The power of the nattative and the McCain campaign
October 25, 2008 | Maryville, Tennessee | Vetting explained

. . The selling of a presidential “narrative” the reigning buzz word of
this election cycle has taken on outsize significance in an age in
which a rush of visuals and catch words can cripple public images
overnight.Mitt Romney, it is said, lost because he could not get his story straight. Hillary Clinton found her I’m-a-fighter leitmotif too late to save her candidacy. By contrast, the narrative of Barack Obamahas seemed to converge harmonically with the shifting demographics and \\ surging discontent of the electorate. It may well be, as his detractors \\ suggest, that Obama is among the least-experienced presidential \\ nominees in our nation’s history. But to voters starved for change, the \\ 47-year-old biracial first-term Democratic senator clearly qualifies. \\ That, in any event, is his story, and he has stuck to it. \\ John \\ McCain’s biography has been the stuff of legend for nearly a decade. \\ And yet Schmidt (McCain’s chief campaign strategist) and his fellow \\ strategists have had difficulty explaining how America will be better \\ off for electing (as opposed to simply admiring) a stubborn patriot. In \\ seeking to do so, the McCain campaign has changed its narrative over \\ and over. Sometimes with McCain’s initial resistance but always with \\ his eventual approval, Schmidt has proffered a candidate who is \\ variously a fighter, a conciliator, an experienced leader and a \\ shake-’em-up rebel. “The trick is that all of these are McCain,” Matt \\ McDonald, a senior adviser, told me. But in constantly alternating \\ among story lines in order to respond to changing events and to gain \\ traction with voters, the “true character” of a once-crisply-defined \\ political figure has become increasingly murky. Draper, author of Dead Certain: The Presidency of George W. Bush, identifies five narratives that the campaign has tried out: * The Heroic Fighter vs. the Quitters * Country-First Deal Maker vs. Nonpartisan Pretender * Leader vs. Celebrity * Team of Mavericks vs. Old-Style Washington * John McCain vs. John McCain The idea of the story is a powerful one for understanding a person or event. How that person got to where he or she is or what will happen when that person assumes power is important for a political campaign to establish. The campaign of George W. Bush was able to effectively obscure his historical narrative (how he got to where he is) with the idea of what would happen when he he was elected (he would be better than Gore or Kerry). McCain has an interesting, if not compelling, historical narrative. His years as a prisoner of war in North Vietnam cannot be matched by any presidential candidate since John F. Kennedy. Yet, as this article points out, he distained using it because at some point during his public life, he grew tired of it. He had repeated the story again and again, and he just didn't want to revisit it again. His political operatives realized this and persuaded him to begin using it again during the general election campaign. The problem was that he didn't do it effectively -- probably because he didn't really want to do it. It became an appendage onto every speech and even every paragraph -- but not really an integral part of what he was saying. That left him with the narrative of what would happen when he was elected. And there is a problem there, too, but one that the New York Times article doesn't really address. That problem is the lack of a central idea about a McCain presidency. It goes back to the old question: "Why do you want to be president?" McCain has not provided a simple, clear answer to that question.
iReport welcomes a lively discussion, so comments on iReports are not pre-screened before they post. See the iReport community guidelines for details about content that is not welcome on iReport.
What is iReport?
-
Share
Tell a story, offer an opinion, say what's important to you.
-
Discuss
Join the conversation on the day's big issues.
-
Be heard
The best iReports get vetted and used on CNN platforms.
The label “Not vetted by CNN” lets you know that this story hasn’t been both checked and cleared by a CNN editor.
iReport stories that have a red "CNN iReport" stamp in the corner have been vetted and
cleared. That means they've been selected and approved by a CNN producer to use on CNN,
on air, or on any of CNN's platforms.








Comments