About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Media outlets noted McCain's efforts to woo Clinton supporters, but not prior distortions and personal attacks challenging his sincerity now

June 05, 2008 2:38 pm ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

SUMMARY: Reuters, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and NBC's Today reported Sen. John McCain's praise of Sen. Hillary Clinton in a June 3 speech, but none of those outlets noted that McCain has previously distorted Clinton's record on issues such as health care, taxes, the environment, and housing, nor did they note that McCain has a history of personal attacks against Clinton and her family.

44 Comments

In reporting on Sen. John McCain's June 3 speech in Kenner, Louisiana, several media outlets -- Reuters, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and NBC's Today -- reported McCain's praise of Sen. Hillary Clinton, who McCain said "deserves a lot more appreciation than she sometimes received," and reported that McCain was trying to win over Clinton supporters for the general election. On the June 4 edition of NBC's Today, chief White House correspondent David Gregory said that McCain "spoke directly to Clinton supporters: women, independents, and working-class voters," while Wall Street Journal reporter Elizabeth Holmes wrote in a June 4 article that "McCain has gone out of his way to be complimentary of Sen. Clinton and her campaign, hoping it will endear him to her supporters likely bruised by the defeat." Reuters reported in a June 3 article that McCain "tipped his hat to Clinton with comments aimed to appeal to the New York senator's women supporters, some of whom have said they would support McCain rather than [Sen. Barack] Obama," while The New York Times reported in a June 4 article that "McCain, whose aides have been heartened by reports that some supporters of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton say they would not vote for Mr. Obama, began his speech with praise of Mrs. Clinton -- and what could be read as a pitch to her supporters." But in noting McCain's current efforts to "endear" himself to Clinton supporters, none of these reports noted that McCain has previously distorted Clinton's record on issues such as health care, taxes, the environment, and housing; nor did they note that McCain has a history of personal attacks against Clinton and her family.

For example:

  • Health care. McCain has repeatedly falsely attacked Clinton's health-care plan. In recent months, McCain has mischaracterized Clinton's health-care plan as a "nationalized health-care system," a "one-size-fits-all, big-government takeover of health care," a "government monopoly" on insurance coverage, and "a health-care system run by the federal government." In fact, a Clinton campaign summary of her health-care program says: "In addition to the broad array of private options that Americans can choose from, they will be offered the choice of a public plan option similar to Medicare." As New York Times reporters Michael Cooper and Julie Bosman noted in a May 3 article, "McCain has been repeatedly suggesting that his Democratic rivals are proposing a single-payer, or even a nationalized health-care system along the lines of those in countries like Canada and Britain. The suggestion is incorrect."
  • Taxes. McCain has misleadingly claimed that Clinton is "going to raise your taxes by thousands of dollars a year." In fact, Clinton's campaign website says that she would "[l]ower taxes for middle class families by: extending the middle class tax cuts including child tax credit and marriage penalty relief, offering new tax cuts for healthcare, college and retirement, and expanding the EITC [earned income tax credit] and the child care tax credit." Clinton has expressed support for rolling back the Bush tax cuts on those making more than $250,000.
  • Environment. On May 13, during a "tour" touting his environmental record, McCain said of his Democratic opponents: "They have never, to my knowledge, been involved in legislation nor hearings nor engagement on this issue. I have a long history. I've traveled around the world and seen the impacts of climate change." In concluding that McCain's statement was "false," PolitiFact.com wrote: "Perhaps McCain should check the co-sponsors of emissions-reducing legislation he introduced with Sen. Joseph Lieberman last year. Both Clinton and Obama were among those who signed on to the Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act ... Last year, Clinton and Obama co-sponsored an even more ambitious plan called the Global Warming Pollution Reduction Act. If passed, it would require an 80 percent reduction to 2000 levels over the same time frame. Clinton, who sits on the Senate Committee on Environmental and Public Works, has consistently supported legislation to combat global warming since joining the Senate in 2000." PolitiFact further wrote that it's "also curious that McCain mentioned his travels to see the impacts of climate change firsthand. In August 2004, Clinton was on the same trip as McCain to the fjords of Svalbard, a remote Norwegian island in the Arctic Ocean, where they took a mini-cruise to view the retreat of melted glaciers."
  • Housing. On March 27, McCain released a statement regarding possible responses to the home mortgage crisis that stated: "[W]hat is not necessary is a multibillion-dollar bailout for big banks and speculators, as Sen. Clinton ... [has] proposed." In fact, Clinton -- who had days before made a speech about the housing crisis -- did not propose "a multibillion-dollar bailout" for "speculators." Clinton expressed support for proposals put forward by Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) and Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) -- which respectively passed the House on May 8 and the Senate Banking Committee on May 20 -- that would authorize the Federal Housing Administration to insure up to $300 billion in homeownership retention loans for qualified homeowners. Both Frank's and Dodd's bills specifically limit access to retention loans to owner-occupied homes, not "speculators."

Additionally, McCain has a history of personal attacks against Hillary Clinton and her family. As Media Matters for America documented, during a November 2007 campaign event in South Carolina, when a questioner asked McCain, "How do we beat the bitch?" -- presumably referring to Hillary Clinton -- McCain called the question "excellent" and then pointed to a Rasmussen poll that he said showed him beating Clinton in a head-to-head matchup before saying, "I respect Senator Clinton." Media Matters has also documented several of McCain's personal shots at Clinton, including naming a nursing school's training dummy "Hillary" during an October 2007 campaign appearance in South Carolina. Further, in 1998, while appearing at a Republican fundraiser, McCain reportedly made what New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd called "his disgusting jape": "Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because her father is Janet Reno." McCain reportedly apologized to President Bill Clinton for the comment.

From the June 3 Reuters article:

He also tipped his hat to Clinton with comments aimed to appeal to the New York senator's women supporters, some of whom have said they would support McCain rather than Obama.

"She deserves a lot more appreciation than she sometimes received," McCain said of the former first lady.

"As the father of three daughters, I owe her a debt for inspiring millions of women to believe there is no opportunity in this great country beyond their reach. I am proud to call her my friend."

From the June 4 New York Times article:

Mr. McCain, whose aides have been heartened by reports that some supporters of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton say they would not vote for Mr. Obama, began his speech with praise of Mrs. Clinton -- and what could be read as a pitch to her supporters.

"The media often overlooked how compassionately she spoke to the concerns and dreams of millions of Americans, and she deserves a lot more appreciation than she sometimes received," Mr. McCain said.

From the June 4 Wall Street Journal article:

As Hillary Clinton's primary campaign winds down, Barack Obama will be waiting with open arms for the support of her ardent backers.

So will John McCain.

The likely Republican nominee has set his sights on at least three groups of voters who have favored Sen. Clinton and claim large numbers in key battleground states: working-class Democrats, Jews and Hispanics.

Political strategists say Sen. McCain stands a chance at attracting supporters from these traditionally Democratic cohorts. "These are people who had a chance to vote for Obama once already and declined," said Todd Harris, a Republican consultant not affiliated with the McCain campaign.

However, the onus for getting voters to cross party lines falls on Sen. McCain. "Things [Clinton supporters] don't like about Obama will put them on the market," Mr. Harris said. "But McCain himself is going to have to close the deal."

[...]

As a safeguard, Sen. McCain has gone out of his way to be complimentary of Sen. Clinton and her campaign, hoping it will endear him to her supporters likely bruised by the defeat.

In his speech in Louisiana mapping the general election Tuesday evening, Sen. McCain offered praise: "She deserves a lot more appreciation than she sometimes received," he said. "I am proud to call her my friend."

One of the largest voting groups up for grabs if Sen. Clinton leaves the race are the so-called Reagan Democrats, who tend to lean more conservative on social issues.

From the June 4 edition of NBC's Today:

MEREDITH VIEIRA (co-host): And so how will things shape up as November approaches? NBC's David Gregory has more on that.

GREGORY: Well, we know that it's still three candidates --

VIEIRA: Yeah.

GREGORY: -- in this general election race. But there's really no time to take a breath. A heated general election debate is already under way.

[begin video clip]

McCAIN: Thank you.

GREGORY: It was Republican John McCain seeking to spoil Obama's big night. He took the stage first in prime time and spoke directly to Clinton supporters: women, independents, and working-class voters.

McCAIN: The media often overlooked how compassionately she [Hillary Clinton] spoke to the concerns and dreams of millions of Americans, and she deserves a lot more appreciation than she sometimes received.

GREGORY: He also took aim at Obama.

McCAIN: But the old, tired, big-government policies he seeks to dust off and call new won't work in a world that has changed dramatically since they were last tried and failed. That's not change we can believe in.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by anotheramerican (June 05, 2008 2:41 pm ET)
         
      Oh now I get it.... It's misinformation when a Republican says something nice about a Democrat. ;-)
      Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (June 05, 2008 2:48 pm ET)
           

        "Many of the truths we cling to depend greatly upon our own point of view." - O.Kenobi

        I can't argue with your point, because it's definitely true from a certian point of vew.

        Of course, insincerity is something the right excels at.  Why else support Nader in 2000?  Beauce they thought he woud be a BETTER candidate than Gore?  (And what about operation choas?  (Assuming it ever exsisted.) Casting votes just to screw with the other party, as opposed to for the GUY YOU ACTUALLY WANT TO WIN?)  Yeah, I can see why you missed the sincerity part and why politics as usual is accpetable.  (Of course I can't say that we wouldn't want politics as usual if we'd won 7 of the last 10 elections, so don't bother calling out hypocrisy.  I admit it that, sadly, that would probably be right too.)  Here's hoping Sen. Obama can change things.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by anotheramerican (June 05, 2008 2:51 pm ET)
             

          Nice,

          Nice rant. I noticed you didn't disagree with my statement. ;-)  

          Report Abuse
          • Author by NiceguyEddie (June 05, 2008 3:12 pm ET)
               
            Nope.  Nope.  It's absolutely true from a certain point of view. ;)
            Report Abuse
      • Author by Governor (June 05, 2008 2:49 pm ET)
           
        Right, no misinformation here.  McCain was just lying when he said that Clinton was "going to raise your taxes by thousands of dollars a year."  Now he's being honest.  Media outlets should not report anything to cast aspersions on his sudden Clinton praise.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Sueelldd (June 05, 2008 2:56 pm ET)
           

        McCain is part of an establishment that tried to destroy Senator Clinton and her husband since the 90s.  But you are right, no misinformation.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by BottleBlonde (June 05, 2008 10:37 pm ET)
             

          Media Matters for America put in place, for the first time, the means to systematically monitor a cross section of print, broadcast, cable, radio, and Internet media outlets for conservative misinformation — news or commentary that is not accurate, reliable, or credible and that forwards the conservative agenda — every day, in real time.

          Part of their mission statement.

          Reuters, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and NBC's Today reported Sen. John McCain's praise of Sen. Hillary Clinton in a June 3 speech, but none of those outlets noted that McCain has previously distorted Clinton's record on issues such as health care, taxes, the environment, and housing, nor did they note that McCain has a history of personal attacks against Clinton and her family.

          This fits perfectly. It forwards the conservative agenda to discuss the ways that John McCain is wooing Clinton supporters without discussing how much of a hypocrite that makes him. He's attacked her in the past. He's a flip-flopper, and when the news media doesn't point out his flip-flops, it furthers the conservative agenda. According to conservatives, they don't flip flop, but liberals do.

          Report Abuse
      • Author by RoberttheP (June 05, 2008 3:11 pm ET)
           
        Yes, that is not allowed. Heaven help us if we try and be civil. Not allowed the partisans hate that.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by roundhouse (June 05, 2008 9:33 pm ET)
             
          Nah, brother. Civility is welcome when it's authentic. This junk from McCain, it's just too contrived. It's phony.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by BottleBlonde (June 05, 2008 10:38 pm ET)
               
            Exactly. Bobthep tries to distract us from the real issue. It's not that civility is being disparaged. It's that fake civility should be pointed out for the hypocrisy that it is.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by roundhouse (June 05, 2008 11:50 pm ET)
                 
              Take for example Roe v Wade and you'll realize that conservatives have come to understand sincerity as a person's willingness to lie to them.

              How long has the right been sincerely promised by their leaders that Roe will be overturned?

              Still no progress on that but righties just love to hear the promise even though they have to know it's damn lie.
              Report Abuse
    • Author by DEMS_SOL (June 05, 2008 3:08 pm ET)
         
      So I guess when the Clinton and Obama campaigns try to come together MMFA will find a "Naah - we were just kidding - we love each other" mantra acceptable?? 
      Report Abuse
      • Author by RoberttheP (June 05, 2008 3:10 pm ET)
           
        Well according to Media Matters and other partisan organizations, you are never allowed to say anything nice about someone with different views, and if you do you have a motive. You are never allowed to be friendly with people of different views.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by NiceguyEddie (June 05, 2008 3:18 pm ET)
             
          Are you really that shallow, or are you being dopey on purpose?  No, you can't suddenly be nice to someone after more than a decade of distgusting smears and personal attacks and not have your motivation questioned.  Especially when this happens right after it's clear that they are no longer you're supporter.  (And that some of they're booster are still on the fence.) And to his credit: It's smart politics for McCain.  But it's also insincere.  So unless we're burying our heads in the sand (or in a right-wing blog) let's call it like it is for crying out loud.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by RoberttheP (June 05, 2008 3:19 pm ET)
               
            McCain has been nasty to Hillary Clinton for a decade? 
            Report Abuse
            • Author by roundhouse (June 05, 2008 9:36 pm ET)
                 
              That's all you got? A nit pick?

              Come on. Speak to the point.
              Report Abuse
      • Author by clams casino (June 05, 2008 3:17 pm ET)
           
        You're missing the whole point. This article is about how McCain's campaign strategies are being reported in the media. It's really incredible how people can post here day in and day out and still not comprehend the purpose of the site.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by DEMS_SOL (June 05, 2008 4:04 pm ET)
             
          The purpose of this site is to get Democrats elected - I understand it just fine.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by tommy (June 05, 2008 4:06 pm ET)
               
            HAHA!  Perfect, way to steer yourself into that one Clams....
            Report Abuse
      • Author by tommy (June 05, 2008 4:05 pm ET)
           

        Dead on Dems, when Democrats pander for each others votes of opponents they dissed earlier in the campaign, that's party unity.  When the right does it it's misinformation, unless every single earlier criticism is chronologically listed.

        Hilarious. 

        Report Abuse
        • Author by DEMS_SOL (June 05, 2008 4:21 pm ET)
             
          It's going to be a fun summer - can't wait until the convention.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by roundhouse (June 06, 2008 12:38 pm ET)
               
            Me Too!

            I think the Republicans are in for long overdue, well earned arse-kickin'.
            Report Abuse
        • Author by Governor (June 05, 2008 4:24 pm ET)
             

          when Democrats pander for each others votes of opponents they dissed earlier in the campaign, that's party unity.  When the right does it it's misinformation, unless every single earlier criticism is chronologically listed.

           

          That is a misrepresentation of what's happening here.  Party lines are being crossed. 

           

          Report Abuse
          • Author by DEMS_SOL (June 05, 2008 4:42 pm ET)
               
            Yes - how dare a republican go after democrat voters. Bad republican - bad, bad!!!
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Governor (June 05, 2008 4:47 pm ET)
                 
              I was simply pointing out Tommy's misrepresentation.  Party unity has nothing to do with it.
              Report Abuse
            • Author by tommy (June 05, 2008 4:53 pm ET)
                 

              "Party lines are being crossed".

              LOL, what does that have to do with a politician pandering of another's votes?  The Gov is in rare form today.

              Report Abuse
              • Author by Governor (June 05, 2008 4:56 pm ET)
                   
                What does it have to do with "party unity"?
                Report Abuse
                • Author by tommy (June 05, 2008 5:04 pm ET)
                     
                  Soliciting your party's primary opponents votes is pandering, all in the name of party unity.  Soliciting another party's votes from a defeated candidate is also pandering.  They are not much different.  If you can't see it Gov, then don't ask.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by Governor (June 05, 2008 5:11 pm ET)
                       
                    To me, Obama's certain soliciting of Clinton voters (who are very much in line with him on the issues) appears mightily less like pandering than the pandering reported as gamesmanship on the part of John "How Do We Beat The Bitch" McCain.  But then again, I had clarity for breakfast today.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by tommy (June 05, 2008 5:21 pm ET)
                         

                      Oh, so how do you know it's pandering if the media didn't tell you so?  After all, that is your beef here, isn't it?

                      Oh, and my suggestion would be to skip more lunches and dinners and eat your breakfast three times a day, might help...... 

                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by Governor (June 05, 2008 5:32 pm ET)
                           
                        I don't need the media to define anything for me.  Why is it always about people being stupid with you.  The point is that if they're going to report McCain instant praise, they can report a couple examples of how it's news and let the viewers decide the scope and depth of the pander Maverick.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by tommy (June 05, 2008 5:44 pm ET)
                             

                          HA!  You've been bellyaching on two threads today that the media is being derelict in it's duty by not being forthcoming on what this really is by McCain, pandering.  Now you say you don't need them to tell you anything?

                          Gov, do you live on a merry-go-round? 

                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by Governor (June 05, 2008 6:39 pm ET)
                               
                            I never claimed that this McCain wooing Clinton voters items needed to be called anything.  The point is that these reports of McCain's move to get votes from Dems is totally missing any issue and policy mention.
                            Report Abuse
                            • Author by tommy (June 05, 2008 6:43 pm ET)
                                 

                              "missing any issue and policy mention"?

                              What do you mean now? 

                              Report Abuse
                              • Author by Governor (June 05, 2008 6:51 pm ET)
                                   
                                He's trying to get votes from people who disagree with him on the issues.  I know he's played both sides on just about everything that Americans care about and will the media's cool with that, it could at least pretend that voters vote on issues, not gladhanding.  I guess you'd only prefer that this election and reports on it be about the issues when it's not in the way of your WITHing.
                                Report Abuse
                                • Author by Governor (June 05, 2008 6:52 pm ET)
                                     
                                  ...and while the media's cool with that...
                                  Report Abuse
                                • Author by tommy (June 06, 2008 11:54 am ET)
                                     

                                  "He's trying to get votes from people who disagree with him on the issues"

                                  Ahh, the audacity!  Well, that explains why MMFA put it here, thanks for clarifying. 

                                  Report Abuse
                                  • Author by Governor (June 06, 2008 1:34 pm ET)
                                       
                                    It's here because several media reports on McCain pandering made no mention of his contrary positions to voters he's trying to woo.
                                    Report Abuse
    • Author by truthseeker77 (June 05, 2008 3:42 pm ET)
         

      Obama supporters are quick to dismiss McCain's recent attacks and falsehoods against Hillary, because of course, they want people to believe that McCain and Clinton are evil twins, and that both support each other.

      They are going gaga over McCain's praise of Clinton, even though they KNOW that he's doing this for political reasons--to attract Clinton's disaffected voters, not because he shares Clinton's political views.

      Nobody plays dumb like an Obama supporter.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by dbeden4153 (June 05, 2008 3:54 pm ET)
           
        That makes no sense.  But oh yeah, I'm all against Hillary because I'm for Obama...many have expressed their displeasure with her campaign, but trust me, we understand the political posturing and is why at least I am trying now to bring Hillary supporters into the fold of the Obama campaign.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by roundhouse (June 05, 2008 9:53 pm ET)
             
          No doubt. It's important to understand that Hillary is a pro and she plays to win. When the game is over there's no hard feelings.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by pearlene_scott1602 (June 05, 2008 6:13 pm ET)
           

        They are going gaga over McCain's praise of Clinton,

        LOL, they must have lost their minds when they heard this one.

        "She and John McCain are very close," Clinton said. "They always laugh that if they wound up being the nominees of their party, it would be the most civilized election in American history, and they're afraid they'd put the voters to sleep because they like and respect each other."

        Report Abuse
        • Author by BottleBlonde (June 05, 2008 10:43 pm ET)
             

          Liking each other and trying to draw the other's supporters to you with insincere platitudes are two different things.

          Report Abuse
    • Author by trinette3729 (June 06, 2008 9:39 pm ET)
         
      In June 1998  at a Republican Senate fund-raiser, McCain told a downright nasty joke making fun of Hillary and Chelsea Clinton. The fact that McCain had made the tasteless joke was reported in major newspapers, as was the vain attempt by his press secretary to initially deny what McCain had done. But in several major newspapers, the joke itself was kept a secret. When Maureen Dowd penned a column in the New York Times about the joke, she wrote that McCain "is so revered by the press that his disgusting jape was largely nudged under the rug." But Dowd chose not to relay the joke, either. The joke did appear in McCain's hometown paper, the Arizona Republic, and the Associated Press did report the joke in full, this is what he reportedly said: "Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly?
      Because her father is Janet Reno."
      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.