Why We Lose If McCain Wins

,

  1. #1 by bekkieann on September 27, 2008 - 7:06 am

    My feelings exactly. It’s even worse than we initially thought.

    Again and again, McCain shows he isn’t really about “counrty first”, he’s just a stunt man, doing tricks to gain some poll value. There’s this stunt with choosing Palin. Then there’s the stunt about suspending his campaign.

    Every voter (and in fact everyone in the rest of the world, too) should be aware by now, this is the type of presidency McCain will offer: A stuntman presidency.

    Could the American voters really make this big of a mistake?

  2. #2 by Richard Warnick on September 27, 2008 - 9:02 am

    From the Think Progress debate live blog:

    McCain has already used the joke that he wasn’t “elected Miss Congeniality in the Senate” twice during this debate. Ironically, Sarah Palin was Miss Congeniality.

  3. #3 by Don on September 27, 2008 - 10:14 am

    The title should be “Why we lose if McCain wins.”

    Just saying . . . :)

  4. #4 by Cliff on September 27, 2008 - 11:28 am

    Thanks Don. Perfect!

  5. #5 by Cliff Lyon on September 27, 2008 - 11:40 am

    The silence from our Bush Loving Friends on this blog is deafening.

    Lets try to be empathetic if they come back. They have been defrauded by the Republican Party.

    Their egos are surely bruised watching their tribe and world come crashing down.

  6. #6 by James Farmer on September 27, 2008 - 12:00 pm

    Even if we look at the debate last night in a light most favorable to the republican cause – i.e., we consider the outcome a draw – the fact that McCain was unable to destroy this allegedly inexperienced newbie to national politics is telling.

    For me, the conclusion is this: McCain is incapable of taking down an inexperienced newbie. That doesn’t bode well for McCain, now, does it? What say you Bob S., Ken B., RO, et al.? Cat got your tongue?

  7. #7 by Larry Bergan on September 27, 2008 - 2:46 pm

    Due to the fact that McCain has run a such a horrible and weird campaign, his performance at the debate wasn’t bad, but McCain lives in front of a television camera and has for the last 10 years. He is very comfortable there. His main strategy was to paint Obama as a scary choice because of his lack of experience. Then you remember who he has allowed to be his VP running mate.

    I am in awe of Obama’s composure and bravery and I believe his motives are good. McCain is THE example of the good ole’ boy’s war profiteering network. The playground bully. I hope his involvement in the Saving and Loan scandal gets a lot more exposure.

  8. #8 by Paul Mero on September 27, 2008 - 2:54 pm

    Mostly good points here. She is having a horrendous time in these interviews. Why?

    Is she stupid? While I know you would like to think so, I don’t think that’s true.

    Is she just trying to be clever? My hunch is she is not that kind of personality.

    I think the real problem is that she really is inexperienced on this level of campaign politics…and here’s what I mean: campaign handlers control her now and, for someone with her limited political campaign experience, the handlers are info dumping in excess. She simply cannot assimilate all that is being thrown at her…and, if any of you have ever been involved in a campaign (and I mean a real one…not some local race or a fringe candidate with no chance of winning), handlers are constantly worried about everything and all info must be in play. It’s truly an inhuman experience.

    I know I am wasting my time writing this because no matter what I write you’ll take it as me creating some excuse for her poor performances. But part of my point is that campaign politics at this level and at this juncture is all about performance. For instance, I thought Obama looked at times like a child seeking the approval of his daddy during the debate…calling him “John,” repeatedly trying to make eye contact, telling McCain he was right, etc. Bad performance in that respect. But I don’t really think Obama lacks the self-esteem that peaked through last night.

    If I were counseling Palin I would recommend several tactics: 1) limit press interviews to local media…the voices of the regular people…and not kep trying to battle national media elite who are trying to regain their careers by making her look silly, 2) I would let her be herself and not make her try to live up to the expectations of others (which, I realize, contradicts politics as usual), and 3) I would remind her over and over that she is running for VP, not Prez, and to not let that “one heart beat away” from the main chair persuade her that she really is running for Prez. The fact is that if McCain dies in office, she would be president for a time (surrounded by lots and lots of really smart policy wonks with loads of experience to help her), but only for a time if she is not competent.

    The reality is that Obama is sneaking past using the same game…”Maybe I am not that experienced, but Joe Biden is.” You give Obama the benefit of the doubt because you like him, how he carries himself, his socialist ideas and policies, but you know, if you’re being honest, that you trust the “Obama team,” and not just the man.

    My guess is that given a couple more years…equivalent to Obama’s experience level…that Palin will be fine. Give her the 30 years that McCain and Biden each have and she’ll be Maggie Thatcher.

    So, if you just want to focus on “performance,” then yes, she is performing poorly, even embarassingly at times. But in campaign politics, where everyone is an enemy (even your friends), there are ways for the handlers to cover her weaknesses and play to her strengths which are 1) her genuine belief in the goodness of America (which Obama and the Left, like you guys, do not share), 2) her obvious work ethic, and 3) her ability to connect with Americans (a gift that no one who really cares about this nation should ever underestimate…Reagan had it, Clinton had it, and Palin has it).

  9. #9 by James Farmer on September 27, 2008 - 3:29 pm

    Paul:

    You could have summed up your entire comment as follows: Palin is not yet ready for the role of Vice President, let alone President.

  10. #10 by Paul Mero on September 27, 2008 - 6:51 pm

    Actually, I will sum it up. There is no rhyme or reason to American politics and there never really has been. Truman, who was largely considered a naive bumpkin, was one heart beat away from the presidency, and one day, unexpectedly, became president at an historic time in US history…and he did fine.

    Reagan was accused of being nearly retarded by the Left when stacked up against book-smart Jimmy Carter…and Reagan ended a 70 year reign of terror in communism. Jimmy Carter? The worst president in US history.

    Biden and McCain seem to be the only “experienced” and “qualified” candidates among the fantastic four…and yet Obama is your guys’ main guy. Hard to figure given the concerns you have about Palin.

    America will live on whoever it is. This great country (i.e. freedom) is bigger than any one politician.

  11. #11 by Leo Brown on September 27, 2008 - 9:47 pm

    If Palin had been elected president of the Harvard Law Review, I might have a higher opinion of her as a quick study. Does anyone believe she is the sharpest knife in the drawer?

    Obama’s experience compares favorably with Lincoln’s. Palin’s compares favorably with Agnew’s.

  12. #12 by Cliff Lyon on September 27, 2008 - 11:33 pm

    Paul,

    You’re sounding desperate.

    I mean, that was a real doozy.

    Do you mind if I top post it...”Crazed Reactionary Conservative Savant Declares Reagan Retarded. No Smarter Than Palin.”

  13. #13 by Cliff Lyon on September 27, 2008 - 11:42 pm

    Paul,

    Have you heard about McCain’s gambling problem.

    I wonder how long that darn liberal media has been holding on to this one.

  14. #14 by James Farmer on September 28, 2008 - 12:09 am

    Paul:

    Let’s face it. While Sarah Palin is probably as you describe her – reasonably competent, at least over time – there are women in Relief Society Leadership positions that would have made McCain look better than Palin. You know better than most that politics is all about presentation of the candidate to the people – most folks make up their minds based on a sound bite or two. Palin is a disaster in this regard. The Relief Society babes, on the other hand, can spin every bit as well as General Authorities can. McCain made a bad mistake in picking Palin, and it may just cost him the election.

  15. #15 by Ken on September 28, 2008 - 8:50 am

    The governor of Missouri Matt Blunt is warning the American people that Barack Obama and his henchmen are conspiring to deny Americans their freedom of speech. This is but a taste of the reign of terror an Obama Presidency would be. If he is elected the rights we have enjoyed for 200+ years will evaporate possibly forever.
    People at oneutah.org like to bemoan the alleged rights of terrorists being violated, but if Obama gets his way the rights of every single citizen is threatened. Barack Obama is the greatest threat to our national security than any major presidential candidate in this nations history. All freedom loving people and those that believe in civil rights must stop him while we still have the freedom to do so.

    Here is the text of Gov. Blunt’s blunt assessment.

    Gov. Blunt Statement on Obama Campaign’s Abusive Use of Missouri Law Enforcement

    JEFFERSON CITY – Gov. Matt Blunt today issued the following statement on news reports that have exposed plans by U.S. Senator Barack Obama to use Missouri law enforcement to threaten and intimidate his critics.

    “St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch, St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce, Jefferson County Sheriff Glenn Boyer, and Obama and the leader of his Missouri campaign Senator Claire McCaskill have attached the stench of police state tactics to the Obama-Biden campaign.

    “What Senator Obama and his helpers are doing is scandalous beyond words, the party that claims to be the party of Thomas Jefferson is abusing the justice system and offices of public trust to silence political criticism with threats of prosecution and criminal punishment.

    “This abuse of the law for intimidation insults the most sacred principles and ideals of Jefferson. I can think of nothing more offensive to Jefferson’s thinking than using the power of the state to deprive Americans of their civil rights. The only conceivable purpose of Messrs. McCulloch, Obama and the others is to frighten people away from expressing themselves, to chill free and open debate, to suppress support and donations to conservative organizations targeted by this anti-civil rights, to strangle criticism of Mr. Obama, to suppress ads about his support of higher taxes, and to choke out criticism on television, radio, the Internet, blogs, e-mail and daily conversation about the election.

    “Barack Obama needs to grow up. Leftist blogs and others in the press constantly say false things about me and my family. Usually, we ignore false and scurrilous accusations because the purveyors have no credibility. When necessary, we refute them. Enlisting Missouri law enforcement to intimidate people and kill free debate is reminiscent of the Sedition Acts – not a free society.”

  16. #16 by Cliff Lyon on September 28, 2008 - 9:13 am

    Thanks Ken for another OneUtah Hall of Shame Keeper.

    If he [Obama] is elected rights we have enjoyed for 200+ years will evaporate possibly forever.

    Its funny how the Republicans accuse the Democrats of the very things they themselves have already done to this country.

  17. #17 by Ken on September 28, 2008 - 9:24 am

    Cliff

    No, the difference is that Democrats succeed in the things they accuse the Republicans of trying to do.

  18. #18 by JFarmer on September 28, 2008 - 9:33 am

    Challenge to KEN: Point to me where in your comment or the quoted text I can find a single assertion of what Obama or his supporters did to suppress anything?

    Your comment is nothing but empty shrill rhetoric coming from a scared, angry and confused republican.

  19. #19 by Cliff Lyon on September 28, 2008 - 9:35 am

    Ken,

    I’m impressed how well coordinated that Hail Mary attack is. The reason Blunt said this is because HE is being attacked because Matt Blunt is a Nazi.

    On Wednesday, Obama’s Missouri campaign announced U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill would lead a group of Democratic lawmakers, prosecutors and one sheriff “who will be proactive in letting voters in the Show-Me State know the truth in the face of the distortions by the McCain campaign,” according to a news release.

    The group includes prosecutors from St. Louis, Dunklin, Lafayette, Cass, Clay, Ripley, Audrain and Jackson counties volunteering to be surrogates for Obama on their own time.

    The Missouri Truth Squad will “respond quickly, forcefully, and aggressively when John McCain or his allies launch inaccurate claims or character attacks about Barack Obama, or when they distort Barack Obama’s record or plans.”

    In a conference call Saturday with reporters from battleground states, Obama national campaign manager David Plouffe said those who spread lies and mistruths about the Illinois senator have to be “held accountable,” but did not elaborate how.

    Despite having law enforcement officials on the truth squad, none of them have publicly said they will invoke their official powers to enforce facts about Obama’s record. - link

  20. #20 by bekkieann on September 28, 2008 - 9:59 am

    On Face the Nation this morning, McCain literally repeated the SNL sketch about the distortions of his ad campaign (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_0CudiuboU).

    When asked about the ad saying that Franklin Raines was Obama’s financial advisor, and whether he (McCain) still stood behind that ad, even though it was now disproved. McCain responded yes he still stood behind it because it was true, the Washington Post did say that. See the subtlety? We’re not saying the premise of our ad is true, we’re just saying the Washington Post said it — that part’s true.

    Is that the freedom of speech you’re concerned about, Ken? Or is it you really want to silence those who will set the record straight?

  21. #21 by Richard Warnick on September 28, 2008 - 10:19 am

    Obama has “henchmen”? I don’t think so. In American politics, all the comic-book super-villains are Republicans like Dick Cheney. That guy has henchmen, just look at Scooty Libby and David Addington.

    Barack Obama is the greatest threat to our national security than any major presidential candidate in this nations history. All freedom loving people and those that believe in civil rights must stop him while we still have the freedom to do so.

    Quick quiz: Which U.S. President said, “Stop throwing the Constitution in my face. It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!” ?

  22. #22 by JFarmer on September 28, 2008 - 12:00 pm

    Ken:

    Still waiting for a response. Just what did Obama or his supporters do? Can you articulate the assertion for us with something other than conclusory rhetoric?

  23. #23 by Ken on September 28, 2008 - 12:06 pm

    JFarmer read my comments in the next post by Cliff. The one that features Cliff with his head up his butt.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: