In the Right

But when you lose by just a little, you spend the next six months wondering about the dozen things you could have done differently. Or the two dozen things you could have done differently.

And the navel-gazing can become quite depressing.

Campaign workers already have a built-in depression period on their calendars — from November (when one campaign ends) to February or March (when, if they’re lucky, their next campaign will start staffing up) — when very few of them are working. When you’re not working and you’ve just come off a loss, you can begin to seriously question whether you’ll ever work again.

What’s different about this morning’s exercise in the post-mortem blame game, of course, is that it’s not post-anything yet — it’s a pre- mortem blame exercise.

And what’s really interesting are the talking points that have been distributed to White House insiders, for use in background discussions with reporters analyzing Deeds’ expected loss to GOP nominee Bob McDonnell. They all point to Deeds’ failure to speak more positively about his own vision, and his alleged “over-reliance” on attack ads against McDonnell, as if the White House political team honestly believes that the way to win elections is to offer a positive vision to the electorate.

This is, of course, exactly the opposite of the advice the Obama political brain trust has been giving embattled incumbent Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine in New Jersey, where GOP nominee Chris Christie may end up being the victim of the most expensive and sustained negative campaign in New Jersey history.

In New Jersey, where Corzine’s job approval and favorable/unfavorable ratings are at the toxic level — and have been so for more than a year — the only possible route to victory for the Democrats was a scorched-earth campaign that would have made General Sherman proud.

Comparing the Deeds ads against McDonnell to the Corzine ads against Christie is like comparing Pop Warner football to NFL football — same game, but with a lot more speed, a lot more bone-crunching collision force, and a lot more damage done.

So forgive me if I don’t buy into the “He should have run more positive ads” line from the Obama political brain trust. This line of attack against Deeds stretches credulity to the breaking point.

No, the point here is not whether Deeds offered his own vision or spent too much time attacking his opponent; the point here is that the White House is saying, “They didn’t follow our advice.”

Because the Obama White House doesn’t give a hoot in a holler about Deeds. The Obama White House cares about Barack Obama and the perception of his power. And if f Virginia is going Republican again come Nov. 3, it must not be allowed to be interpreted as a mark against Obama’s power and prestige.

The problem for the White House in playing this strategy is that it raises the stakes just that much more in New Jersey, where, if Corzine loses, the White House won’t be able to say it was because he didn’t follow their strategy.

Of course, the Obama White House will still be able to say, in the event of a Corzine loss, that it was because he ran too many negative ads, and failed to offer a positive vision of his own.

Funny how that works — different advice given to different campaigns, one of which took it and one of which didn’t — but if both campaigns lose, the Obama White House will be able to spin the losses the same way.

Ah, but that’s a different problem for a different day.

Today, it appears, it’s all about Virginia, and making sure Obama isn’t blamed for the Deeds blowout to come.

The good news for the Deeds team is, it looks like they won’t have to worry about spending their next six months navel-gazing. They should be up and ready for work on their next campaign by the time they shake off their hangovers.

Follow me on Twitter!