McCain’s problem is that he had to campaign on “change”, just like the other guy. And why would people choose OLD change with McCain when they could choose NEW change with Obama?
The reason McCain had to campaign on “change” is because George Bush sat there like a punching bag for eight years, never having the guts to stand up and defend himself as lie after lie after lie from the rats and their newsrooms went left unanswered. Bush’s unwillingness to stand up and fight was an eight-year slap in the face to his bewildered supporters, including me.
The result was that the Democrat candidate could successfully tie his opponent to the easily-smeared punching bag, Bush, while the Republican candidate had little choice but to distance himself from Bush. What, McCain was supposed to defend a man who refused for eight years to defend himself? This situation left McCain between a rock and a hard place.
So yes, Tuesday’s Republican slaughter was Bush’s fault. No joke.
Ironically, Bush defeated McCain in 2000 and now again in 2008.
Whew....
That said, McCain was the guy running for President, not Bush, and so maybe he SHOULD have defended, supported, and lifted Bush to the high heavens rather than “distance” himself. “George Bush has kept America safe from the terrorists since 9/11”, might have been a good start.
Maybe if Bush had been an ally and unleashed him on the campaign trail, the whole game would have been changed completely. That would have taken some guts, but it could have worked because the rats greatly overestimated the general public’s dislike of Bush, and exit polls showed that.
What a freaking mess.... And NOW look at the steaming pantload we have for a president-elect.
I think you’re right on target, but I would add three things:
1) it would have been nearly impossible for any R. to win this year against the Mediascum propaganda storm aimed at carrying Obama to the WH (combined of course with the dim economic picture);
2) had McCain and his team recognized early on that “it’s the economy, stupid” would be the main theme of the election (should have been obvious even before the mid-Sept. meltdown) then maybe they could have prepared a better economic package and team;
3) so long as McCain was unwilling to allow the Obamessiah to truly be taken down for all of his radical and racist and corrupt ALLIES (not mere associates) from Chicago the McCain team was always facing a steep uphill struggle.
Only for a few days after the RNC did McCain/Palin ever lead in the polls, and that was due to the positive boost that Sarah Palin gave to the ticket. However, once the Lehman and AIG meltdowns started the huge mess in mid-Sept., only a tremendous McCain response could have turned things around.... obviously that did not happen.
If you will recall, McCain began his campaign on "reform" not change. That had nothing to do with President Bush!
He began the REFORM Institute in 2001, funded by Soros.
He is a leader of the Republican Main Street Partnership, a bunch of "moderate" so-called republicans, aka RINOs.
He has been a mainstay of the Senate Centrist Coalition.
None of these things had a dang thing to do with President Bush!
...while the Republican candidate had little choice but to distance himself from Bush. What, McCain was supposed to defend a man ...that he had been stabbing in the back for the past 8 years?
Also see my post 122 and 134.
maybe he SHOULD have defended, supported, and lifted Bush to the high heavens rather than “distance” himself.
Then he would have been called a flip-flopper! President Bush has more daggers protruding from his back with McCain's name on them than any demonRAT or member of the Enemedia.