Obama is an elitist

@Cycloptichorn,

What are you running for, cyclops? I don't think Obama does well, going negative. Go ahead and try it, I hope you do, and you can cry your tears next November, again, for the 3rd time in a row, after you thought it was a lock.

1 Reply

@Lash,

Lash wrote:

....doesn't....know.....how many....HOUSES.....he has.

Outrageous.

Here's another doozy I hadnt come across before this kerfluffle:

Quote:

Cindy McCain was also quoted in Vogue magazine talking about her Coronado condo, also in San Diego.

“When I bought the first one, my husband, who is not a beach person, said, ‘Oh, this is such a waste of money; the kids will never go,’” she told the magazine. “Then it got to the point where they used it so much I couldn’t get in the place. So I bought another one.”

Source: Fox News

Seems like it's the McCains who live in Paris Hilton land, not Obama...

1 Reply

@nimh,

Again, keep attacking, I love it, but you better watch your polling numbers. And I suspect that is the reason for desperation now, to make Obama into an attack dog, not exactly his best element in my opinion, and he is only doing this for one conceivable reason, he knows he is in trouble.

0 Replies

@sozobe,

Sozobe, this is a known tactic, try to turn your own candidate's known weak points, and try to tag your opponent with it instead. Be careful, the tactic is pretty transparent. It is a tactic, nothing more, because we all know who McCain is. To suggest otherwise is nonsense.

3 Replies

@okie,

Yes, but Okie, you don't think Obama does well at anything, so why is this any different?

Yes, we want to run against Mitt. Badly. He's unexciting and is just another old white guy. He might help out some in CO and NV but that's it. We'll clobber him around the same way McCain is getting clobbered around.

You say 'look at the polling.' I have been. McCain has hardly gained any traction in national or state polling. He has been ahead in ONE of the last 30 national polls. Everything he has done has not been able to capture the lead, and this is in a month-long period where McCain went strongly negative, with those silly celebrity ads. So I don't know what it is you want me to look at - the fact that McCain has gotten a little bit closer, but is still losing?

Here's Marc Ambinder today -

Quote:

Maybe Barack Obama should thank John McCain. McCain hands him this beautiful gift of an out-of-touch rich guy statement right when he's about to pivot to the economy, Obama gets to mock it all day long today, he baits McCain into unleashing some of the most negative ads he's likely to put out there, THEN announces his vice presidential friend.

Then he has a four day national commercial in which everyone close to a camera talks about the seven houses gaffe.

THEN gives a (we all presume) barn-burner of a speech presenting his economic plan. One assumes. Barns don't burn as easily as they used to.

I think we can assume that Obama will give a good speech, yes Laughing

McCain shot himself in the foot with this one.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@okie,

Quote:

Sozobe, this is a known tactic, try to turn your own candidate's known weak points, and try to tag your opponent with it instead. Be careful, the tactic is pretty transparent. It is a tactic, nothing more, because we all know who McCain is. To suggest otherwise is nonsense.

Sure, we all know who he is - a fallen hero, who went from being a POW to cheating on and dumping his faithful wife, to marrying a beer heiress, to riding her money to a seat in the government, to getting caught up the Keating 5 scandal in the 80's, to becoming the flip-flopping, go any way the wind blows guy that he is today.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@okie,

Not just a tactic. I'm basing this not just on my own observations but on studies of this stuff. Here's one:

Quote:

But now there's additional evidence that casts doubt on the bias claims aimed -- with particular venom -- at three broadcast networks.

The Center for Media and Public Affairs at George Mason University, where researchers have tracked network news content for two decades, found that ABC, NBC and CBS were tougher on Obama than on Republican John McCain during the first six weeks of the general-election campaign.

You read it right: tougher on the Democrat.

During the evening news, the majority of statements from reporters and anchors on all three networks are neutral, the center found. And when network news people ventured opinions in recent weeks, 28% of the statements were positive for Obama and 72% negative.

Network reporting also tilted against McCain, but far less dramatically, with 43% of the statements positive and 57% negative, according to the Washington-based media center.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-onthemedia27-2008jul27,0,712999.story

1 Reply

@sozobe,

So, is this the direction this campaign is going? It is going to get real nasty, if this is any indication.

Again, I believe the Obama campaign would not be taking this route right now if they didn't believe they had to do something to reverse the trend toward McCain.

Also, I find it curious, and a wrong tactic to not instead run on your own positives going into your own convention in Denver.

1 Reply

@okie,

What do you mean, "this is the direction"?

Do you think the study was conducted by the Obama campaign?

1 Reply

@sozobe,

I'm talking about the tactics of the campaign, sozobe, not some obscure study, which is pretty much a non-issue. The issue here is the tactics of the campaigns.

2 Replies

@okie,

You're all over the place, okie.

You called my own assertion that McCain is getting more of a pass than Obama is a "campaign tactic." I said no, it's based on my own observations and studies I've seen (I provided one, can get more). I've been saying this throughout.

1 Reply

@okie,

You don't have any problems with the tactics of the McCain campaign, Okie?

Isn't the real problem that when it comes to character assasinations McCain really shoots blanks when it comes to having anything of substance to push back with.

0 Replies

@okie,

Quote:

It is a tactic, nothing more, because we all know who McCain is. To suggest otherwise is nonsense.

Sure, we all know that the McCains neatly fall into the category of the super-rich. People who cross the state in private planes, because anything else is too much of a hassle. People who buy a second multi-million dollar condo next to the multi-million dollar condo they bought earlier, because their kids are constantly using that place, and that's just more than anyone can take.

It's just that when they admit, publicly, that they've lost track of how many houses they own, we're all reminded of those well-known facts.

1 Reply

@old europe,

Being successful is so over rated Rolling Eyes

1 Reply

@H2O MAN,

Marrying a beer heiress is successful?

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

Marrying a beer heiress is successful?

Inheritance of any kind does not make one a success, but successfully building on an inheritance is something to take pride in.

2 Replies

@H2O MAN,

McCain is in the beer business?

0 Replies

@H2O MAN,

What has McCain done to successfully build on the inheritance?

Nothing at all.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

I think he and his wife invested in a bunch of homes.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

So whats all the fuss over then? From what I have heard, it is his wife that manages the money, McCain himself is not that motivated by money, and that probably explains why he didn't know how many houses they own, his wife has properties rented out, houses the McCains don't use. What is so unusual about that? And from what I understand, some are rented out to relatives.

In contrast, Obama has a brother living in a hut, making a pittance, somewhere else in the world, and has he even received a dollar from Obama? Obama loves to quote the scripture, as you have done to the least of your brothers......, using it to justify the government taxing the rich to give to the poor, when what about his own brother?

Trying to make an issue of McCain's houses or McCain having money is nonsense, what are we supposed to do, elect a homeless person? Most politicians have money, that comes with the territory, because they are usually successful people and know how to manage money, and if they didn't, nobody would vote for them. Would you rather vote for a loser with no money?

P.S. I would be curious about how many A2Kers are sitting around enjoying life because of inheritances, or are rich? Any volunteers? I had to work for everything I have, which isn't much, but whether McCain is rich or not, I don't frankly care.

1 Reply

Obama is an elitist

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know