to put that criticism to rest.