good advice. mccain camp; please read it
- Posted by Martin on July 3rd, 2008 filed in 2008 election, Barack Obama, Martin
I’ve grown out of Sean Hannity’s ranting - he’s almost on a par with Randi Rhodes in his relentless peddling of faux outrage at normal (to be expected, I should say) behavior from the other side. His stupid attachment to the Reverend Jeremiah Wright story makes him look like a racist (he’s not), because every ounce of bad karma that story could visit upon the Obamessiahâ„¢ camp, it already has. He’s beating a dead horse, and if the McCain camp think he’s helping them, they’re dead wrong.
So it’s good to read a piece with a few nuggets of common sense advice for the McCain camp (which thus far is looking amateurish to the point of being comical), on how to go after Obama without trying to tie him to Weather Underground has-beens and insane whitey-hating preachers that he’s already dropped like hot rocks.
So how could the GOP make an effective case against Obama? The same way almost every successful campaign has built a case against a relative neophyte in the past. The more experienced opponents of Barry Goldwater (in 1964), George McGovern (in 1972), and Walter Mondale (in 1984) each ran the same kind of ad, accusing their opponents of flip-flopping on issues. Those specific assaults, of course, embodied a much larger critique.
Flip-flop attacks aren’t really about the issues at hand. Instead, they’re a way of reminding voters, “You don’t really know this person well enough, do you?” Plus, they’re a great way to make a candidate who appears to be “above politics” look as political as everyone else. In that sense, they are really character attacks on the opponent, and the reason they reappear so often in presidential politics is that they are often highly effective.
Three simple attack lines:
1) He doesn’t understand the world we live in,
2) He has therefore no developed, coherent worldview that informs his policies,
3) Which is why he flip flops, backflips, loops the loop, and generally spouts superficial baloney once he has to deviate from his scripted rote.
In other words, absent that eloquent delivery, you’d be electing a vacuum cleaner salesman to run the most powerful country in the world. And that’s probably not a great idea.
The Gentle Cricket says:
CNN released a poll today (for whatever you can get from their consistently inaccurate polls) that found more people think McCain is inconsistent than Obama! Obama changes his positions more often than his underwear, yet any criticism just rolls off of him. So, I’m not sure that such criticism-no matter how justified-will be effective.
Many of Senator Obama’s most fanatical supporters know nothing of what he stands for (search “Kirk Watson” on Youtube)…so how do you convince people that he’s an old product in new packaging?
Obi's Sister says:
“…you’d be electing a vacuum cleaner salesman to run the most powerful country in the world.”
Gives a brand new appreciation of how bad things will SUCK if he’s elected President, doesn’t it?
JCWHO says:
Golly, I wonder why John McCain will never use any of those “Three simple attack lines.”
Maybe because he is a decent and honorable man who will not take the low road.
And/or because each one is patently false, readily refuted, and unconvincingly namecalling politics-as-usual.
But of course, you’re not John McCain, so feel free to use them and advise him accordingly.
Advice is cheap.