You know, if you're going to run for the most important job in the world, perhaps you should come up with new stump speeches and catch phrases every now and then.
They made Sarah Palin repeat her convention speech for weeks after the RNC. John McCain's little catch phrases are so ingrained in him that he occasionally spits them out at random (see the first debate). Every morning I turn on the news and they switch to the latest stump speech going on live from each of the campaigns. Obama usually has a new speech every day, or every 2-3 days. I think that Palin has finally broken free and her speeches are always different... but McCain rarely changes it up. Lame.
If McCain were able to make this election about personal responsibility versus Socialism, he'd win. Too bad that it's kind of hard to call Barack Obama a socialist when you're promoting a crappy Mortgage Bailout plan in every speech.
McCain is out of touch, and it shows. Obama is a crazy socialist, but at least he has a consistent message, no matter how empty it may be.
If (when?) McCain loses this election, he'll deserve it.
There is some logic to the 90%-boilerplate stump speech. Not everyone (more precisely, almost no one) follows politics as avidly as we Internet geeks do. For most of the audience, the stump speech may as well be brand new -- with the added benefit that the speaker's mastery improves with each new delivery.
I suspect McCain's campaign strategy is actually better than conservatives (and other non-socialists) realize. I could be wrong, though... we'll find out in a couple weeks. | |
Gughunter wrote:
I suspect McCain's campaign strategy is actually better than conservatives (and other non-socialists) realize. Just curious, what leads you to suspect this? | |
Our Country is fucked. We get to have either a decrepit old out of touch whore to the Republican party, or a young scarily socialist whore to the Democratic party.
It's bullshit that the system doesn't allow for any other real choices. | |
I agree, both candidates make me not want to vote. One candidates wants to be almost exactly like Bush and the other one thinks he can have a rational conversation with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The same guy who said the holocaust did not happen. Well the 90's was great :)
| |
Bootyboy wrote:
Just curious, what leads you to suspect this? Only a hunch. I could very well be wrong. | |
Gughunter wrote:
Bootyboy wrote: That's kind of a non-answer. The reason why I ask is that most people bring up actual tactics when dissecting a strategy. I'll use the NFL's Dallas Cowboys as an example. They have lost three out of their last four games with _supposedly_ an elite calibre squad and came off a 13-3 record last year. The general thought is that their coach, Wade Phillips, does not have the locker room's ear like former coach Bill Parcells had. Last year, the players were motivated to show that firing Parcells was the right move, hence the good record. But, this year, without that motivation, and now without the discipline, the Cowboys are seriously underachieving. Now, you're comment is like saying: "I suspect that the Cowboys are being coached better than most sports pundits think." This is a fine statement, but requires the thought process to really have some meat attached to it. To just respond with "only a hunch" really evacuates the assumed thought process behind your initial assertion. | |
Gughunter wrote:
I suspect McCain's campaign strategy is actually better than conservatives (and other non-socialists) realize. I could be wrong, though... we'll find out in a couple weeks. Yeah, I think that the race is a lot closer than the polls make it out to be. | |
SilkWizard wrote:
Gughunter wrote: Any reasoning/evidence for saying this, or is it all hope that McCain wins? | |
Techgamer wrote:
Any reasoning/evidence for saying this, or is it all hope that McCain wins? Obama should have a massive lead right now. Massive. The fact that he doesn't speaks to the hesitation that a lot of independents have about him... and I predict that when people get in the booth, they're going to think twice before voting for him. | |
SilkWizard wrote:
Techgamer wrote: Okay, this makes no sense to me... He is winning, but not by enough, so therefore he will lose? | |
Techgamer wrote:
SilkWizard wrote: Or it's that the polls show that he's winning by not enough which is closer than it ought to be? | |
Bootyboy wrote:
Techgamer wrote: Ah, I was thinking he was implying that McCain was ahead, My bad. And with the polls being close, I'd like to remind everyone that both sides are so polarized that they wouldn't vote for Jesus himself if he was for the other party. | |
And with the polls being close, I'd like to remind everyone that both sides are so polarized that they wouldn't vote for Jesus himself if he was for the other party. Jesus is opposed to scientific and technological development, has questionable companions, and his 'faith-based' administration violates the separation of church and state. I'm not voting for him. Of course, Silk won't be voting him because of his socialist tendencies. :P | |
Jp wrote:
And with the polls being close, I'd like to remind everyone that both sides are so polarized that they wouldn't vote for Jesus himself if he was for the other party. Whoa, let's be clear... if Jesus ran as a Republican, then it would be okay for Silk that Jesus was a socialist. ;) | |
Jp wrote:
Of course, Silk won't be voting him because of his socialist tendencies. :P Socialist tendencies? Jesus is the embodiment of socialism! | |
Not MY Jesus.
| |
Jaredoggy wrote:
Not MY Jesus. Yeah, well you've always struck me as an Old Testament kind of guy anyway. You like your God ANGRY. | |
Angry god got things done. Loving god ended up getting killed.
| |
You've hit the nail on the head.
The last bastion of the old GOP is the outcry over socialism -- yet they will nominate RINOs/neo-conservatives without hesitation.
False choice indeed.