<p>Are you suggesting that a candidate should be able to go thru an entire campaign w/ no gaffes? Do you really think a gaffe means that the candidate is wrong all the time? (If so, then will someone please tell Obama that there are 50 states, not 57!). </p>
<p>And regarding McCain’s interview w/ Meredith Viera - those were some really really tough questions. And McCain rose to the challenge. You don’t see the media asking Obama stuff like that & you don’t even see Obama answering the softball questions like that. McCain was fine - what more would you expect?</p>
<p>Not in the least. And we should cut these guys some slack when it’s obvious that it’s not so important. Arguably, the interview with Viera involved just a slip of the tongue related to age perhaps; however, McCain did very much misspeak, missed the point of the question, and appeared to evade the point of Viera’s question.</p>
<p>And McCain is becoming a gaffe-a-day, if not gaffe-a-minute, candidate. And something tells me you’ll just keep excusing him. Here’s another example about something he claims to be really smart about. I am wondering when, if ever, your sense of standards – or concern – kick in:</p>
<p>Only one reporter was covering McCain in New Hampshire. Meanwhile three ANCHORS followed Obama overseas. This is the worst case of media bias I’ve ever seen. Even the Daily SHow was spoofing the press and their complete lack of objectivity.
<p>I don’t know that I find Senator McCain’s remarks all that shocking. </p>
<p>Seems about right to me…not the point, but the manner of speaking.
It’s congress speak, of course. </p>
<p>I’ve heard far, far worse in the last week from a gaggle of Senators doing what they do best. The art of the dull, if overwrought, insult.</p>
<p>In any case, I believe few could doubt that as of now Senator Obama is knocking this one out of the park. Not in responding to an attack on his candidacy, but in not responding to this issue at all. </p>
<p>Senator Obama is a superstar politician operating at the top of his game…with a bit of compliance on the part of the press – which is par for the course, if you are a shooting-star doing your first World Tour. </p>
<p>Senator Obama is – Senator McCain is most certainly not.</p>
<p>Unless things change soon, Senator McCain will be little more than that old dog that kept nipping at President Obama’s heels.</p>
<p>I don’t know about other senators. The reason I am so disappointed is precisely because I respected McCain and therefore expected better from him.
I expected a positive campaign, in which he would lay out good reasons for voters to vote for him, not, as you describe him " an old dog that kept nipping at President Obama’s heels" and committing gaffe after gaffe in the process (as in getting the timeline of the Sunni Awakening wrong, or blaming Obama for the rise in gas prices).</p>
<p>Katie Couric interviewed both candidates last night and McCain made the comment that Obama would rather win a campaign than a war. I hadn’t realized he had said it before. I was a little more concerned with his repeating over and over that we had been successful and were coming home in victory - a little too close to “Mission Accomplished.” I’m not sure anyone knows what victory really looks like over there.</p>
<p>Not only is Obama far more presidential in his manner & his actions than McCain, the age issue has been possibly showing, as well. One has to wonder if all these verbal missteps by McCain (inaccuracies, forgetfulness, not being very quick to answer a simple question), raise signs of a mind not agile enough for the job.</p>
<p>As to press favoritism, Obama continues to be the athlete in the race. He’s active, he takes charge, he actually goes somewhere. He actually speaks to political leaders in other countries. That’s a lot more attractive & newsworthy to the press than making speeches to U.S. political groups or reporters. If the roles were reversed, they’d be following McCain.</p>
<p>This is the extent of Obama’s ammo - right now, on this trip.</p>
<p>McCain hasn’t even taken aim yet.</p>
<hr>
<p>The “dog” analogy as you all have described is wishful thinking.
Obama will find a “Junkyard Dog” when/if he ever actually gets in the gate.</p>
<hr>
<p>The “rather win a campaign than win a war” comment is just an offshoot of what McCain was saying last summer when he ** stood up for what was the right thing to do** in Iraq even when it wasn’t popular. Back then McCain was saying that he’d rather “lose a campaign than lose a war”. </p>
<p>McCain is the most selfless individual we have EVER has running for office, esp. POTUS.</p>
<p>(Meanwhile, Obama has shown that he has to be one of the most self-serving! What a disparity!).</p>
<p>As Andrea Mitchell pointed out, access to Obama is so tightly controlled as to make comparison impossible.</p>
<p>This race is tied and has more than three months to go. It is beyond outrageous that the two candidates are being covered so differently. It is also shocking that some voters are fine with a president being annointed. I am thoroughly disgusted.</p>
<p>Epiphany, Senator McCain made a similar trip after he locked-up the nomination and it was not covered. The roles were reversed six weeks ago and the press DID NOT COVER MCCAIN. As evidenced by the fact that you don’t know about the trip.</p>
<p>If the media wanted to rile up the republican base and turn us out and get us to support McCain, they’re on the right track.</p>
<p>We still have a long time to go in this election – and what happens after the elections will be quite important.</p>
<p>But bz2010, I admire your ability to ignore what is plain as day – that McCain’s running a horribly flaccid and scurrilous campaign – and focus entirely on what your wishes for him are (as opposed to reality).</p>
<p>The only reason BO is getting the attention now is because it’s like his first time. (“Let’s watch the baby take his first steps!”). McCain doesn’t have to keep going on trips like that b/c he’s already been doing it for years. Once you’re already running, “baby steps” aren’t that newsworthy.</p>
<p>^^ Bizzy, clearly they are newsworthy. The creation of invincibility is making me very angry. I finally sent the campaign a check this week, though.</p>
<p>Oh brother, yourself, bz. You like to dominate the thread as if you’re some political authority, when you’re not. I’ve probably been around politics a lot longer than you have, judging by your comments. I know what press likes. Yes, of course they like ‘newness,’ but more than that, they like action. Lights, camera, action. As with sports, (and the media considers politics, among other things, a sport) cameras follow the players on the field who are actually moving, not the ones standing around talking to the coaches or scratching their behinds (or fronts, lol).</p>
<p>I’m not saying it’s good or bad they consider it a sport. But they do. And they often talk in sports terminology about politics. If you don’t grab their interest, they’re not going to report much about you.</p>
<p>Are you referring to his March trip? It was covered by the NYT, MSNBC and a lot of other news organizations. I think that was only a two-day trip, but it was definitely all over the news.</p>
<p>“It seems to me that Obama would rather lose a war in order to win a political campaign.”</p>
<p>Why is this controversial? In a campaign, you say anything you can to win. Then you do the right thing when you’re elected. There’s a lot of what Obama says that he’ll do that he simply can’t. Yes we can? Duval Patrick.</p>
<p>Okay, I am finding it frightening that he is being covered as if he IS the president and is speaking for the United States of America over there. Why is this being allowed? (His answers to foreign press questions are being covered on all three cable stations right now.) As someone said above, this has never before happened. Who IS this guy is right!</p>