Skip to main content

I am really dumbfounded by the utter cluelessness of this WH communications team in the whole nominations saga. If they are going to float names of candidates, and these candidates are getting a pushback; why is there not a plan to use talking points and surrogates to effectively push back? This leaves the candidate to try to do damage control on their own. This is difficult as the candidate does not want to come out looking presumptuous and seen to be trying to force the President's hand. That is why it is imperative that the WH communications team has a staff devoted to push back. They should have surrogates on the ready to counter any stories or smears. The surrogates of course should be from outside the WH; but the WH communications team should coordinate.

It was bad enough that the Susan Rice nomination went down in flames as she was allowed to twist in the wind. But on top of that; the way this WH has allowed Chuck Hagel to be smeared? WHAT IS WRONG WITH THESE WH IDIOTS? Have a team ready, get surrogates, fight back! Do not allow the purported candidate to do his own fighting. The candidate is ALWAYS the weakest to do this. It is because they do not want to come out as looking presumptuous. How difficult is this? You do this for Supreme Court nominees; now do it for all the people that you think are important. The Security team is important. ACT LIKE IT!

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Are they floated, or is the GOP proactively (0+ / 0-)

    predicting possibilities and preemptively attacking?  I mean they'd get word though leaks who is being vetted and they they start trashing.  

    But I agree the WH looks weak as hell allowing names to be defeated even before they are nominated.  

    The Susan Rice issue put blood in the water now and both sides are out against Hagel as well figuring it worked once, why not do it again.  

    Panetta could be sticking around for 4-5 months into President Obama's second term, so is he supposed to rush his nomination because folks are attacking Hagel?

    President Obama needs to send out word that any more of this preemptive bullshit attacks and he'll nominate folks the attackers will like ever worse.  

    Put Feingold at the NSA, Krugman at Treasury if Lew is pilloried etc.  

    GOP got who they wanted in Kerry at State, now they're trying to block Hagel for made up reasons, just like they used made up reasons to defeat Rice.  They're after Hagel because he criticized Bush and all but endorsed Obama over McCain in 2008.  

    The NRA is the Gun Manufacturer Lobby. Nothing more. Their pontification about the second amendment is nothing more than their ad jingle. They're the domestic version of the Military Industrial Complex.

    by Jacoby Jonze on Mon Dec 24, 2012 at 09:34:08 AM PST

  •  Republicans are the problem. We need filibuster (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    fixxit, JoanMar, SuetheRedWA, jan4insight

    reform.

    Brand new favorite RSS feed of Daily Kos Radio Podcasts http://kagrox.libsyn.com/rss
    Jobs, Jobs, Jobs

    by We Won on Mon Dec 24, 2012 at 09:37:00 AM PST

  •  Susan Rice was nominated? nt (5+ / 0-)

    "Mitt Romney looks like the CEO who fires you, then goes to the Country Club and laughs about it with his friends." ~ Thomas Roberts MSNBC

    by second gen on Mon Dec 24, 2012 at 09:44:39 AM PST

  •  The names of candidates (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    second gen, jan4insight

    are often floated to weigh the reaction.  Where's the support?  Where's the opposition?  Until a nomination occurs, pushback by the WH is largely tilting at windmills.

    Things work out best for those who make the best of the way things work out.

    by winsock on Mon Dec 24, 2012 at 09:55:55 AM PST

  •  The nomination committee stopped by, (0+ / 0-)

    but apparently the whole White House was out to lunch, so, no -- she wasn't.

    It seems curiosity has killed the cat that had my tongue.

    by Murphoney on Mon Dec 24, 2012 at 09:57:28 AM PST

  •  ::Blank Stare:: (5+ / 0-)

    ::sigh::  nevermind...

    The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing online commenters that they have anything to say.-- B.F.

    by lcj98 on Mon Dec 24, 2012 at 09:57:31 AM PST

  •  "smear" might be a strong word for some (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    winsock, Bob Love, gramofsam1

    of what Hagel is facing.

    Some have called him antisemitic, which is ridiculous. But there are legitimate questions about many of his votes.

    Even more so, it's  valid to question his opposition to James Hormel because Hormel was "aggressively gay", in Hagel's words.

    Finally, to answer your  question on why the WH doesnt have a team to defend Hagel: it could very well be that they arent definitely going to nominate him. There is also the question of whether they leaked his name or not.

    In this day and age, it seems impossible to keep a potential cabinet nominee's name secret right until the nomination.

    •  The WH (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jj32

      has explicitly mentioned, I believe, three names that are under consideration for SecDef nomination (besides Hagel, the other two being Michele Flournoy, under secretary of Defense in Obama's first term, and Ashton Carter, the deputy Defense secretary).  Of these, Hagel is the only one creating much buzz one way or the other.

      Things work out best for those who make the best of the way things work out.

      by winsock on Mon Dec 24, 2012 at 10:52:25 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Right (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        winsock, erush1345, gramofsam1

        While it might not be a WH strategy, you could argue they are taking notes on who is getting opposition or not.

        It's quite possible Obama really doesnt have a strong preference between the three names mentioned. But if he can get GOP support for say, Florunoy, then he might figure he gets someone he wanted, and an easier confirmation as well.  

  •  There was no Susan Rice nomination. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Bob Love, jan4insight

    If you are going to scream about the WH not knowing what it is doing, at least get your facts straight.

    Maya Angelou: "Without courage, we cannot practice any other virtue with consistency. We can't be kind, true, merciful, generous, or honest."

    by JoanMar on Mon Dec 24, 2012 at 10:41:41 AM PST

  •  Could they be waiting (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FiredUpInCA

    until the new Senators are in office?  Looking at what the Republicans are doing with Benghazi, I wonder if WH is waiting and giving current incumbents less of an opportunity to be taken seriously.  

    It isn't like the WH doesn't have their people in office, so they don't have to be in a rush.

  •  seems to be the WH SOP (0+ / 0-)

    The WH regularly uses trial balloons to test potential nominees and policy positions, and if you think back you can see that they have played this game all along. The target seems to be the Washington Consensus and the purpose seems to be to avoid controversy with the Very Serious People. Consideration for the nominee appears to be of secondary importance, at best.

    Frankly, I'm glad Hagel is running the gauntlet: maybe they will drop him and choose an actual Democrat.

    "I don't cry over milk spilled under bridges. I go make lemonade" - Bucky Katt

    by quill on Mon Dec 24, 2012 at 11:29:36 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site