<p>Looking at his recent speeches, Obama seems to have a new strategy: bash George Bush, tie McCain to George Bush, then talk about “hope” some more</p>
<p>um…i know most of you love Obama…but lets be real… all this “Bush-McCain” rhetoric isn’t exactly the new kind of politics you have been promised. </p>
<p>Obama is doing what politicians (both Republican and Democrat) usually do: create fear by equating their opponent with something bad. </p>
<p>I think this “third Bush term” catch phrase, intellectually, is such a cheap shot. “Slash and burn” politics as Obama would say. </p>
<p>McCain is his own person with his own ideas and voting record.
He has plenty of controversial positions to attack (some of which are in alignment with George Bush, some of which are not)
What is so hard for Obama to say “John McCain wants to do A,B,C. I disagree, I want to do X,Y,Z and this is why my ideas make more sense”? </p>
<p>Does anybody understand where I’m coming from?</p>
<p>Of course. Obama is a politician like all politicians. And he’s a politician who found a winning message in a primary during which he couldn’t use slash-and-burn negativity against his opponents well (because they’re in his own party). Now that he’s running a general election campaign, slash-and-burn is much, much more effective and so he is of course utilizing it.</p>
<p>In reality, the most radical candidate is McCain. His independent stances have at times alienated him with his own party and he willingly works across ideological lines. He doesn’t seem to care what party it is as long as the results are positive for the United States. </p>
<p>Obama is proving himself to be just another liberal - ever consider his voting record? Hillary is more conservative than Obama. Obama almost never crosses party lines.</p>
<p>I considered supporting Obama initially (I’m a Republican and somewhat conservative). The Rev. Wright issue concerned me greatly and I’m afraid he (Obama) never successfully dealt with the issue. It’s hard to dump your pastor and his words after 20 years of regular and close contact. I have to assume Obama, especially after his wife’s remarks, believes at least part of what Wright says.</p>
<p>p2n, even as someone who’s not a particularly big fan of Obama’s I am mystified when people still purport that he believes Wrights drivel. He has never shown even the beginnings of believing what Wright said apart from not jettisoning him fast enough for some people’s tastes - which was a political move aimed at his black supporters, I think. It’s quite a stretch to say that he believes his pastor.</p>
<p>Of course Obama is going to compare McCain to Bush. After eight years of the most inept leadership in US history. He would be a fool not to paint McCain as another eight more years of the same. If I were him I would run ad’s every fifteen minutes of McCain hugging and praising Bush.</p>
<p>If McCain supports Bush on the war in Iraq, taxes, health policy, ie the big issues, why not make the connection. It would be stupid not to. And why would this be considered negative campaigning? Don’t most Repubs agree with both of them on these things. I would think they would look kindly on such a Bush-McCain connection.</p>
<p>Or are you secretly dissatisfied with Pres Bush and happy to see him go like most Americans.</p>
<p>McCain does agree that we can’t leave until the job is finished, but lets look back only 2 yrs ago…McCain was screaming from the top of his lungs to anyone who would listen that Rummy had to go! McCain started demanding a surge way b4 Bush did it, and the surge has worked violence is down 70% from a yr ago. </p>
<p>That is the thing about McCain and why he is knwon as a Maverick he will go against his own party when he believes they are wrong. He is willing to be the outsider if he believes that his constituency demands different answers. He is a Senator, not just his own person, he understands that he is to represent his state, and that his own beliefs must take a 2nd seat to what is best for his voters. I would rather have someone who says we need to control spending and go against his party (that was the reason he voted against the tax cuts, there was no provision that the govt would curb spending) than someone who says I will spend more money and raise your taxes</p>
<p>I lived in Chicago, Obama’s hometown. I have many friends and neighbors who is/was active in his campaign. Imho he is a politician with a “new brand”. I didn’t think he behaved any differently as a politician when he was a local politician. His wife got a terrific raise (six figures if I remember right) that commensurate with his rise in stature, from a non-profit no less. The non-profit justified it by saying she is well connected and expected to bring much more to the table. </p>
<p>The Obamas got some kind of sweetheart deal from Rezko for their backyard, some extra footage. </p>
<p>I don’t think these kind of stuff are illegal or even unsavory. To me he just another politician who is not above taking advantage of his position, but because of his short track record, nothing much for his opponents to go against yet. I mean the younger the person and shorter the resume, the less to criticize, because the young person simply hasn’t done much. </p>
<p>As for Wright, I am not a regular church goer so I asked my church going friends about how much a pastor influence their thinking. They said a lot, esp. for an association of 20 years. I know if I attend a church and if I don’t like the pastor I won’t go there again. So I think Wright does have influence on Obama. I don’t know if Wright preaches the kind of beliefs in church he exhibited on national TV though. In his defense, Obama said Wright was not the man he knew.</p>
<p>You may recall that Bush ran against Clinton, not Gore. It’s a pretty effective tactic, and Obama would be nuts not to use it. In fact, all the Republicans in the House and Senate and governorships running for reelection will find a ghostly W standing beside them during their elections. I predict that there will be a tsunami of Republican losses.</p>
<p>I understand where you’re coming from. What I don’t understand is why Repubs ever thought that those of use who support Obama ever expected him to be some kind of doe-eyed, naive babe in the woods kind of guy. We get that he’s a politician. What we like is intelligence, different world view and various other attributes.</p>
<p>I’m not at all surprised by his tactic to tie McCain to Bush. It works. Why wouldn’t he go with what works? This is not mudslinging.</p>
<p>Geez that is an easy answer…the media has made him into this guy who won’t play the game, he has also had run on the platform…remember at first he wouldn’t throw Wright under the bus b/c he didn’t play those political games, but eventually he did which now took the shine off of him</p>
<p>Well, he didn’t throw Wright under the bus until Wright essentially forced him to do so. I thought Obama was a pretty stand-up guy during that whole episode. Like youdon’tsay, I expect both Obama and McCain to play the game, but I have some hope that both of them will play it a little cleaner than some of their predecessors.</p>
<p>There’s playing the game, and there’s getting down in the mud. I never thought he wouldn’t play the game, regardless of what the media say. The “media” paint simplistic story arcs. I guess some people could have read/heard these stories and expected him to never throw a punch, but c’mon. Now who’s naive?</p>
<p>Now I don’t expect for him to engage in Rovian tactics, but I certainly expect him to punch back. He’s not a political pacifist.</p>
<p>Like Hunt, I hope McCain will run a cleaner campaign as well. But they’ll each have their surrogates get dirty. I just hope it’s not as bad as it has been the past eight years, where a dissenting opinion means you’re evil/unpatriotic/atheist (gasp!)/against the troops, etc.</p>
Michelle Obama is a Harvard Law School grad and works for U of Chicago Hospitals as a vice-president, making about $275K/yr, which is about average for her job. Most lawyers make more than that 20 years out of Harvard Law school. I think it’s demeaning and sexist to suggest that her career is driven by her husband’s political success.</p>