Tuesday, February 12, 2008
The McCain Doctrine
Obama gave a good speech tonight, but I have to wonder where the Democrats have been for the last year:
I thought that I mentioned it in this blog at the time, but, alas, I can only find it an email that I sent to a friend last January:
Odd, I had forgotten that it was already shaping up as either Obama or Clinton against McCain way back then. Of course, McCain didn't stay on top the whole time, but it's looking like we'll see a one seed against a two seed.
At any rate, the year's been wasted in that respect. I just hope the Democrats continue to do everything possible to remind voters of McCain's flip-flops and to tie him to Bush. With that in mind, if the Democrats don't put this picture on every piece of campaign literature this Summer and Fall, they deserve to lose. If we don't see as much of that picture as we saw of Dukassis in a tank, I'll compare the Democratic party to a football team that needs to fire both its coaching staff and its front office.
For an example of why Obama's preferable to either Clinton or McCain, just click.
*I'm aware that it's debatable whether Kerry was the anointed candidate before the primaries, the quote is from an email. I try to do a google search are some type of fact check on things that I post, but emails to friends are a little different. I'm also aware that Gary Hart made a serious bid in 1984, but Mondale had the unions and most of the party bigwigs lined up by the end of 1983.
The McCain Doctrine
In a potentially brilliant political move on ABC News' This Week, John Edwards (D) said he opposed a U.S. troop increase in Iraq -- or "surge" -- and referred to the proposal as the "McCain doctrine," after the strategy's biggest proponent, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ). Expect the phrase to be picked up by other 2008 presidential candidates soon.
January 2, 2007
I thought that I mentioned it in this blog at the time, but, alas, I can only find it an email that I sent to a friend last January:
How strongly do you dislike Clinton and Obama? I don't like winners being picked before the primaries, esp if your party doesn't have a sitting Prez or Veep running. I don't know why the machinery of both parties doesn't realize than it hasn't proven very successful. The Dems have picked Mondale and Kerry* that way. The last time the Repubs picked their candidate in advance they had to steal the general election. But I don't have any specific objections to either Clinton or Obama. I vaguely dislike Hillary and don't like being told that somebody has star quality. Right now, any Dem that joined Edwards in calling escalation the McCain Doctrine would go way up in my book. It's too late for it to catch on, but anybody who helped tarnish St. McCain's image, even in a way that gave Edwards credit, would look good to me.
Odd, I had forgotten that it was already shaping up as either Obama or Clinton against McCain way back then. Of course, McCain didn't stay on top the whole time, but it's looking like we'll see a one seed against a two seed.
At any rate, the year's been wasted in that respect. I just hope the Democrats continue to do everything possible to remind voters of McCain's flip-flops and to tie him to Bush. With that in mind, if the Democrats don't put this picture on every piece of campaign literature this Summer and Fall, they deserve to lose. If we don't see as much of that picture as we saw of Dukassis in a tank, I'll compare the Democratic party to a football team that needs to fire both its coaching staff and its front office.
For an example of why Obama's preferable to either Clinton or McCain, just click.
*I'm aware that it's debatable whether Kerry was the anointed candidate before the primaries, the quote is from an email. I try to do a google search are some type of fact check on things that I post, but emails to friends are a little different. I'm also aware that Gary Hart made a serious bid in 1984, but Mondale had the unions and most of the party bigwigs lined up by the end of 1983.
Labels: Barack Obama, John Edwards, John McCain
