McCain Incompetence
If the first major judgement call a Presidential candidate makes is the Vice Presidential pick, then John McCain’s judgement needs to be seriously questioned.
In Alaska, several state leaders and local officials said they knew of no efforts by the McCain campaign to find out more information about Ms. Palin before the announcement of her selection, Although campaigns are typically discreet when they make inquiries into potential running mates, officials in Alaska said Monday they thought it was peculiar that no one in the state had the slightest hint that Ms. Palin might be under consideration.
As I surmised earlier, the Republican Party Machine is so right wing that McCain’s real choices for VP, Lieberman or Ridge, were nixed in the last five days. Only then did they start vetting Palin.
But both men favor abortion rights, anathema to the Christian conservatives who make up a crucial base of the Republican Party. As word leaked out that Mr. McCain was seriously considering the men, the campaign was bombarded by outrage from influential conservatives who predicted an explosive floor fight at the convention and vowed rejection of Mr. Ridge or Mr. Lieberman by the delegates.
Read the whole Times article. The Rove Swat Team is mindblowingly incompetent. That they screwed up the country so badly for eight years and still at the end, McCain put them in charge of his campaign, reveals a very weak man, who should not be President.
Morgan,
Congratulations on your record media consumption — anyone have the number for Guinness?
how is acknowledging the dichotomy in the voting block problematic for you? It’s always important to understand where the other side/s is/are coming from.
“And, quite frankly, it is seriously unattractive in your psyche, for you to imagine some “other” large group of stupid people who just happen to not think like you do.”
And I was so hoping for that marriage proposal, Morgan; I’m crushed. low information does not necessarily equate stupid — that’s your interpretation. Low information means lack of comprehensive information — it’s not a judgement about what people do with the information when they get it. I think people need more information — whether or not they’d switch allegiances is another issue entirely.
“low information voters” aren’t a figment of the imagination. You may want to turn off your TV and visit Google — lots of bloggers and papers and news shows talking about that segment of the voting public.
Recent WaPost article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/23/AR2008072303693.html
“The American Voter Revisited” is chock-full of depressing conclusions, couched in academic understatement. In-depth interviews conducted with 1,500 people during the two most recent presidential elections revealed that the “majority of people don’t have many issues in mind” when they discuss voting, Lewis-Beck says. Sometimes they say they’re attracted to a candidate because “I just don’t think we should change parties right now.” They tend to inherit their party allegiance from their parents, and those beliefs tend to stay fixed throughout their lives, he says.
“For many people,” the authors of “Revisited” write, “dealing with political issues is too much of a bother.”
…
Even for those voters who do rethink their allegiance to a given party — because, say, the party in power has fouled things up — “if times get better, they’ll get back to where they were,” Weisberg says. Their attachment to party is more emotional than intellectual, Lewis-Beck suggests, akin to their feelings for sports teams.
…
And how do they gather what they know? Popkin, whose own studies suggest that Americans’ awareness of issues has been growing for decades, argues that voters use shortcuts to make judgments about the candidates, relying on things like endorsements, the advice of friends, and the candidate’s party.
****
Also, Morgan — Republican surrogates are having a hard time justifying the pick; honestly, people voting for McCain in the general public are more articulate about why they like Palin that the official party representation. Says something about toeing the line
Morgan, part 2,
please stop trying to guess what’s going on in my brain. . . you’re doing a really crappy job of it.
Morgan, part 2,
please stop trying to guess what’s going on in my brain. . . you’re doing a really crappy job of it.
Morgan, part 2,
please stop trying to guess what’s going on in my brain. . . you’re doing a really crappy job of it.
zak,
You’re right that there are a lot of “low information” voters. But you seem to imply that McCain is more popular than Obama amongst this group, inferring that many McCain supporters are ignorant. What’s the basis for this assumption?
zak,
You’re right that there are a lot of “low information” voters. But you seem to imply that McCain is more popular than Obama amongst this group, inferring that many McCain supporters are ignorant. What’s the basis for this assumption?
zak,
You’re right that there are a lot of “low information” voters. But you seem to imply that McCain is more popular than Obama amongst this group, inferring that many McCain supporters are ignorant. What’s the basis for this assumption?
Zak- Welcome to the Morgan Mindreading Club. He’s been telling me for months what’s going on in my head.
Zak- Welcome to the Morgan Mindreading Club. He’s been telling me for months what’s going on in my head.
Zak- Welcome to the Morgan Mindreading Club. He’s been telling me for months what’s going on in my head.
Bob Herbert apparently shares the views of many of us: the issues are more important than the choice of VP. As Herbert says, she’s a distraction:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/02/opinion/02herbert.html
Bob Herbert apparently shares the views of many of us: the issues are more important than the choice of VP. As Herbert says, she’s a distraction:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/02/opinion/02herbert.html
Bob Herbert apparently shares the views of many of us: the issues are more important than the choice of VP. As Herbert says, she’s a distraction:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/02/opinion/02herbert.html
Zak, Seattle steve noticed the exact flaw in your “logic” – you should have too. Why didn’t you? From where I sit, Obama’s voters are the “low information” voters. Finding an Obama supporters who don’t know anything about him is as simple as asking any two Obama supporters.
Finally, it isn’t that the phrase doesn’t exist (and that doesn’t mean there is such a thing, even amongst Obamatards – I don’t think they are low information.) The issue is that YOU, Zak, can’t apply the term in discourse. Those of us who know more than you, find you to be rather ignorant. Tongue in cheek there, but you take my point?
I’m afraid not, because you skipped the issue I raised. Zak could have said, “maybe we’re not actually listening to the complaints people have about our candidate, and giving up ground on issues less-than-important, that will prove to a bunch of them, we can be trusted.” That’s not what Zak said, huh? You don’t see changes in your policies as an option, some of your policies are great, but some will get hung around your neck like an anvil. That’s not compromise to find a majority. You did make such an assumption, that handing out more info would sway people, you did… go read it. My point is that the people aren’t stupid, you want to win more of them? Change your policies.
I say this because, IF Obama doesn’t win, I just want to make sure you are positive that every single one of the issues he stands for… that you have to have all of them, and will take none instead.
The Repubs are about to make the clarion call, “Obama sides with party over country” – and if Obama came out and said, “surprise,” and killed off some sacred cows. Repubs FAIL.
Zak, Seattle steve noticed the exact flaw in your “logic” – you should have too. Why didn’t you? From where I sit, Obama’s voters are the “low information” voters. Finding an Obama supporters who don’t know anything about him is as simple as asking any two Obama supporters.
Finally, it isn’t that the phrase doesn’t exist (and that doesn’t mean there is such a thing, even amongst Obamatards – I don’t think they are low information.) The issue is that YOU, Zak, can’t apply the term in discourse. Those of us who know more than you, find you to be rather ignorant. Tongue in cheek there, but you take my point?
I’m afraid not, because you skipped the issue I raised. Zak could have said, “maybe we’re not actually listening to the complaints people have about our candidate, and giving up ground on issues less-than-important, that will prove to a bunch of them, we can be trusted.” That’s not what Zak said, huh? You don’t see changes in your policies as an option, some of your policies are great, but some will get hung around your neck like an anvil. That’s not compromise to find a majority. You did make such an assumption, that handing out more info would sway people, you did… go read it. My point is that the people aren’t stupid, you want to win more of them? Change your policies.
I say this because, IF Obama doesn’t win, I just want to make sure you are positive that every single one of the issues he stands for… that you have to have all of them, and will take none instead.
The Repubs are about to make the clarion call, “Obama sides with party over country” – and if Obama came out and said, “surprise,” and killed off some sacred cows. Repubs FAIL.
Zak, Seattle steve noticed the exact flaw in your “logic” – you should have too. Why didn’t you? From where I sit, Obama’s voters are the “low information” voters. Finding an Obama supporters who don’t know anything about him is as simple as asking any two Obama supporters.
Finally, it isn’t that the phrase doesn’t exist (and that doesn’t mean there is such a thing, even amongst Obamatards – I don’t think they are low information.) The issue is that YOU, Zak, can’t apply the term in discourse. Those of us who know more than you, find you to be rather ignorant. Tongue in cheek there, but you take my point?
I’m afraid not, because you skipped the issue I raised. Zak could have said, “maybe we’re not actually listening to the complaints people have about our candidate, and giving up ground on issues less-than-important, that will prove to a bunch of them, we can be trusted.” That’s not what Zak said, huh? You don’t see changes in your policies as an option, some of your policies are great, but some will get hung around your neck like an anvil. That’s not compromise to find a majority. You did make such an assumption, that handing out more info would sway people, you did… go read it. My point is that the people aren’t stupid, you want to win more of them? Change your policies.
I say this because, IF Obama doesn’t win, I just want to make sure you are positive that every single one of the issues he stands for… that you have to have all of them, and will take none instead.
The Repubs are about to make the clarion call, “Obama sides with party over country” – and if Obama came out and said, “surprise,” and killed off some sacred cows. Repubs FAIL.
lol, this s great:
http://www.ffholic.com/ShowVideo.aspx?f=ebc97c1c-173f-883c-57e9-50d267cc9019
lol, this s great:
http://www.ffholic.com/ShowVideo.aspx?f=ebc97c1c-173f-883c-57e9-50d267cc9019
lol, this s great:
http://www.ffholic.com/ShowVideo.aspx?f=ebc97c1c-173f-883c-57e9-50d267cc9019
Steve,
I’m mis crossing low information w/blue collar voters. Which contrary to the conclusions Morgan will immediately jump to, does not mean I think blue collar workers are stupid.
There are our low info voters
http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=6985
Here are our walmart shoppers
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ron-galloway/sarah-palin—devil-with_b_122741.html
Morgan,
I didn’t realize you were representing the peanut gallery at large. Can you provide a list of name of commenters that your have given 2 thumbs up to represent? Just so I know for my reference exactly who belittles my intelligence. Thanks, much!
I said we should look to see why people are supporting McCain. From my statement that include reasons they don’t like Obama as well as policy initiatives they like from McCain. Can’t really brainstorm solutions without a list of complaints/reasons to gush can we?
I don’t agree with all of Obama’s policies. But holding onto the Supreme Court AND putting someone in the white house that puts science and wacky things called facts above religious ideology AND a leader that puts diplomacy before bombing is enough for me this go around.
In the future, when you see you my name on a comment, just skip over it. I’d hate to continue to assail you with my developing ideology.
Steve,
I’m mis crossing low information w/blue collar voters. Which contrary to the conclusions Morgan will immediately jump to, does not mean I think blue collar workers are stupid.
There are our low info voters
http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=6985
Here are our walmart shoppers
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ron-galloway/sarah-palin—devil-with_b_122741.html
Morgan,
I didn’t realize you were representing the peanut gallery at large. Can you provide a list of name of commenters that your have given 2 thumbs up to represent? Just so I know for my reference exactly who belittles my intelligence. Thanks, much!
I said we should look to see why people are supporting McCain. From my statement that include reasons they don’t like Obama as well as policy initiatives they like from McCain. Can’t really brainstorm solutions without a list of complaints/reasons to gush can we?
I don’t agree with all of Obama’s policies. But holding onto the Supreme Court AND putting someone in the white house that puts science and wacky things called facts above religious ideology AND a leader that puts diplomacy before bombing is enough for me this go around.
In the future, when you see you my name on a comment, just skip over it. I’d hate to continue to assail you with my developing ideology.
Steve,
I’m mis crossing low information w/blue collar voters. Which contrary to the conclusions Morgan will immediately jump to, does not mean I think blue collar workers are stupid.
There are our low info voters
http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=6985
Here are our walmart shoppers
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ron-galloway/sarah-palin—devil-with_b_122741.html
Morgan,
I didn’t realize you were representing the peanut gallery at large. Can you provide a list of name of commenters that your have given 2 thumbs up to represent? Just so I know for my reference exactly who belittles my intelligence. Thanks, much!
I said we should look to see why people are supporting McCain. From my statement that include reasons they don’t like Obama as well as policy initiatives they like from McCain. Can’t really brainstorm solutions without a list of complaints/reasons to gush can we?
I don’t agree with all of Obama’s policies. But holding onto the Supreme Court AND putting someone in the white house that puts science and wacky things called facts above religious ideology AND a leader that puts diplomacy before bombing is enough for me this go around.
In the future, when you see you my name on a comment, just skip over it. I’d hate to continue to assail you with my developing ideology.
Just wait until the Rove media commandos get a chance to do some covert ops, reek some havoc, and just generally perpetrate evil doings. They are much less incompetent when they are in their natural surroundings, doing what they do best.
I think Patton Oswalt said it best: http://snowfat.org/patton.html
Just wait until the Rove media commandos get a chance to do some covert ops, reek some havoc, and just generally perpetrate evil doings. They are much less incompetent when they are in their natural surroundings, doing what they do best.
I think Patton Oswalt said it best: http://snowfat.org/patton.html
Just wait until the Rove media commandos get a chance to do some covert ops, reek some havoc, and just generally perpetrate evil doings. They are much less incompetent when they are in their natural surroundings, doing what they do best.
I think Patton Oswalt said it best: http://snowfat.org/patton.html
Patton Oswald is great.
Zak, I don’t skip over anyone. Must be egalitarian ya know. Again, the idea you seem to be missing, is that everyone has someone who knows more about a subject than they do, AND disagrees with them. The other side isn’t the other side because they know less.
It isn’t hard to see why WalMart shoppers might have some issues with Obama… Rev. Wright, saying people cling to guns, they are “Jacksonian” democrats – strong national defense fight, fight, fight – rah, rah, USA!! etc.
Now I do realise you really think there must be something wrong with kansas, the point is that Obama only needs to be rah, rah USA. hell, he could learn to hunt. how hard is that?
Or seriously, he could do either of the ideas I listed above. It wouldn’t hurt him terribly with his base, and it would neuter one of the few real strong arguments mcCain is gong to make. What I don’t get is why Obama doesn’t do this. It is obviously closer than it should be. The other side is screaming you put party before country… why not just slaughter a few sacred cows and cruise through November?
I mean seriously, the only reason McCain is even competitive, is that he wins independents. He’s no darling of the right, but he won the moderates, because he often bucks the party. If thats the trend that works, why isn’t Obama doing it?
This is my counter-plan to your plan, let’s figure out the best liberal cow to slaughter – which ones gain him the most traction with Kansas? which ones harm him the least on the left?
Patton Oswald is great.
Zak, I don’t skip over anyone. Must be egalitarian ya know. Again, the idea you seem to be missing, is that everyone has someone who knows more about a subject than they do, AND disagrees with them. The other side isn’t the other side because they know less.
It isn’t hard to see why WalMart shoppers might have some issues with Obama… Rev. Wright, saying people cling to guns, they are “Jacksonian” democrats – strong national defense fight, fight, fight – rah, rah, USA!! etc.
Now I do realise you really think there must be something wrong with kansas, the point is that Obama only needs to be rah, rah USA. hell, he could learn to hunt. how hard is that?
Or seriously, he could do either of the ideas I listed above. It wouldn’t hurt him terribly with his base, and it would neuter one of the few real strong arguments mcCain is gong to make. What I don’t get is why Obama doesn’t do this. It is obviously closer than it should be. The other side is screaming you put party before country… why not just slaughter a few sacred cows and cruise through November?
I mean seriously, the only reason McCain is even competitive, is that he wins independents. He’s no darling of the right, but he won the moderates, because he often bucks the party. If thats the trend that works, why isn’t Obama doing it?
This is my counter-plan to your plan, let’s figure out the best liberal cow to slaughter – which ones gain him the most traction with Kansas? which ones harm him the least on the left?
Patton Oswald is great.
Zak, I don’t skip over anyone. Must be egalitarian ya know. Again, the idea you seem to be missing, is that everyone has someone who knows more about a subject than they do, AND disagrees with them. The other side isn’t the other side because they know less.
It isn’t hard to see why WalMart shoppers might have some issues with Obama… Rev. Wright, saying people cling to guns, they are “Jacksonian” democrats – strong national defense fight, fight, fight – rah, rah, USA!! etc.
Now I do realise you really think there must be something wrong with kansas, the point is that Obama only needs to be rah, rah USA. hell, he could learn to hunt. how hard is that?
Or seriously, he could do either of the ideas I listed above. It wouldn’t hurt him terribly with his base, and it would neuter one of the few real strong arguments mcCain is gong to make. What I don’t get is why Obama doesn’t do this. It is obviously closer than it should be. The other side is screaming you put party before country… why not just slaughter a few sacred cows and cruise through November?
I mean seriously, the only reason McCain is even competitive, is that he wins independents. He’s no darling of the right, but he won the moderates, because he often bucks the party. If thats the trend that works, why isn’t Obama doing it?
This is my counter-plan to your plan, let’s figure out the best liberal cow to slaughter – which ones gain him the most traction with Kansas? which ones harm him the least on the left?
She is distracting, Rachel, but I want to hear her speech tonight and see what she has to say. The rampant sexism has been too allowable in the face of the angst over racism. The left is too anxious to blow her out of the water, and that tendancy of Obama to run behind skirts when attacked, too noticeable. The hypocrisy is palpable. I don’t expect agreement on this blog. I appreciate being allowed to comment.
As I said, she supports issues that I can’t and won’t. But she deserves the same chance as Obama and she has more experience to work from, so she has a right to be heard first.
Otherwise, the Democrats become not the opposition, but the Party of Hate and that is not, I suspect, what they want to become. Still, right now, they are on that path and as a former Democrat gone independent because of what was done to Hillary Clinton, I have to make a decision based on what the candidates say and my sense of their ability to deliver.
Otherwise, republic is just another name for oligarchy.
She is distracting, Rachel, but I want to hear her speech tonight and see what she has to say. The rampant sexism has been too allowable in the face of the angst over racism. The left is too anxious to blow her out of the water, and that tendancy of Obama to run behind skirts when attacked, too noticeable. The hypocrisy is palpable. I don’t expect agreement on this blog. I appreciate being allowed to comment.
As I said, she supports issues that I can’t and won’t. But she deserves the same chance as Obama and she has more experience to work from, so she has a right to be heard first.
Otherwise, the Democrats become not the opposition, but the Party of Hate and that is not, I suspect, what they want to become. Still, right now, they are on that path and as a former Democrat gone independent because of what was done to Hillary Clinton, I have to make a decision based on what the candidates say and my sense of their ability to deliver.
Otherwise, republic is just another name for oligarchy.
She is distracting, Rachel, but I want to hear her speech tonight and see what she has to say. The rampant sexism has been too allowable in the face of the angst over racism. The left is too anxious to blow her out of the water, and that tendancy of Obama to run behind skirts when attacked, too noticeable. The hypocrisy is palpable. I don’t expect agreement on this blog. I appreciate being allowed to comment.
As I said, she supports issues that I can’t and won’t. But she deserves the same chance as Obama and she has more experience to work from, so she has a right to be heard first.
Otherwise, the Democrats become not the opposition, but the Party of Hate and that is not, I suspect, what they want to become. Still, right now, they are on that path and as a former Democrat gone independent because of what was done to Hillary Clinton, I have to make a decision based on what the candidates say and my sense of their ability to deliver.
Otherwise, republic is just another name for oligarchy.