I think Josh is one of the most insightful observers out there, and the BSTEP is a great way to explain what happened to Dukakis, Gore, and Kerry. It's sad, but true.

But even the best theory has limits. In this case, I think Democratic observers are so traumatized by BSTEP that they're in danger of fighting the last war.

We have different candidates this year, and the country is in a different mood -- and, in short, I don't think the BSTEP is the main thing we've got to worry about anymore.

First, different candidates. When you put Dukakis next to Bush41, or Gore next to Bush43, you've got a situation where "proving masculinity" has got to be #1 on the Democratic agenda, for a lot of reasons -- from height to temperament to tone of voice.

When you put Barack Obama next to John McCain, it's not the same situation. I know, Barack can seem academic and/or optimistic. "Obambi." Sure, I've heard it. But not everyone reads Maureen Dowd, and on a straightforward physical level the guy looks like he could take McCain. Taller, deeper voice, more sex appeal, more confidence in his smile, sinks three-pointers with nothing but net, etc. etc.

Moreover, it's a different country. We've just had eight years of swaggering, lying, testosterone-poisoned bullies. A heck of a lot of people out there are ready to see something other than a swaggering, lying bully when they turn on the tv in the evening.

I'm not saying that it's time to retire the BSTEP; the "mommy party / daddy party" thing isn't going away permanently, and we need to remain wary of the dangers it poses for Democrats. But I do think it's going to be less important in this election cycle than it has been in the past.

I'm not buying this meta narrative.

Kerry, Gore, and Dukakis lost because they were terrible candidates. It wasn't because they refused to play dirty, or effectively parry scurrilous attacks.

There were other factors as well. Dukakis ran against an incumbent candidate, who was himself riding the coat tails of a popular President. Gore was hindered by a lingering sense of Clinton fatigue, and since there were no wars and prosperity was going so well, American's took a gamble with a new guy. And Kerry was freighted by a scared population, and a tradition in this country not to throw out an incumbent President during a time of war.

Needless to say, things are different this time. Obama is likable in ways that Gore and Kerry were not. He appeals to first time voters and young people in a way we've never seen. He's got a brilliant campaign team that is playing the game better than its ever been played before. Things are different this time. This election is his to lose.

Sweet-thanks for a great post, with dynamite links. And thanks to the commenters above for valuable discussion.

Much as I hope Alex is right (as usual!), I think he's overlooked an important function of the bitchslap: it's about protecting cred, as well as asserting masculinity. Obama's "bring a gun to the knife fight" remark tells us they're hip. The question is, when to show the gun.

Best to wait til the MSM start questioning the credibility of McCain's attacks on Obama, as they are now beginning to do. Once there's sufficent blood in the water, move in for the kill.

It was very frustrating when Obama didn't go nearly as negative against Clinton as she did against him. But ultimately it was a winning strategy. Obama is a classy guy and he's not going to make stupid ugly statements like "McCain is the one who is willing to send Americans to die to win the election". I don't think McCain's "loose the war" statement worked well at all. It made McCain look bad. Obama's recent counter-ad calls out McCain's ridiculous blaming of Obama for high gas prices and it's a really good ad that combines that with a positive message about his real solutions to gas prices. He counters in his own way and it has been very effective. These low blows are making McCain look bitter, jealous and mean and some in the media are noting that.

Sometimes I say c'mon already, lets see some negative ads against McCain, there are so many possibilities. But I think Obama is smart and so far has played it right. I guess if it ain't broke don't fix it. BTW McCains new add with Obama showing the crowds and comparing Obama to celebrities looks pretty petty. There has also been some talking heads saying that. I'm not worried so far, I think Obama has the right balance. Well see how it goes....

This post is on the money is the sense that taking the high road and being the bigger man just doesn't work when you're dealing with a culture that thrives on the lowest common denominator. I think a lot of us on TPM forget that we're not the ones this sort of thing is directed towards. For the most part (with notable exceptions) the people on blogs like this are going to go for the policy wonk type rebuttals and attacks: 'woohoooooooo! his proposal is only for 4%! chump. OURS is for 12%!!! He's losing 2.4 Billion. what a loser, we're making a 7.5 Billion surplus!' Whereas the average person and the mythical 'swing voter' out there is by definition not swayed by such detail. These are people who are going to decide which candidate to vote for based on some gut reaction that is driven by the catchy ad they saw in the last month or the one line zinger from the 15 second clip of the debate they didn't watch but saw on the evening news or some sense that one candidate is the type of person they like. it's not a tangible thing to be rebutted but an almost whimsical 'feeling' they'll get at some point about one or other of the candidates and they'll go with it. they might honestly get this feeling several times and simply vote for the one who causes it last! If these are the people who will decide this election (and based on recent elections there is no reason to discount them) then Obama can't afford to have McCain just talking all kinds of shit about him (no matter how absurd) without it being repudiated strongly. And not in the sense of 'the facts in his recent attack have no merit' but more like 'what the fuck is he talking about? that dumb little twerp can't hold my jockstrap!'. I know it doesn't appeal to TPMers but for the folks who this is directed at, that's what will work. Gore never tried, he just ignored it and Bush simply doubled-down with it. Kerry tried the factual approach and people thought it was soft because it is. If someone punches you, kick their ass! It's the American way and a lot of Americans won't elect someone for president who doesn't demonstrate that characteristic.

Agreed. For a good example of "smack-down," see the Obama camp's reply to the latest "Britney" ad.

"On a day when major news organizations across the country are taking Senator McCain to task for a steady stream of false, negative attacks, his campaign has launched yet another. Or, as some might say, 'Oops! He did it again.' "

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/07/mccain_camp_defends_comparison.php

That's smack-down. It shows that the Obama people have studied what the Clintons did -- and probably read Josh's treatise on BSTEP. There's no defensiveness; it's just laughing in the opponent's sorry face.

But also notice that he's doing this in a way that doesn't require us to become Rove. The opposition between "taking the high road" and "fighting dirty" is a false opposition. You don't have to respond to bullshit either by pushing up your glasses and rapidly reciting a list of facts or by matching it with equally vicious BS. You can also laugh at it, especially when it's as transparently desperate as the BS McCain has been peddling lately.

Thus far, McCain's ads strike me more as annoying ankle-biting than substantive bitch slaps. Does anyone know if any of these ads have gotten much play anywhere, other than as viral videos, or in the news media? As a latte-sipping liberal who spends a lot of time thinking of new ways to hate America rather than watching TV or listening to commercial radio, I may be a little off the grid for McCain's messages, but I'm pretty sure I haven't seen or heard ANY of his ads through traditional channels.

I'm not seeing many. But then, I live in Illinois. We are not exactly a swing state in this election.

Great discussion everyone and thanks for the recommends.

I think the big reason Obama won the primaries is because he understood the BSTEP very, very well. Of course that is never the explanation that the mainstream media gives, because they really don't understand what hooks them.

A more well known example is here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uCn6rFFJ2s

An obscure, but great, discussion is here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZC8C_JH2eQc

I fully expect Team Obama to get back on the right footing with their responses and attacks. I just couldn't stand the "McCain is running a dishonorable campaign" response.