What hurt McCain?

[Patch'sD]

It's Quite Simple, It's the Ecconomy Stupid

 

[allison443]

I am a republican, but after this election I will become an independent. If the Republicans do not get off the Roe vs. Wade and anti-gay (fear and hate) they will become a dying breed. The world is changing, the old are dying, the younger and new voters are more tolerant and accepting. As a fiscally conservative party, it has become as spendthrifty as the Dems. The Republican party must reevalute themselves and make a change from within. The constitution states separation of church and state for a reason. Our forefathers came here for religious freedom. They realized that the government did not belong in religion and religion did not belong in the government.

I agree with what you wrote here....the GOP turned off most moderates I know by focusing on the issues you mentioned. The party is perceived by many as catering to "the religious right".

 

[Galahad]

and was inherited, not caused by Obama.

Doesn't matter - it's his now. Reagan inherited a huge economic problem, but when the recession stretched beyond the first few months, it was Reagan's recession, not Carters. Clinton inherited a recovering economy. He just had to sit back and let it recover and it became "his". Bush 43 did things about the war on terror that I'm sure were in response to things that were or were not done by previous administrations - things he inherited. But it didn't matter at that point - the problem was his now. Obama will get a long honeymoon, I'm thinking. But it doesn't absolve him. He got elected telling us he could fix things.

 

[LuvOrlando]

I think that the party platform needs to be reformulated. I think that making Religion such a central part of the platform is a huge problem. This country is no longer the demographic it once was so the strategy now alienates more people than it once aligned... the platform even makes many religious people uncomfortable because it smacks of intolerance and that goes against the grain for many people.

I think that Palin's was a huge asset and that without her the loss would have been more like a hemorrhage where instead of losing voters for an election they would have lost voters for good.

I also think McCain never made it plain what he was offering us. His slogan never quite took shape. All I remember was the mention of doing to this countries health care system what the Politician's did to our retirement system.... and that I couldn't have been more against. The only reason any of us get decent health coverage is because big companies have leverage and negotiate good contracts. Without them shaping the industry we'd all be left to the wolves.

At least that's my 2 cents, take it for what its worth.

 

[allison443]

I think that the party platform needs to be reformulated. I think that making Religion such a central part of the platform is a huge problem. This country is no longer the demographic it once was so the strategy now alienates more people than it once aligned... the platform even makes many religious people uncomfortable because it smacks of intolerance and that goes against the grain for many people.

I agree with what you stated here...I just don't know why the party doesn't wake up and realize that...

 

[DawnCt1]

I think he was too, BUT.

I don't think it's deniable that McCain had to run against Obama AND virtually the entirety of the press. But the press exalted and fawned over other Presidents to our benefit. It may not alway be a bad thing in the long run. FDR is a perfect example. He was a successful President whose Presidency was an undeniable benefit the the nation. But he served with a relatively sycophant press corps in place. I think President Obama will have a similarly long honeymoon period - perhaps the whole of his first term. I'm not convinced this morning that is an altogether bad thing. I'm not in favor of much, if not most, of what he proposes. But I'm not interested in a failed presidency.

FDR was a successful president because WWII ended the depression and probably not his economic policies. I also think that the press was on the "right side" of WWII, which kept the country focused, and that was necessary. I don't think that the honeymoon for Obama will continue for more than six months. With newspaper sales at an all time low, with the MSM having their journalistic integrity, if it ever existed, questioned; they will start to wonder who Barack Obama is, or share what they already know. I am not sure what a "failed presidency" is. To me, national security at home and abroad are the primary responsibilities of the president. Gridlock is good for the economy and generally good for Americans. I think that the counry would survive quite nicely if we could go for at least a year with no new laws, tax increases or entitlements passed. We might get to like it!

 

[Geoff_M]

Palin was a net positive for McCain for about two weeks.....but then the veil was lifted. After that point, the conservatives put their protective hooks in her and rallied like crazy behind her. Everyone else got a little more horrified by her with each passing day.

If you wish to stick with your preconceived bias, that's fine. But not "everyone else", outside of conservatives were "horrified" by Palin. As others have commented, exit polls showed that Palin as a net positive. Palin didn't cost McCain the election, it was perceptions about the economy. Do you seriously think the outcome would have been different for McCain if he had picked Romney or Ridge?

 

[Geoff_M]

Doesn't matter - it's his now. Reagan inherited a huge economic problem, but when the recession stretched beyond the first few months, it was Reagan's recession, not Carters. Clinton inherited a recovering economy. He just had to sit back and let it recover and it became "his". Bush 43 did things about the war on terror that I'm sure were in response to things that were or were not done by previous administrations - things he inherited. But it didn't matter at that point - the problem was his now. Obama will get a long honeymoon, I'm thinking. But it doesn't absolve him. He got elected telling us he could fix things.

You are correct. People are forgetting that voters have an extremely short memory.

 

[Becky2005]

I think this election was bigger than anything any Republican candidate could have overcome. Too many factors played against the incumbent party retaining control of the Presidency.

That's what I think...I think it wouldn't have mattered who they chose, they were going to lose. People are unhappy so they were going to put a different party in the White House. That's how it usually works, if things are going good, the same party usually retains the White House, if things are going bad, it gets switched. It would have been interesting if it it ended up being a 3rd party instead of the main 2 but that is highly unlikely to happen for an extremely long time.

 

[jodifla]

It's hard to win when you abandon your core principals, which McCain did.

He was an absolute mess once he got nominated: from the LOUSY choice of Sarah Palin, who followed a predictable arc in popularity for someone so unknown, to the debates, where he smirked and was condescending to "that one" to his careening response to the economic crisis to his endless bogus attacks on Obama without having a plan to sell the American people.

He looked old and unstable.

 

[Galahad]

, where he smirked and was condescending to "that one"

To be fair - Obama has him hands down in the smirking and condescension categories.

 

[whjoyjr]

I think another big factor in McCain's loss was the "cult of personality" and "celebrity" that Obama was able to generate. I have met a lot of Obama supporters who couldn't tell me one thing about their candidate, only that he would "Bring Change". They couldn't say what that "change" was, only that he would provide it. Of course I am making the distinction between them and those who engage in message board discussions and participate in debates.

The Rupublican's complaints about celebrity ended with how they packaged and promoted Palin. All the talk about how many people she had at her rallies, etc. It left me with the perception that the Republicans were hypocrites...

 

[whjoyjr]

To be fair - Obama has him hands down in the smirking and condescension categories.

McCain's statement "congratulating" Obama for securing the nomination was absolutly dripping with sarcasm. I was driving home that night listening to talk radio when the statement aired.

 

[Geoff_M]

It's hard to win when you abandon your core principals, which McCain did.

Obama was hardly "rock solid" on the issues either as he transformed himself from the most Liberal Senator into a "bi-partisan centrist" right before our eyes. Gun control, foreign policy, energy policy, etc. It clearly worked for him.

 

[Nancyg56]

I think John McCain would have been very good with the veto pen and pork barrel spending. I think as a compromise, we may have seen tax increases as well. I would be very comfortable with him on national security issues. On military issues, which for me are primary issues. Without security, the economy is meaningless. I think Sarkozy is correct when he describes Obama as naive. I think that our enemies will see him as weak. If he surrounds himself with the far left, we will be left extremely vulnerable. Obama had to move towards the center to become elected. I think he will govern towards the left.

I agree that John McCain would be good on security but I think that anyone who describes Obama as naive or weak is dead wrong. I believe he will surround himself with men and women who are extremely knowledgeable and will not isolate himself with only those who agree with him. I also believe that in the event we are tested he will not respond by turning the other cheek.

I am a republican, but after this election I will become an independent. If the Republicans do not get off the Roe vs. Wade and anti-gay (fear and hate) they will become a dying breed. The world is changing, the old are dying, the younger and new voters are more tolerant and accepting. As a fiscally conservative party, it has become as spendthrifty as the Dems. The Republican party must reevalute themselves and make a change from within. The constitution states separation of church and state for a reason. Our forefathers came here for religious freedom. They realized that the government did not belong in religion and religion did not belong in the government.

I sincerely hope Obama makes this country better. If he makes the decision to stay moderate, he may very well help us out of this financial mess. If he goes to the left, the country will be in a deep recession.

I totally agree with you. I was a registered Republican until after the 2004 election when I changed my party affiliation to Democrat. I am very conservative but am appalled at the direction the Republican party has taken since then. I can only hope that religion and the cultural views of some do not continue to be a part of our politics. Not all Americans share the same view of cultural issues, they should not be stripped of their civil liberties becasue of that.

 

[Geoff_M]

I agree that John McCain would be good on security but I think that anyone who describes Obama as naive or weak is dead wrong. I believe he will surround himself with men and women who are extremely knowledgeable and will not isolate himself with only those who agree with him. I also believe that in the event we are tested he will not respond by turning the other cheek.

Well, let's hope his response to Russian invasion of Georgia was an aberration. But if I were a Ukrainian at this point, I'd be brushing up on my Russian.

Obama seems to me to suffer from the same sort of self-assurance (some call it "arrogance") that Bush's critics cite as being the source of his political down-fall. He seems to think that he knows what's best. Time will tell, I suppose.

 

[Galahad]

McCain's statement "congratulating" Obama for securing the nomination was absolutly dripping with sarcasm. I was driving home that night listening to talk radio when the statement aired.

Guess people hear what they want to hear. I didn't get any sarcasm from that and most Democrats on these boards seem to think it was well done and showed class.

 

[WildernessBride]

What hurt McCain??

a. "The fundamentals of this economy are sound."

b. "I can see Alaska from my house."

c. America wanted change, just not the kind McCain and Palin wanted.

d. America did not respond to his negativity and Pailn's attack dog attitude.


What a great day......I am so happy support our new President!!!!!!!

President Obama..............that sounds beautiful!!!!

 

[jodifla]

Obama was hardly "rock solid" on the issues either as he transformed himself from the most Liberal Senator into a "bi-partisan centrist" right before our eyes. Gun control, foreign policy, energy policy, etc. It clearly worked for him.

I see your point. But if you are going to shift, it makes sense to shift TOWARD the public, not run to the extreme right.

Hillary was my candidate, and I was a bit sad last night that it wasn't her up there. But Obama ran the smarter campaign from the get-go.

I think the debates were the clincher for him. He simply was totally unflappable....that's what made the difference.

 

[Geoff_M]

What hurt McCain??

a. "The fundamentals of this economy are sound."

b. "I can see Alaska from my house."

c. America wanted change, just not the kind McCain and Palin wanted.

d. America did not respond to his negativity and Pailn's attack dog attitude.


What a great day......I am so happy support our new President!!!!!!!

President Obama..............that sounds beautiful!!!!

a. Ironically, it didn't seem to hurt Obama when he said the same thing...

b. Gaffe-o-matic, no one seemed to notice when Biden was being kept from the press.

c. Fair enough

d. But America did respond to the negativity and fear spread from the Obama camp and their proxy agents. One of McCain's mistakes was to try and not directly attack Obama while allowing him to do so repeatedly in return.