McCain is totally blowing it

The forum for general posting. Come join the madness. :)
Message
Author
User avatar
Buffacuse
Posts: 1797
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 5:52 pm

McCain is totally blowing it

#1 Post by Buffacuse » Tue Jul 08, 2008 6:02 am

I never thought I'd see a campaign as disorganized and off-message as Dole's 1996 fiasco--but here it is again. He got to where he is by being a maverick Republican--the only hope he has in a year where a GOP administration has led us to a major economic crisis, record gas prices, record home foreclosures, and a still unpopular (if much more successful in the last year) war.

Instead, they are making him read off that damn teleprompter, sound totally traditional themes, and frankly, making him look every bit as old as he really is. He should be barnstorming the country with the Straight Talk express and all he is doing is giving really bad traditional GOP speeches.

If this keeps up he will lose--badly.

User avatar
earendel
Posts: 13871
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 5:25 am
Location: mired in the bureaucracy

Re: McCain is totally blowing it

#2 Post by earendel » Tue Jul 08, 2008 6:11 am

Buffacuse wrote:I never thought I'd see a campaign as disorganized and off-message as Dole's 1996 fiasco--but here it is again. He got to where he is by being a maverick Republican--the only hope he has in a year where a GOP administration has led us to a major economic crisis, record gas prices, record home foreclosures, and a still unpopular (if much more successful in the last year) war.

Instead, they are making him read off that damn teleprompter, sound totally traditional themes, and frankly, making him look every bit as old as he really is. He should be barnstorming the country with the Straight Talk express and all he is doing is giving really bad traditional GOP speeches.

If this keeps up he will lose--badly.
I dunno - from what I read Obama is having a pretty rough time, too. Now that he's locked up the nomination there are complaints that his campaign message is getting "lost" as he attempts to steer closer to the center. The confusion over his position on Iraq, for instance, or comments about late-term abortions have engendered comments in the media. For instance:

LINK HERE
"Elen sila lumenn omentielvo...A star shines on the hour of our meeting."

User avatar
NellyLunatic1980
Posts: 7935
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 3:54 am
Contact:

#3 Post by NellyLunatic1980 » Tue Jul 08, 2008 6:16 am

Anybody else besides me thinking that the GOP is having some serious buyer's remorse? Not that somebody like Fred Thompson would've set the party on fire either, but still.

But honestly, the entire GOP field this cycle has been pitiful. None of them would ultimately be able to unite the GOP, independents, and conservative Democrats. Huckabee raised taxes while governor. Romney is a big flip-flopper. Giuliani is a hypocrite and is obsessed with 9/11. Paul wants to end our occupation in Iraq. And Tancredo, Hunter, and Keyes are just bats**t crazy.

I can't wait to see who they'll trot out in 2012.

User avatar
NellyLunatic1980
Posts: 7935
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 3:54 am
Contact:

#4 Post by NellyLunatic1980 » Tue Jul 08, 2008 6:22 am

As an addendum, if the 2008 John McCain were the same as the 2000 John McCain, he wouldn't be so loathsome to Republicans, Democrats, and Independents today.

User avatar
dimmzy
Posts: 925
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 11:23 am

#5 Post by dimmzy » Tue Jul 08, 2008 6:38 am

Probably many voters will think that McCain is the lesser of two evils. McCain may be old, but he will be predictable. Obama scares people.

And if he doesn't scare them, his wife does.

User avatar
NellyLunatic1980
Posts: 7935
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 3:54 am
Contact:

#6 Post by NellyLunatic1980 » Tue Jul 08, 2008 6:49 am

"Scary" sounds like a Republican codeword for the N-word... just like "radical" and "exotic" are Republican codewords for the N-word.

User avatar
TheCalvinator24
Posts: 4886
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:50 am
Location: Wyoming
Contact:

#7 Post by TheCalvinator24 » Tue Jul 08, 2008 6:55 am

NellyLunatic1980 wrote:"Scary" sounds like a Republican codeword for the N-word... just like "radical" and "exotic" are Republican codewords for the N-word.
Bulls**t

Scary and Radical mean Scary and Radical.

I haven't heard anybody use Exotic in a political discussion, so I won't argue that one.

Hillary would have been just as Scary and almost as Radical. Kerry was Scary. Gore was Scary and Radical.
It is our choices that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities. —Albus Dumbledore

User avatar
Bob Juch
Posts: 27071
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
Contact:

#8 Post by Bob Juch » Tue Jul 08, 2008 7:01 am

dimmzy wrote:Probably many voters will think that McCain is the lesser of two evils. McCain may be old, but he will be predictable. Obama scares people.

And if he doesn't scare them, his wife does.
Yeah, they scare Republicans!
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.

User avatar
gsabc
Posts: 6493
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 8:03 am
Location: Federal Bureaucracy City
Contact:

#9 Post by gsabc » Tue Jul 08, 2008 7:03 am

NellyLunatic1980 wrote:As an addendum, if the 2008 John McCain were the same as the 2000 John McCain, he wouldn't be so loathsome to Republicans, Democrats, and Independents today.
Amen. I donated to his campaign in 2000, but getting those weekly (and more) donation solicitations from his campaign and the RNC in this cycle was annoying, to put it mildly. Thanks, but you and your party have changed since then, and not to the better IMO.
I just ordered chicken and an egg from Amazon. I'll let you know.

User avatar
danielh41
Posts: 1219
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 10:36 am
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Contact:

#10 Post by danielh41 » Tue Jul 08, 2008 7:12 am

NellyLunatic1980 wrote:"Scary" sounds like a Republican codeword for the N-word... just like "radical" and "exotic" are Republican codewords for the N-word.
Personally, I find Obama "scary" because he should be the Socialist party nominee instead of the Democratic one. I'm not that big on McCain either though.

I was thinking about legally changing my name to None Of The Above. Then I'll be the next President...

User avatar
NellyLunatic1980
Posts: 7935
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 3:54 am
Contact:

#11 Post by NellyLunatic1980 » Tue Jul 08, 2008 7:18 am

TheCalvinator24 wrote:I haven't heard anybody use Exotic in a political discussion, so I won't argue that one.
Pat Buchanan used the word "exotic".

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/06/1 ... ode-words/

User avatar
Flybrick
Posts: 1570
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:44 am

#12 Post by Flybrick » Tue Jul 08, 2008 7:20 am

NellyLunatic1980 wrote:"Scary" sounds like a Republican codeword for the N-word... just like "radical" and "exotic" are Republican codewords for the N-word.
Aaannnnddd we begin....

So do I assume your premise is that if Obama loses it will strictly be due to racism?

Small points like being ranked the #1 most liberal senator in a body containing Ted Kennedy, Barbara Boxer, et al, doesn't come into play?

His lack of a stance or record on anything doesn't matter?

It's only because he's black that he'll lose?

Right.

So if he wins, it's on talent and character alone?

Neat trick. I've gotta figure out how to do that.

User avatar
gsabc
Posts: 6493
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 8:03 am
Location: Federal Bureaucracy City
Contact:

#13 Post by gsabc » Tue Jul 08, 2008 7:22 am

Flybrick wrote:So if he wins, it's on talent and character alone?

Neat trick. I've gotta figure out how to do that.
Just ask any major beauty pageant winner. They can tell you.
I just ordered chicken and an egg from Amazon. I'll let you know.

User avatar
earendel
Posts: 13871
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 5:25 am
Location: mired in the bureaucracy

#14 Post by earendel » Tue Jul 08, 2008 7:34 am

Flybrick wrote:
NellyLunatic1980 wrote:"Scary" sounds like a Republican codeword for the N-word... just like "radical" and "exotic" are Republican codewords for the N-word.
Aaannnnddd we begin....

So do I assume your premise is that if Obama loses it will strictly be due to racism?

Small points like being ranked the #1 most liberal senator in a body containing Ted Kennedy, Barbara Boxer, et al, doesn't come into play?

His lack of a stance or record on anything doesn't matter?

It's only because he's black that he'll lose?

Right.

So if he wins, it's on talent and character alone?

Neat trick. I've gotta figure out how to do that.
This is a no-win situation - if Obama loses, it's because of race. If he wins it's because of race. I heard a commentator on NPR mention this morning that Obama was campaigning in Georgia, a state that Bush carried in both 2000 and 2004; Obama was in Georgia and thought he could win the state this year because of its large Black population.
Last edited by earendel on Tue Jul 08, 2008 7:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Elen sila lumenn omentielvo...A star shines on the hour of our meeting."

User avatar
Flybrick
Posts: 1570
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:44 am

#15 Post by Flybrick » Tue Jul 08, 2008 7:35 am

gsabc wrote:
Flybrick wrote:So if he wins, it's on talent and character alone?

Neat trick. I've gotta figure out how to do that.
Just ask any major beauty pageant winner. They can tell you.
But the losers don't get to cry about hair color do they?

Obviously, it's because they didn't 'measure' up!





No, no, don't get up. I'll show myself out....






But I hold to my point about not voting for Obama because of his mostly unknown/unpublicized or known far left views on most issues rather than the color of his skin.

Of course, that's just what a 'racist' WOULD say, isn't it?! It's gotta be about skin color and not policy.

edited to add: I agree McCain is running a less than inspiring campaign. I'm not a big fan of his political decisions. Some I agree with, some I don't. But he's looking mighty non-impressive now.

User avatar
NellyLunatic1980
Posts: 7935
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 3:54 am
Contact:

#16 Post by NellyLunatic1980 » Tue Jul 08, 2008 7:43 am

Flybrick wrote:Aaannnnddd we begin....

So do I assume your premise is that if Obama loses it will strictly be due to racism?

Small points like being ranked the #1 most liberal senator in a body containing Ted Kennedy, Barbara Boxer, et al, doesn't come into play?

His lack of a stance or record on anything doesn't matter?

It's only because he's black that he'll lose?

Right.

So if he wins, it's on talent and character alone?

Neat trick. I've gotta figure out how to do that.
Thank you for playing "Missing the Point Completely".

First of all, Frank Lautenberg is the most liberal senator in the Senate. Obama ranks 23d. Anybody who says that Obama is the most liberal U.S. senator is talking out of his ass. I've posted that on the Bored before.

Second of all, the GOP can run a campaign against Obama solely by debating the issues, but they won't cuz they know that they will lose in a landslide. They also can't come right out and call Obama the N-word for the same reason. So they come up with these codewords to insert into the dialogue to scare Americans, to say the N-word without actually saying the N-word. "Naive" and "inexperienced" are code for "he's too young". "Radical", "exotic", and "scary" are code for "he's Black".

They couldn't debate the issues with John Kerry four years ago, so they introduced codewords into the mainstream to scare voters into not voting for him. "Flip-flopper", "wishy-washy", "elitist", "cut-and-runner", "surrenderer", "terrorist coddler", "appeaser", "defeatocrat"... shall I continue?

User avatar
Flybrick
Posts: 1570
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:44 am

#17 Post by Flybrick » Tue Jul 08, 2008 7:55 am

NellyLunatic1980 wrote:

... shall I continue?
Certainly. If you can do it without being insulting or condescending. Or is that a racist remark?

And if you use correct punctuation and spelling.

Finally, simply because you have a difference of opinion regarding who the most liberal senator is does not make you right. I'm satisfied with my exploration of the topic I used to arrive at my view. I don't really care if you agree or disagree.

As our votes are most likely going to cancel each other out, then it's up to many others to decide if they're voting simply due to color or to the issues.

Interesting that you didn't dispute my conclusion that if Obama loses it's due to racism, but if he wins, it's talent and skill that brought him to the White (ahem) House.

Again, that's a very neat trick

User avatar
silverscreenselect
Posts: 24385
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Contact:

#18 Post by silverscreenselect » Tue Jul 08, 2008 8:11 am

This election is not about McCain. Unlike what Rush Limbaugh might think, a hard right wing conservative would lose in a landslide even to Obama at his scariest. The Republican brand is so unpopular this year that they are losing special elections in red districts in LA and MS. A generic Republican loses to a generic Democrat by 15 points. Fred Thompson or Mitt Romney would be creamed. So McCain is doing what he can, promoting his experience and war background (and winning points when Obama foolishly attacked him on the issue) and letting the election be about Obama.

Of course, it's Obama who has used the race card relentlessly from the start in this election, resulting in more racial polarization and tension than we've seen in a decade or more. He has personally set the cause of race relations back in this country back years, and his constant attempts to deflect any criticism of him by claiming it's racist are ludicrous. When the Clintons attacked his claims about his Iraq stance by saying that his story was a "fairy tale," instead of defending himself on the issue, he claimed racism, and the election went downhill from there.

Obama brings out his racial and ethnic heritage when it suits his purposes but then tries to shut down any investigation of his background, his associates or his beliefs with claims they are racist.

What is becoming obvious to many people is that he has no core beliefs and no principles and is extremely inexperienced with a history of some of the most unsavory characters in American and Chicago political history.

The latest is that the mortgage company that gave him the loan to buy his house did so at well below market rates at the time. It turns out that the mortgage company had been given a lot of business over the past few years by the same charitable foundation that Obama and Bill Ayers had been in charge of. And lest we forget, that same house was bought, in large part, due a lot of money provided by Tony Rezko, insolvent at the time, who was serving as a funnel for the money coming from convicted Iraqi financier Auchi.

These stories haven't fully taken hold with the public in large part because, like Whitewater and unlike the Wright story, they aren't easy to follow. But they paint a very sleazy picture of Mr. Hope and Change.

User avatar
Flybrick
Posts: 1570
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:44 am

#19 Post by Flybrick » Tue Jul 08, 2008 8:21 am

The end is nigh!

SSS and I agree on something!


And just for the cheap shot humor, do you wonder if Hillary's heart (if it exists) skipped a beat hearing about the (minor) incident on Obama's plane that forced a precautionary landing? :D

User avatar
tubadave
Official Bored Breaker/Fixer
Posts: 827
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:17 pm
Location: D/FW, TX

#20 Post by tubadave » Tue Jul 08, 2008 8:43 am

Flybrick wrote:The end is nigh!

SSS and I agree on something!

I can't tell you how many times already during this political season that I've read something in here and thought the same thing.

I expect the pigs to fly by my window any moment. :shock:
"Not all chemicals are bad. Without chemicals such as hydrogen and oxygen, for example, there would be no way to make water, a vital ingredient in beer." -- Dave Barry

User avatar
Chuck E Reese
Merry Man
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2007 8:34 am
Location: SSS's basement

#21 Post by Chuck E Reese » Tue Jul 08, 2008 8:46 am

tubadave wrote:
Flybrick wrote:The end is nigh!

SSS and I agree on something!

I can't tell you how many times already during this political season that I've read something in here and thought the same thing.

I expect the pigs to fly by my window any moment. :shock:

Must be because he quit reading my fine articles..... :x

User avatar
tlynn78
Posts: 9452
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:31 am
Location: Montana

#22 Post by tlynn78 » Tue Jul 08, 2008 8:53 am

"Scary" sounds like a Republican codeword for the N-word... just like "radical" and "exotic" are Republican codewords for the N-word

And apparently "Republican" is code for ignorant racist. Who knew?


t.
To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead. -Thomas Paine
You can ignore reality, but you can't ignore the consequences of ignoring reality. -Ayn Rand
Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities. -Voltaire

User avatar
ne1410s
Posts: 2961
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 5:26 pm
Location: The Friendly Confines

#23 Post by ne1410s » Tue Jul 08, 2008 9:06 am

And apparently "Republican" is code for ignorant racist. Who knew?
Anyone who followed the 2000 Republican primary in South Carolina. But, those were the good old days.
"When you argue with a fool, there are two fools in the argument."

User avatar
TheCalvinator24
Posts: 4886
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:50 am
Location: Wyoming
Contact:

#24 Post by TheCalvinator24 » Tue Jul 08, 2008 10:00 am

NellyLunatic1980 wrote:
TheCalvinator24 wrote:I haven't heard anybody use Exotic in a political discussion, so I won't argue that one.
Pat Buchanan used the word "exotic".

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/06/1 ... ode-words/
I'll say it once.

Pat Buchanan doesn't count.

I'm willing to concede that Pat's use of Exotic might have been some sort of code, but I will not concede on "Scary" and "Radical." Those words have been applied to politicians of all skin colors for years. To claim that they now are used to imply race is ignorant at best.
It is our choices that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities. —Albus Dumbledore

User avatar
silverscreenselect
Posts: 24385
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Contact:

#25 Post by silverscreenselect » Tue Jul 08, 2008 10:26 am

TheCalvinator24 wrote:
NellyLunatic1980 wrote:
TheCalvinator24 wrote:I haven't heard anybody use Exotic in a political discussion, so I won't argue that one.
Pat Buchanan used the word "exotic".

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/06/1 ... ode-words/
I'll say it once.

Pat Buchanan doesn't count.

I'm willing to concede that Pat's use of Exotic might have been some sort of code, but I will not concede on "Scary" and "Radical." Those words have been applied to politicians of all skin colors for years. To claim that they now are used to imply race is ignorant at best.
Republicans call every Democrat except Joe Lieberman and Zell Miller a radical. And every politician claims his or her opponent is "scary."

It's ironic that this is one election in which a genuine progressive has a very good chance at winning by embracing those principles. The electorate is clearly tired of what the Republicans have been dishing out the last eight years and is very distrustful of Republican "answers" on the economy which don't seem to produce results at the individual paycheck level.

Instead of genuine progressivism, Obama seems intent on obscuring his true intentions in a veritable blizzard of contradictory, explanatory and "refined" statements. He's now succeeded to a large extent at dispelling the "hope and change new politics" image, and the only reason he is ahead in the polls is not due to his own charisma, charm and beliefs but to the public's distaste of the Republican party in general. Even at that, he has "squandered" over half of the generic Democrat's polling advantage. If Obama wants to make this election a referendum on himself and "hope and change," rather than on Democratic vs. Republican politics, he will lose. The problem is that he has moved so far away from progressive principles that any move now will be viewed as just the latest flip flop in response to negative public reaction.

Post Reply