tekisui
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Aug-02-08 11:01 AM
Original message |
McCan't is Anti-Obama and Nothing More. |
|
Remember when the pukes moaned and groaned in 2004 that Kerry didn't have any plans, he was just anti-B*sh? They ran their entire campaign on that assertion.
Now, we see McCan't has no plan, no message, no position other than anti-Obama.
The McCan't campaign is doing everything they can to avoid debate on issues, because they are on the Wrong Side of every issue. The People are against what the McCan't campaign is for. The Democrat's are are the right side of the issues, and the pukes are running scared.
McCan't is defining himself as anti-Obama. Obama is letting him write that narrative. It is a losing strategy, and McCan't is digging his own grave. They best thing Obama can do right now, which his doing very well, is offer McCan't a bigger shovel.
|
Evergreen Emerald
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Aug-02-08 11:02 AM
Response to Original message |
1. That is what sells. Americans don't listen to the issues, they pay attention |
|
when it is negative. It is not McCain. It is America.
|
tekisui
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Aug-02-08 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. But, McCan't isn't moving up. He is not winning over any voters. |
|
I contend it is not America. It is the pukes, and the M$M's drive for a horse race and ratings.
|
Evergreen Emerald
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Aug-02-08 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
6. But, we are letting them get away with it. |
|
The media is allowed to be complicit. When they talk about the issues, the story does not get attention. When the negativity begins (be it from either side) the media highlights it and the throngs are enthralled and the blogs light up.
|
panader0
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Aug-02-08 11:08 AM
Response to Original message |
3. It's the "I'm not him" approach |
|
It'll work with some folks, but those independents and undecided voters will be turned off by it.
|
niceypoo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Aug-02-08 11:09 AM
Response to Original message |
|
Edited on Sat Aug-02-08 11:09 AM by niceypoo
To a tee...
|
Kurt_and_Hunter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Aug-02-08 11:11 AM
Response to Original message |
5. Nixon was the anti-Kennedy |
|
Edited on Sat Aug-02-08 11:14 AM by Kurt_and_Hunter
In 1952 Eisenhower was the anti-Truman (though running against Stevenson) Then in 1956 Stevenson was the anti-Eisenhower Nixon was the anti-Kennedy Goldwater was the anti-Kennedy (though running against Johnson) Nixon was the anti-Johnson (though running against Humphrey), and Humphrey was the anti-Nixon Nixon was the anti-McGovern Carter was the anti-Nixon (though running against Ford) Reagan was the anti-Carter Mondale was the anti-Reagan Dukakis was the anti-Reagan (though running against Bush) Clinton was the anti-Bush Dole was the anti-Clinton Bush II was the anti-Clinton (though running against Gore) Kerry was the anti-Bush II
This year is a little different, somewhat like 1968 in that neither candidate is *generally* supported for himself (though all candidates have some devout core support): Obama is the anti-Bush II (though running against McCain) and McCain is the anti-Obama
|
WinkyDink
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Aug-02-08 11:36 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
9. I thnk JFK was actually the anti-Ike. |
|
Edited on Sat Aug-02-08 11:37 AM by WinkyDink
|
RoyGBiv
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Aug-02-08 11:13 AM
Response to Original message |
7. McCain is apparently a Whig ... |
|
The last surviving member of that party, in fact.
|
Overseas
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Aug-02-08 11:33 AM
Response to Original message |
8. And I like the way Obama has pointed that out, too |
|
>> I like your use of McCan't. Can't say anything except Obama Bad. >> I like the way Obama refers to the attack ads in occasional asides at campaign rallies as confusing and disappointing -- that the American people deserve a debate on the issues but all John Sidney McCan't III has for them are ads about Paris Hilton and Britney Spears. He doesn't totally ignore the ads, but he refers to them informally. Wondering why the ads are mostly attacks on him rather than positive messages about the issues voters care about. >> The casual approach so far seems pretty good. I like Nance Greggs' take on it-- giving JSM III's camp enough rope to hang themselves. They do seem to be getting more and more hysterical. >> I trust the Obama camp not to ignore discussing the dangers of Bush III-- the disastrous effects of continuing the Bush policies as McCain't plans to do. I believe they are waiting until we get a bit closer to the election.
|
Name removed
(0 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Aug-04-08 11:16 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
|
DFLforever
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Aug-04-08 11:26 PM
Response to Original message |
11. I can't think of a single president who has won with only a |
|
negative campaign.
Every successsful candidate wins because of their positiive message. I don't think this year will be any different.
|
GoesTo11
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Aug-05-08 01:12 AM
Response to Original message |
12. He's more anti a false representation of Obama |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu May 02nd 2024, 12:08 AM
Response to Original message |