Posted on 10/15/2008 11:55:22 AM PDT by stevek1
I heard on our local Tampa radio station this morning 970 Radio:
According to a political analyst, McCain would rather "lose" the election than conduct a dishonorable campaign.
If this is true, than many of us regret sending a contribution to McCain.
This reminds me of a boxer fighting in the last round needing a KNOCKOUT to win the fight. Instead he jabs and dances.
It's better to go down in flames with honor, according to McCain.
He is going to lose the election and STILL be accused of running a dishonorable campaign.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
There you go again, Barack, you play the race card every time something doesn't go your way, and I'm not buying into it any more. You marxist.
Well, he won’t call an illegal who got in the army and tell him he deported his mother either.
Oh please people, please quit believing the Media, they are all lying to us, every minute of every day.
Maybe I should just go back to drinking and burying bodies under my house...darn, the smell had just recently calmed down.
Who are you? Try daily Koz you may feel more comfortable!
John will do a great job tonight...and even if he doesnt
I will never vote for A UNEXPERIENCED SOCIALIST RADICAL MUSLIM BARACK HUSSIEN OBAMA!
If this is true, than many of us regret sending a contribution to McCain.
I think someone is stuck on stupid, and it isn't McCain.
I suppose he should have said "I would rather win the election than conduct a honorable campaign"
Geez......
This is a misstatement of something said by one of his campaign people. It may be true, but it is not from McCain’s mouth.
Since this is not a proven statement by McCain I can only hope this is not his belief. That said...for me his not bringing out the facts of Obama’s ties to terrorist, Acorn and all the other stuff is what is dishonorable!! Why would anyone running for President allow this country fall into the hands of someone who basically is driving us closer to socialism/marxism/....if Obama wins I feel most of the fault will indeed be to a bad campaign where “telling the truth” is considered dishonorable.....where being “nice” is more important than doing your best to save this country...
Oh come on. THey say this is a democrat year, but the country may not be ready to elect big spending liberals when the economy is in crisis. The crisis happened a little too soon. I think it would have been easier for them to get elected if it hadn’t. The polls apparently would say I am wrong, but I just can’t see how people could elect even MORE big spenders right now.
We’re just upset. Well, okay, paranoid. It’s been terrible enduring eight/nine months of nonstop Obama baloney. Rush mentioned today that Clinton supporters had raised a half million or so at a party for McCain. (Putting us to shame.)
You got that right TA3.
First lets get the attack ads out of the way. Let me make a simple statement that is axiomatic. A candidate cannot get people's votes by trashing his opponent.
The question undecided voters ask is "Why should I vote for you?" If the answer is "My opponent is a lousy SOB!", that is not even an answer to the question. "My opponent rapes, steals, robs, and tortures" even if proven is still not a reason to vote for a candidate. It is not an answer to the question.. "Why should I vote for you?"
Undecided voters and they are nearly all called swing or independent voters, vote on two issues. They first of all tend to vote for the candidate they like. A candidate with whom they can identify. A trustworthy candidate with whom they feel comfortable. That candidate is never an attack dog.
The second criteria is the candidate they believe will do the most for THEM. Not the most for society.. not the most for the downtrodden... but the most for them. Tattooed across every independents chest are the words.. "WHAT WILL YOU DO FOR ME?" Trashing the opponent is not an answer to that question.
Rule One. To get from 35 to 50 plus percent candidates have to answer the questions independents ask and be the kind of candidate independents will vote for.
So to get support from the available voters one must focus on being a nice likable person who will do things for the undecided voter. He must care more about the nation than he cares about himself.
THAT MEANS A POSITIVE CAMPAIGN.
But what about negative campaign. Haven't we all heard that they work? Sure we have and they do. But what they do and how do they do it is rarely understood. Negative ads are used to reduce the support for the opponent. They are used to reduce an opponents support from his base. It is done by using commerials that cause a candidates regular supporters to doubt his commitment to his base.
How do you do that? Well if you are running against McCain in the primaries you want to paint him as a closet liberal so conservatives won't vote for him. If I really wanted to hurt Obama you would need to run spots showing Obama saying conservative things. And ask is Obama really a liberal? That would cause doubt about Obama in his base.
Running spots trashing Obama as a far left liberal socialist does not hurt Obama. The left has been waiting for such a candidate for years. It would be the biggest favor a Republican could do for Obama. Democrats would think even Republican ads are saying Obama is everything I have ever wanted.. That is not the way to hurt Obama.
But why not use anti Obama spots to encourage the right to get out and vote for McCain. Say what? Are right wingers so uninterested in this election so as to say.. "I never knew Obama was a socialist. I was going to vote for him until you told me he was a leftist." That is just stupid. It is wasting money preaching to the choir. What part of Obama's preacher saying 'GOD DAMN AMERICA!" do you think the right did not hear? What part of Obama's mentor's being communists and domestic terrorists do think right wing voters don't know about?
But such ads also have a very negative effect for the campaign running them. The independents tend to vote for nice guys. Accusing your opponent of being a bad guy is not what nice guys do. McCain wants to have the image of trustworthy nice guy that people like. HE HAS TO HAVE THAT IMAGE TO WIN.
Reagan in 1980 refused to say a single negative word about Jimmy Carter. The media tried its best to get Reagan to be critical of the way Carter handled the Iran Hostage crisis. Reagan refused. "Every president needs the support of the people in a crisis and President Carter has mine.." "This nation is more important than my campaign." is what Reagan said. Sound similiar to what McCain just said? McCain must be as stupid as that Damned Reagan. Everyone knows Reagan did not know how to win elections.
Reagan would not even trash Carter over the economy. I remember how angry the right wingers were. They were hoping for a candidate that would tear Jimmy Carter a new one. If Reagan had been stupid enough to have done so, Carter would have had a second term.
Nixon was Ike's attack dog. Ike was the nice guy above the fray. Then Nixon used Agnew as his attack dog. Reagan went to surrogates and had his entire campaign play nice guy to Jimmah Carter.
Bush did not attack Gore or Kerry in 2000 and 2004. For some strange reason Ike, Nixon, Reagan, and Bush all wanted to win and did what it took to win. They did not listen to the right wing demands for an attack dog campaign.
We know for a fact that about 2/3 of the voters believe the media is in the tank for Obama. You have to believe that 2/3 of the voters know the media is biased but will believe what the media tells them anyway. That is like saying.."I know you are a liar but I still believe every word you say!!!!" It makes no sense at all. People who think the public is dumb are dumber than the public.
Obama has run a mostly negative campaign with huge media support. Obama has scared the dickens out of conservative voters. They will quite likely come out to vote against Obama and to do that they have to vote for McCain.
On the other hand polls show McCain doing better than Obama with independents. So if the turn out is 35 D 35R 30Ind McCain wins. It it is 41D 29R 30Ind then Obama wins. This election is in the hands of the political right. Will they stay home and ensure Obama is our next president or not?
Those who think McCain can change independent minds by trashing Obama just don't understand independent voters. Trashing Obama does not make McCain likable. Trashing Obama does not say what McCain will do to make the lives of independents better. Talking about fixing the economy and talking nice to Obama is the way to win votes... while hoping that Obama continues to attack McCain. McCain saying he fostered the surge for 3 years before it was implemented and once implemented it worked is the way to sell his foreign policy experience.
If 25 percent of the Republican base stays home, then Obama wins. If the right comes out holds its nose and votes for McCain then McCain wins.
I find it interesting that the right wingers on the web will scream that the New York and LA Times are in the tank for Obama. But when they publish stories about how McCain is failing to attack Obama and that will cost McCain the election they believe the leftist press. It is the media's way of reducing the turn out for McCain. Say he needs to be an attack dog and then show that he is not. It is a way the media plays the right wing suckers. The fact that it can work is why the media hold the right wingers in such contempt. The media does not respect people they can fool.
Plus right wing pundits are clamoring for McCain to trash Obama. I guess they think they are so brilliant that only they are the only ones bright enough to see through Obama. All I can say is I never met anyone who flunked out of a Journalism school.
The media is running story after story that mcCain refuses to attack? Are they hoping he will attack and defeat Obama or are they are hoping he will attack and destory any chance he has at defeating Obama?
I leave you with two thoughts.
The swift boat groups will have to step up and do the dirty work.
Not voting for Obama! Not now, not ever!
if he wins...please look for me in the camps for dissenters and give me some water if you will
Yep. Just somebody’s opinion....
My thoughts exactly!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.