Obama honeymoon watch (continued)

On Thursday, I asked if the Blagojevich scandal would wreck Barack Obama's nascent presidential honeymoon. The next day, The Hotline, an influential newsletter for political insiders, asked the same question, signalling a potential shift in the conventional wisdom:

Could Pres.-elect Obama's honeymoon be over before 1/20? For the first time since 11/4, RNC emails are filling our in-boxes, suggesting they see a chance to knock some shine off Obama's platinum-plated approval ratings.

-- First, Obama's attempts to try and ride above the Blago story aren't working. Not only has his PR approach drawn loads of criticism, but there's now growing speculation about whether his team was really as hands-off w/ Blago as he'd reported. The fact that his normally ubiquitous CoS has been out of sight recently only intensifies the focus on Rahm's involvement.

-- Then there's the bailout fall-out. Another failed attempt at bi-partisanship means another bad day for the markets. That Pres. Bush has little to no capital on Capitol Hill isn't surprising. But what about Obama? Despite his calls for protecting Detroit, he did little to publicly pressure Congress to forge a deal. Will he now put pressure on the WH to release TARP funds? Or will he wait for Bush to make the first move? At this point, it looks like the WH may already be warming to that option.

-- Either way, it seems like the Obama team is going to have to re-evaluate their ability to truly stay above the fray for the next 30+ days.

There's still no sign of a decline in Obama's honeymoon-esque approval ratings, but media coverage continues to relentlessly associate Obama with the scandal despite a complete lack of evidence of any wrongdoing on the part of the president-elect or his associates.

In addition, the Republican National Committee, which never stopped criticizing Obama after the campaign ended, has gotten increased traction with its incessant drumbeat of demands for answers to a never-ending list of questions about Obama and Blagojevich. Here's the newest RNC web video titled "Questions Remain":

This is turning into an interesting test of whether Obama can break the Clinton paradigm of scandal coverage early in his administration...

Comments

[Rob]

Gosh, the injustice of it all just leaves one breathless. The media are "relentlessly" associating Obama with the scandal, despite "a complete lack of evidence," and the Republicans are not merely raising questions, they're making an "incessant drumbeat of demands for answers"--and not answers to just a limited number of questions, but a "never-ending list of questions."

Why oh why can't people take Obama at his word? If they didn't keep asking questions, Obama and his spokespeople wouldn't have to keep changing their answers. And who is this Blagojevich fellow anyway but just another guy Obama knows from the neighborhood?

Move along, folks. Show's over. Nothing to see here.

[David]

It's important to distinguish between "evidence" and "proof". There is no conclusive proof of wrongdoing on the part of Obama or his associates, but there is some evidence.

Blago's recorded statement said Obama had refused to participate in pay to play. It's to their credit that they refused, but it implies that some Obama asociate knew about the pay to play demand and may not have exposed it. Rahm Emanuel's delayed admission of contact and refusal to take questions look suspicious.

Again, this doesn't constitute proof of wrongdoing, but it's incorrect to claim that there's no evidence at all.

[Jinchi]

This is turning into an interesting test of whether Obama can break the Clinton paradigm of scandal coverage early in his administration...

I don't know. The only Clinton scandals that actually gained traction were sex scandals and Clinton actually was guilty of cheating on his wife. Every time there was an allegation of a mistress being paid off or rumors of White House indiscretions, most people considered them credible.

[slag]

I don't know. The only Clinton scandals that actually gained traction were sex scandals and Clinton actually was guilty of cheating on his wife.

Ummm...Whitewater?

And Patrick Fitzgerald says this: “I’m not going to speak for what the President elect was aware of," he said. "We make no allegations that he’s aware of anything and that’s as simply as I can put it."

Does the press really think they can get more on Obama than Fitzgerald can?

[Jinchi]

Ummm...Whitewater?

Whitewater never captured the public imagination the way the Lewinski scandal did. Most people didn't even know what the scandal was. Republicans thought it was proof of Bill's corruption. Democrats thought it was a partisan witch hunt. Clinton's reputation didn't suffer from it, except among those who already referred to him as "Three Dollar Bill".

It was the expansion of the investigation into every allegation ever made against Clinton under Ken Starr that caused him trouble. Republicans dismantled the Office of the Independent Council to protect the incoming Republican president from similar tactics and it's unlikely to be rebuilt by Democrats while Obama is in office.