Ironically it was *their* campaign McCain was running (very poorly, it has to be said). There’s a fascinating piece in Newsweek about McCain’s campaign:
Crushed by the Elephant
Picking Palin was a confession that McCain did not have control of the Republican Party.
In a season of ironies, the greatest of all might be that John McCain lacks the toughness to get elected president. During the summer, when he had his best chance, he wasn’t tough enough to remake the Republican Party in his own image; instead, he surrendered to a cynical assortment of lobbyists and right-wingers who insisted on a strategic blunder that McCain would recognize from his reading of military history—fighting the last war. In 2004 President Bush won by rallying the base and destroying the Democrat as unpatriotic. They would try to do it again.
And now w’ere going to be left with a effete, secret Muslim a-rab who palls around with terrorists, who’s also an extreme leftist “educated" *gag*, New York Times reading elite who sees things differently from you and I.
Here’s hoping our Sarah, with her astounding breadth and depth of wisdom and knowledge, impeccable ethical record, and soul-destroying wink will be ready for 2012.
JOHN McCain went into today’s third and last presidential debate promising to “whip” Barack Obama by saying to his face all the negative attacks the McCain campaign have said behind his back.
When the time came, Senator McCain took the first punch. But when Senator Obama punched back, Senator McCain blinked.
It was a retreat which might cost the Republicans the White House. Already lagging badly in the polls, Senator McCain needed something special today - but was found wanting......
It was a disastrous performance for McCain, not because he did anything particularly badly, but because he stuck to the same script of previous weeks and pretty much sealed his fate as the runner-up. Right from the first question he teed up Obama to rattle off his own points which are much better crafted, politically speaking, than McCain’s.
Obama didn’t do anything particularly special, but at this stage he doesn’t have to. Obama specifically mentioning the taunts of “Terrorist!” and “Kill him!” at the Palin rallies was impressive though, if a little chilling.
Obama is running as a pretty conventional campaign at the moment, but McCain seems to be trying to appeal to the Republican base with essentially meaningless catch phrases ("Drill now!”, “Tax cuts!"), while at the same time running against them as the reforming outsider, which makes for a pretty incoherent platform (eg less government, more regulation!). It looks like McCain decided he couldn’t win without the Republican base, and the American public will decide that he can’t win with them.
You’d think these are the guys who struggle to win elections, not the ones who got a record turn out in 2004. Obama has all the main attack angles neutralized, and you’d think that, given the size of these things, the McCain campaign would be able to land a few blows, but it seems to be all bluster at this stage.
If Obama comes through in a few weeks time, it will be fascinating to read about the political machine he has built, particularly on the ground. And I just don’t mean in the last few months of the campaign - what he’s put together over the last couple of years, and what he must have been planning for years before that is quite incredible.
If Obama comes through in a few weeks time, it will be fascinating to read about the political machine he has built, particularly on the ground. And I just don’t mean in the last few months of the campaign - what he’s put together over the last couple of years, and what he must have been planning for years before that is quite incredible.
In a few weeks time...... Yes, I think we will have to wait til after the election to see any real investigative reporting on how Obama got to where he is today. There seems to a voluntary cone of silence in the US Media about Obama’s previous political associations. As with Bill Clinton in 1992, the dirty linen will only be aired once he gets elected. I don’t think by comparison there is anything which could be said about John McCain which hasn’t been well and truly ventilated.
A wonderful summing up of this phenomenon from Melanie Phillips in the latest Spectator:
You have to pinch yourself – a Marxisant radical who all his life has been mentored by, sat at the feet of, worshipped with, befriended, endorsed the philosophy of, funded and been in turn funded, politically promoted and supported by a nexus comprising black power anti-white racists, Jew-haters, revolutionary Marxists, unrepentant former terrorists and Chicago mobsters, is on the verge of becoming President of the United States. And apparently it’s considered impolite to say so.
[McCain] should ask him why America should elect as its President someone who believes he has to apologise for America, even to its enemies. And he should ask him whether, in view of his record, far from being a unifier Obama would actually be one of the most divisive presidents in American history.
It truly takes a special something to label someone like Obama a candidate who would be “one of the most divisive presidents in American history” after the last 8 years of peace and harmony.
In other words, McCain has to present a coherent case for not voting for this man.
That’s generally how politics works, yes.
He has to show why what Obama stands for is so dangerous and divisive. It can be done – must be done – on the level of principles and ideas, not personalities. He has to show that he himself truly understands why Obama should not be elected.
Gosh, imagine if a group of ideological radicals took control of the White House and ran the US into the ground on just about every measure imaginable… perish the thought!
To date, this is what he has conspicuously failed to do. Even now, it is not too late to do so.
Call it the audacity of hope.
Hope for the glorious neo-conservative reign to continue is a hope I think we all share, Melanie.
I wonder if there’s any jobs at Fox News going? Though I guess they too have been part of this voluntary cone of silence in the US… stupid liberal media!
In any case, who would have thought what started as the rise of the neo-conservatives would end with the part nationalization of US banks? They must have been closet socialists all along!
Wikipedia’s entry on Melanie Phillips makes for some fascinating reading. And by fascinating, I mean disturbing. Is the right so bereft of intellectuals these days that crackpot conspiracy theorists are all that’s left to fill the void? I guess when “intellectual” is itself a pejorative term, this is what you get.
Mr Dungey
I do so hope you have the evidence to support the assertions you made above.
Even the link to the Spectator would have been a good start.
As we have seen before ( in among other threads the chaplaincy thread last year) this site is monitored by the secular press. It’s not a good witness to make such assertiions without the evidence or the source and its most unlike you - you are normally very scrupulous at adding your references.
I don’t think I’ve asserted anything - except that the Media will give a lot more space to reporting negative aspects of Obama’s background once the risk that such journalism would deter folks from voting for him has passed.
As regards Alan’s other “assertions”, I too have read many articles that allude to the media’s softly, softly approach to Obama pre-polling day - similar to the way the Australian media ‘fell in love’ with Kevin Rudd last year and threw a lot of their objectivity out the window - and glossed over any seeming faults - because of the media’s own agenda to ensure a change of government.
There have been so many articles and opinion pieces and blog pages over the US election, that you simply and quickly read one and then press on to the next one - going from link to link as they pop up on the screen. That is where I too have seen the ‘assertions’ that Alan referred to - but don’t ask me to try and link back to them. They are gone - just held in my memory. But I got the same overall impression as Alan. But from now on, I will link the significant ones here for all to peruse.
Conspiracy theories abound, it seems. I think calling the Melanie Phillips quote, which included labeling Obama a “Marxist radical” (among other equally absurd/outrageous things) a “wonderful summing up of this phenomenon” is quite an assertion indeed.
I certainly hope those lefties at Fox News stop fawning over Obama and do some serious reporting on his background, including his terrorist fist-bumping ways.
My comments were with regards to his political machine which has taken him from rank outsider to a 95% chance of becoming president.
Nevertheless, on the conspiracy theory front it seems some fine American citizens share similar concerns to Alan about Obama’s background. Is he a Muslim, white-hating, terrorist?
Put your binoculars down - the US election is already OVER - at least according to this Irish bookie :
All bets off - Obama’s won
From correspondents in Dublin October 17, 2008 Article from: Reuters
IRELAND’S biggest bookmaker, Paddy Power, will pay out more than 1 million euros ($1.35 million) on bets that Barack Obama will be the next US president, three weeks ahead of the election.
The Dublin-based bookmaker said it made the “unprecedented decision” to pay on bets taken so far, following yesterday’s final campaign debate between Obama and his Republican rival John McCain, which polls judged the Democrat to have won.
“We declare this race well and truly over and congratulate all those who backed Obama,” Power said.
“Although he seemed a little out of sorts in last night’s final debate we believe he has done more than enough to get him across the line on November 4.”
The bookmaker said the overall betting trend had shown “one- way traffic” for the Illinois senator, with odds shortening to 1-9, meaning a bet of €9 is required to make €1 profit.
Power said it had taken more than 10,000 bets on the 2008 US presidential election, the majority in support of Obama.
In June a wager of €100,000 was placed on Obama to win at odds of 1-2, yielding a payout of €150,000, it said.
Here’s an interesting analysis from an Australian point of view :
THE US ELECTION AND AUSTRALIA - #1
PAUL COLGAN – WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 15 2008
This is the first of a series of guest posts laying out what the outcome of the US election campaign means for Australia and Australians.
ASIA LOOKS TO OBAMA FOR A DIFFERENT KIND OF LEADERSHIP
Greg Barton*
University educated professionals in Asia generally pay more attention to American politics than the most Americans, and tend to keep a close eye on presidential campaigns. This is not simply because many them have studied and worked in the US but also because, for better or worse, US presidents make decisions that impact on the entire globe. This time, however, there has been an extraordinary level of interest in the race to the White House, beginning with the presidential primaries. There are three reasons for this elevated level of interest.
Firstly, over the past five years America has suffered a massive diminution of soft power - of its reputation and ability to influence - around the world, including across the Muslim world and throughout Asia and even in Australia. To most Americans this comes as a surprise, if indeed they are aware of it at all. But in survey after global survey comes the news that America’s standing is at an historic low with the vast majority of people in the developing world, including in many nations where America had enjoyed a decades of popularity and influence.
Polling shows that the decline, which came rapidly, began with the invasion of Iraq in 2003. In the days after the 2001 September 11 attacks America enjoyed tremendous support from virtually every corner of the globe but that universal goodwill evaporated overnight as Allied forces moved into Iraq. Since that point, there’s been a sharp divergence between the way the world sees America and the way that America sees itself. Problems existed long before the invasion of Iraq but that event was a tipping point leading to a massive re-evaluation of America.
And yet, all across Asia, it is clear that people wish that the American government exhibited the same kind of positive character traits as the individual Americans they have lived and worked with. Americans are typically described as being decent, generous and thoughtful but the nation’s reputation as a global actor currently stands as a mirror image of this. Consequently, this year’s US presidential campaign has been followed more intensely than usual by Asia’s elite, most of whom desperately want to see America turn a corner and re-engage with the world, restoring its reputation and influence under the next administration.
A second reason for keenly following this year’s campaign, and one that has been linked from the start with the first, is the emergence of Barack Obama as a credible and impressive candidate who has the potential to finally break through the colour barrier. Viewed from Asia, and especially from Indonesia where he lived for four years, he appears to be somebody who understands Asia and who is capable of leading America into a new style of engagement with Asia, one that is much less condescending and one-sided.
The third reason for the extra level of interest in this year’s campaign is the recognition that in troubled economic times the leadership of America becomes more important than ever. This factor was in play a year ago but has become extremely important over the last month. If Asia’s middle class had a say Obama was always set to win despite the fact that in some parts of Asia, as with some Asian Americans, a question mark has hung over his ability to lead decisively in security and economic affairs.
These doubts, however, appear to be dissipating even as the economic crisis increasingly overshadows all else. At the same time the enormous goodwill felt towards the first candidate to ‘truly understand Asia’ has in no way diminished. The message from Asia to America remains ‘we like to like you, help us to like you: engage with us as equals and you will have our support’.
Obama may well prove to be America’s best chance to restore its international standing as Asia looks to America for leadership and partnership in troubled times. As a nation tied closely to both Asia and America Australia’s interests are best served by a president who can restore America’s reputation in the region.
*Greg Barton is Herb Feith Research Professor for the Study of Indonesia, in the school of Political and Social Inquiry at Monash University
Nevertheless, on the conspiracy theory front it seems some fine American citizens share similar concerns to Alan about Obama’s background. Is he a Muslim, white-hating, terrorist?
Who knows? But his record on abortion is chilling.
The opinions expressed in this forum belong to the individual posting the message and may not represent the view of the Sydney Diocese of the Anglican Church. Click here to read the Posting Policy.
Everyone is welcome on our forums, but please keep comments on-topic and civil. Any flaming or general nastiness will be deleted. No unsolicited advertising is allowed. All comments, suggestions, bug reports, etc. related to the forums should be directed to Robert Moller. Click here to read our complete Posting Policy.
Sermon two in a series entitled 'Answering Wrong Assumptions' delivered by Simon Manchester at St…
Get the latest Sydney stories, Culture and Indepth on your mobile device. Visit sydang.mobi
