Obama's New Vulnerability

Obama will beat him handily, having massively out-raised and out-organized him.

Quote:

Obama will beat him handily, having massively out-raised and out-organized him.

And if, by some chance, McCain does win?
What will you do then?

Will you accept that, or will you immediately start with the conspiracy theories that you had after 2000 and 2004?

More on McCain's UNimpressive campaign so far, with a lot of links/cites:

http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2008/02/the-great-untes.html

Excerpt:

Quote:

At first glance, you might think McCain's primary victory is evidence of his own campaigning skills. But I don't think so. His victory (for unique reasons) doesn't necessarily show his Darwinian chops. Despite all his experience, McCain remains in many ways a roll of the dice.

Consider 2000. While he had some initial success due to fawning press coverage (which is probably his key "skill"), the ultimate result was a spectacular flameout in South Carolina and beyond. The South Carolina tactics were despicable, sure. But Republican primaries aren't pretty. He knew the players involved and should have been better prepared. More to the point, you can't win a Republican nomination when you ostentatiously demonize key coalition members, as he did. Personally, I applauded the criticism of Jerry Falwell, but I'd have been cringing if I were his campaign manager.

Moving on to 2008, the stars aligned perfectly for him. Ross Douthat has made the case more eloquently than I have, but McCain's victory had a lot to do with luck. First, his rapid ascent helped him avoid embarrassing media moments. Remember that, for most of 2007, McCain was ignored. Thus, he wasn't subject to the type of exacting scrutiny that Romney and Rudy (and, to a lesser extent, Fred Thompson got). He had to keep things together for a month rather than a year - a much easier task.

Second, his victory was less than overwhelming. McCain won a relatively small plurality among a sharply divided field. His victory had less to do with his savvy campaigning, and more to do with (1) a conservative base split between Romney and Huckabee; (2) Rudy's rapid collapse and strategic blunders; and (3) Thompson's silly last stand in South Carolina.

Nope, I was wrong in my belief that the GOP would hold on to the Senate. Hell, I've been wrong three or four times already this morning according to Natalie. You also seem to have the impression that I'm arguing with you, or debating some issue. Wrong. Neither of us is likely to be much persuaded by anything the other asserts. You doubtless have reams of political commentary written in support of your candidate, and there is an equal amount probably available to counter those opinions by the GOP. The bottom line is that both begin with an opinion, and then supporting "facts" are dredged up to support the opinion. During the heat of an American political campaign more BS is shoveled in a year than all the cattle in the world have produced in the last 25. Instead of that, or latching onto a candidate just because he/she say they support some issue of interest to me, I try to look for more objective clues to their character, their toughness and ability to work effectively in stressful circumstances. I'm interested in candidates whose political philosophy is "as nearly as possible congruent with that of the Great Federalists, Washington, Hamilton, Adams, Madison, Jay, etc. I'm turned off by candidates who may hold greater loyalty to Party, or some idea, than to the Nation and its Constitution.

For all I know, Obama will win handily. If he does, then I sincerely hope my misgivings about him and his incompetence to lead the greatest nation in the world is also wrong. If President Obama can crush utterly the terrorists who operate under the guise of Radical Islam, that would make me very happy. If he can reduce the National Debt while increasing the standards of living for all Americans, I'll be the first to applaud. If Obama comes into Office and conflicts around the world are replaced with a thousand years of peace and prosperity with religious and racial harmony the order of the day, I'll be in the "Amen Corner". The problem is I don't think any of that is more than a three-pipe opium dream.

Salt away! I'm a big fan of taking things with grains (or shakers) of salt.

The opinions in the blog I link to contain links to various news sources, though. (Washington Post X 3 plus other bloggers with their own sources.) If you want to actually dispute any claims made, have at it.

McCain's attempts to build up his campaign coffers before a general election contest appeared to be threatened by the stern warning yesterday from Federal Election Commission Chairman David M. Mason, a Republican. Mason notified McCain that the commission had not granted his Feb. 6 request to withdraw from the presidential public financing system.

The implications of that could be dramatic. Last year, when McCain's campaign was starved for cash, he applied to join the financing system to gain access to millions of dollars in federal matching money. He was also permitted to use his FEC certification to bypass the time-consuming process of gathering signatures to get his name on the ballot in several states, including Ohio.

By signing up for matching money, McCain agreed to adhere to strict state-by-state spending limits and an overall limit on spending of $54 million for the primary season, which lasts until the party's nominating convention in September. The general election has a separate public financing arrangement.

But after McCain won a series of early contests and the campaign found its financial footing, his lawyer wrote to the FEC requesting to back out of the program -- which is permitted for candidates who have not yet received any federal money and who have not used the promise of federal funding as collateral for borrowing money.

[...]

If the FEC refuses McCain's request to leave the system, his campaign could be bound by a potentially debilitating spending limit until he formally accepts his party's nomination. His campaign has already spent $49 million, federal reports show. Knowingly violating the spending limit is a criminal offense that could put McCain at risk of stiff fines and up to five years in prison.

"If in fact he is stuck with these spending limits, it would be a serious limitation on what he can do," said Rick Hasen, an election law expert at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles.

Does USA Today make you want to shower, too? If so, I can find another source... just let me know what's OK. ;-)

And while Duke Cunningham was a scum of a politician, and perhaps of a human being (it's really not for me to judge that), in fairness:

[...] He was one of the most highly decorated United States Navy pilots in the Vietnam War, receiving the Navy Cross once, the Silver Star twice, the Air Medal 15 times, and the Purple Heart for wounds he received under enemy fire.

Not really. Doesn't seem to be what was actually said, either. I searched for "scum," and found:

Quote:

And while Duke Cunningham was a scum of a politician, and perhaps of a human being (it's really not for me to judge that), in fairness:

[...] He was one of the most highly decorated United States Navy pilots in the Vietnam War, receiving the Navy Cross once, the Silver Star twice, the Air Medal 15 times, and the Purple Heart for wounds he received under enemy fire.

Note the formulation. While he was a scum of politician, he wasn't all bad -- he was a highly decorated veteran.

As in, being a highly decorated veteran is good.

Were you referring to something else?

Sozobe,

The manner in which each of the candidates have managed their campaigns, is a good indicator that we need to be aware of. On that basis alone, you conclude that Obama is a better manager than McCain. I disagree. The McCain campaign has had problems. Early on spending was out-stripping the funding, and his appearances weren't working very well. He had gotten off message, and it looked like curtains. The smart thing probably at the time would have been to throw in the towel and leave it to Romney and Guiliani to fight it out. McCain is too tough for that. He fired staff, canceled expensive transportation and began to select his appearances more carefully. Even more importantly, he returned to the straight forward expression of what he believes in rather than what the pundits thought would sell. It's been an uphill battle against tough opponents, but the McCain Comeback is going to be remembered for years for its success against overwhelming odds. That's facing adversity, making hard decisions and going back into battle renewed. The GOP Primary Campaign has demonstrated McCain's chief asset... his toughness and dedication to prevail against any odds.

However, I think your criteria is too narrow.

What do we know about Obama?

He has a very modest legislative record, but he will go along with senior Party leadership. He has been careful not to offend the big Democratic Party chieftains, by opposing any of their interests.

He uses his youth and charisma to attract young educated people with high ideals, but little understanding of the world's realities.

He raises a whole lot of money, because everyone wants on the bandwagon while he is riding high.

His positions are all carefully framed and can mean almost anything to anyone.

At the moment, he reflects the hopes and ideals of people, and like most people he hasn't a clue about what is involved in running the Executive Branch of the Federal government.

If Obama had more of a record, if he ever faced grave adversity and overcame it,

if he had any experience directing government,

However, Obama has almost no record comparable with what we normally expect in Presidential candidates, so he must either impress us all with how great his insights and policies are for dealing with complex domestic and international issues, or he has to bet everything on his media image and its ability to generate emotional commitments.