I question the conventional wisdom ... repeated here... that the dems need to attack right from the start, and that they need to use the valuable time in the national spotlight to do so.
Obama is not Kerry (ironically McCain is more similar to Kerry). Most of America already dislikes the Bush presidency, attacking it is not what is needed.
The need is to show that the Obama's are an American success story. I think the first night of the Convention was just what was needed.
I think the Republican convention will be very interesting to watch... since people will naturally compare the two. This story line will go a long way to setting the tone of the election.
I agree too. It was the first night. They played nice and I think that was the smartest way to go. Tonight is Hillary. Let her kick off the attacks. She does it so well.
...and that'd be a direct repudiation of the attack ad McCain has out, too, using her own words. That gives her something to pivot off of, hope she uses it. (And remember when we were saying that's just what she was doing... providing McCain attack-ad fodder? Ah well.)
Well, there will be debates... and Obama could profit from the whole "he's running from debating McCain, he's such a bad debater, he's a complete failure without a script" image that the right has been so busy creating....
It's a shame Obama is such a chicken when it comes to debating McCain.
Obama has agreed to 3 debates.
Since 1976 the most presidential debates in any presidential cycle was 3. About half of the presidential cycles only had 2 debates.
Your statement about Obama being chicken is stupid based on historical fact unless you want to call several GOP Presidents chicken. Reagan only had 2 debates each of the times he ran.
