Opinion: Perspective on campaign shakeups

This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.

The massive re-shuffling of the deck chairs aboard the USS John McCain this morning doesn’t necessarily mean that his presidential campaign increasingly resembles the Titanic. Contemporary politics is replete with examples of candidates who made dramatic personnel changes and lived to see a better day. In McCain’s case, though, as noted in a previous Top of the Ticket item, it’s hard to escape the conclusion that he’s sinking fast.

First, a trip down memory lane.

Most recently, John Kerry in late 2003 moved to revitalize his fading prospects in the Democratic presidential campaign by dumping campaign manager Jim Jordan. Roughly two months later, Kerry transformed himself from an afterthought in the contest to winner of the Iowa caucuses --- and he then cruised to the nomination.

In the early fall of 1999, Al Gore shook up his high-priced, Washington-based campaign by transferring its headquarters to Nashville, cutting staff and tapping the then-little known Donna Brazille to oversee the operation. The re-location, sparked by the surprising fundraising success insurgent contender Bill Bradley was enjoying in the Democratic race, was somewhat ridiculed at the time. But Gore, then vice president, regained his footing as the clear frontrunner within a few months and easily crushed Bradley.

In the early fall of 1987, Michael Dukakis was one of several contenders in a crowded and scrambled Democratic field when he faced a tough decision. Two of his top aides --- including his campaign manager and longtime confidant John Sasso --- had helped orchestrate the chain of events that led Joe Biden (yes, the same Delaware senator vying in this year’s battles) to end his candidacy amid revelations that he had plagarized his stump speech. The Dukakis aides, while obviously playing political hardball, had not committed a crime. But the episode sullied the image the then-Massachusetts governor sought to project, and he fired the pair.

Dukakis went on to claim his party’s nod. Some analysts, though, believe the loss of Sasso proved especially grievous to Dukakis when, buffeted by a series of GOP attacks in the ’88 general election campaign, he failed to respond effectively.

Finally, even as the current Republican pack never wastes an opportunity to pay homage to Ronald Reagan, theGipper sent his own shock through the political world when, on the day of his key triumph in the 1980 New Hampshire primary, he cut loose his campaign’s strong-willed major-domo, John Sears. Two other key aides resigned in protest over Reagan’s action, which was motivated in part by disputes over spending and strategy.

Sears was replaced by William Casey, who went on to head the CIA after Reagan moved into the White House.

As McCain surveys his shattered campaign apparatus, he can find some solace in these examples. But only some.

McCain’s campaign may have been mismanaged, it may have been riven by personality clashes, it may have suffered from strategic miscues. To varying degress, these previous campaigns were afflicted with similar problems and overcame them. What they didn’t face, however, is what still seems, at heart, McCain’s core dilemmas: a rank-and-file constituency that disagrees with the candidate on key issues and doesn’t trust his commitment to their causes on other fronts.

-- Don Frederick