Skip to comments.Tell this Poster why he's wrong: (Vanity) McCain will lose
Posted on 11/04/2008 1:55:06 AM PST by Stingray
Yes, I'm afraid after all the hope poured out onto these pages, John McCain will lose. There are at least two very important reasons for this (and they have nothing to do with media bias).
The first is - simply put - that McCain ran a lousy campaign. There was no focus on any one particular message that resounded with voters until Joe The Plumber came along (too little too late?) despite the fact that Obama's own voting record in the Senate said at least as much about his plans to "tax and spend" this country into bankruptcy faster than any president before him!
Why McCain was so hesitant to call Obama out on his liberal views is simple: McCain shares many of them! McCain believes - like Gore and Obama - that unless we do something about co2 pollution, we're doomed to suffer the ravages of global warming! In fact, McCain has often stated the need for tighter legislation aimed at curbing greenhouse gases, and has voted for those that have come before the Senate! Nevermind the fact that anthropogenic global warming is "junk science", McCain has bought into it and that is just one area where his "Maverick" stance in the Senate has actually put him on the side of the most liberal senator there is!
There are other issues that were taken out of the McCain playbook because of his record and past indiscretions in the Senate. Can't raise Obama's associations with Wright, Ayers, Khalidi et al without having to defend himself from his disastrous association with Charles Keating. Is it any wonder McCain didn't want to touch Obama's associations with a ten-foot pole?
McCain can't bash Obama for wanting to "bankrupt" coal companies, when his own plan to convert the country to natural gas (for the same green purposes as Obama) would've had roughly the same effect! Yet another issue taken off McCain's plate.
And how can you decry Obama's "socialism" when they both voted for the biggest socialist bailout of investment banks the world has ever seen? McCain's vote for socialism at that level is no less aggregious than Obama's desire to "spread the wealth", and is especially vexing in light of the fact that the bailout legislation doesn't solve the underlying causes of the latest finacial meltdown in the first place!
So you can't attack Obama for being "green", for his past associations, and for his socialism because of McCain's "glass house" record on these issues.
So what's left?
Let's see: you start to make promises to the American people that make Obama's sound downright fiscally conservative! In a race to see who could give away more of the store, McCain and Obama were running neck-and-neck. Remember McCain's promise to tap 300 billion dollars of the bailout money to help homeowners stave off foreclosure??? Obama had been promising something similar for weeks ahead of McCain finally chiming in on the great taxpayer gravy train!
Tax cuts? Both were promising them. I cringed whenver I heard McCain start to talk like a fiscal policy wonk. It literally made me change the channel!
And please, John, the fundamentals of the economy were NOT sound when you made such a ridiculous statement at a time when foreclosures and bank failures were starting to mount! How can anyone seriously criticize Obama and Biden for their gaffes, when McCain provided the greatest bulleting board material of all time?
To this day, McCain continues to resort to the only trump card he has: his military service. While not enough can be said about his sacrifice for this country, most people - who just want to see us get out of Iraq and Afghanistan - don't want to see the same things, or worse, happen to their kids or friends. His greatest positive was a reminder to people of the brutality of war and why - depsite the fact he's the best qualified to be Commander-in-Chief - they don't want to be in one.
The second reason is, simply put, most Americans want change and feel - somehow - that Obama is the best one to bring about that change. Nevermind that "change" is a word completely devoid of any meaning without context, people want it. Obama's use of the word in making it the cornerstone of his campaign simply illustrates - again - how he was able to tap into this desire and play it consistently for all it was worth. McCain never had anything remotely resembling a message like this he could stick to through this campaign.
On a closing, personal note, I find two of the McCain campaign's most glaring errors revolved around their public announcement to pull out of Michigan, and the way they fed Sarah Palin to the wolves (the Couric and Gibson interviews).
On Michigan: even if you can't justify the expense of making another trip to the state, you have to keep in mind that you have coattails upon which other candidates are riding. The worst thing to do is tell the press you're pulling out of a state like Michigan weeks before the election! Pull out if you must, but keep your freaking mouth shut about it! McCain's decision to pull out early, and announce it to the world, has screwed a number of GOP congressional candidates, leaving them to fend for themselves, where they are being outspent by a large margin!
On Palin: the biggest mistake the campaign made in letting her do those post-convention interviews was that she simply was not ready for the kind of sleezy "gotcha!" questions she would have to field from people who were clearly in Obama's back pocket! They were going to go for the throat on her (never intending to ask Obama what qualified him to be president!). The final insult of those interviews was to reduce her to a punchline on Saturday Night Live, a show which mercilessly lampooned her even when she was there! She was clearly not ready for the kind of campaigns on the national stage that gets run down here in the lower 48, and it showed. She could've been a tremendous asset if handled properly. Instead, she became a national joke, undeserving as it was. I blame the McCain campaign for that.
So gear up for 2012 all. We're simply going to have to field a much better candidate then.
Nice try...you’re wrong.
hey buddy....if McPalin loses, you lose....as do we.....
And read this while you’re rethinking your hypotheses:
doom gloom doom gloom —
Eeyore’s in the room.
Why post this?
Why post this ... NOW?
Go back to DU.
“why all these vanities by no-names?”
First of all, I’ve probably been a member of this forum long before you came along.
Secondly, I take no joy in seeing McCain lose. I will be voting for him today. That doesn’t change what I feel about the imminent outcome of this election.
I hope I’m wrong. I don’t think I am.
Answer the question:
Why post this?
I am not giving up..but agree with most of what you said..I would ad McCains ads all sucked..he should have run ads with Obama not having his hand over his heart during pledge of allegiance
I agree with what you said on most of these things, especially the tactical error involving voting for the bailout. Ditto on the glass houses thing.
People thought Huckabee was bad because he raised taxes in Arkansas to fund new roads and such, so instead they elected someone even more to the left to represent the GOP brand.
At least, for all of Huckabee’s flaws, he could go toe to toe with Obama in oratory skills which we know do make a difference and he opposed the bailout. We would’ve won with Huckabee.
That is not to say that we won’t win with McCain, we might squeak by and win this, so lets get out and VOTE!!!
Hopefully McCain will be a voluntary 1-term president and we can field someone better in 2012 (like Sarah or Jindal).
Welcome to FR.
What a jerk@! Can’t you keep your damn mouth shut until after the election? Assclown!
Well, blame McCain on cue. All RINOs would.
Both McCain and Palin have called him a socialist repeatedly, what more do you want? They had to campaign against the entire MSM as well. Jeeze.
No, no,no, if Barack Hussein Obama *wins* tomorrow, I’m going to blame the people that voted for the little marxist the most. Oh, and you’re not going to “field” a better candidate four years from now, this country will be deep into the revolution by then.
I believe your last paragraphs hurt your overall reasoning. No, your assessment of the veep situation is not right.
Given the fact that you’ve all chosen to attack me rather than the points I raised in my post means you have no better argument than to attack the messenger?
Hate to say it, but that’s pretty typical of someone who’s losing the debate.
Why post this?
We do not yet know the outcome but I don't find many faults with the McCain campaign. Even the Clinton war machine could not stop the Obamanation.
Factoring in the economy, W's extreme unpopularity, fatigue over Iraq and the funding disparity it's quite shocking McCain has kept so competitive.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.