Originally posted by WulebgrOverall, I think he did what he needed to do and what he needs to do which is to be seen as a vehicle for change. One way he has done that is his selection of Palin. Another way he did that in the speech is to outline himself as a "Maverick" that will shake up Washington.
McCain promised to tell us about pork in all legislation. How does this promise offer something not already law due to the Coburn-Obama Transparency Act?
Obama's strategy is to portray him as George Bush with a third term. If he is unable to do so I think he will more than likely loose.
2 edits
Originally posted by whodeyIf only he would now talk about his voting record: 90+% with the current administration's priorities. Real change!
Overall, I think he did what he needed to do and what he needs to do which is to be seen as a vehicle for change. One way he has done that is his selection of Palin. Another way he did that in the speech is to outline himself as a "Maverick" that will shake up Washington.
Obama's strategy is to portray him as George Bush with a third term. If he is unable to do so I think he will more than likely loose.
At least he voted with Obama on the matter of showing who's eatin' the pork.
Originally posted by WulebgrSo what? Obama voted with Hillary about 95% of the time. Considering this fact, McCain would appear to be less partisan than Obama.
If only he would now talk about his voting record: 90+% with the current administration's priorities. Real change!
At least he voted with Obama on the matter of showing who's eatin' the pork.
To be honest, being on the right side or wrong side of an issue is only half the battle. Then you half to execute a plan effectively if you are on the right side of an issue to be successful. Take for example the war in Iraq. When Bush Senior was at the helm he invaded with international support and with Saudi money and with next to no casualties when it was all said and done. Then during his next Presidential address he got a standing ovation at the capital for his efforts with praise from both Republican and Democrat alike. In contrast we see "W" try to tackle the same opponent but with a piss poor approach. You see, you can vote the same on an issue but handle them in vastly different ways. In the case of McCain, he was shown to be right about needing more ground forces in Iraq even though the position was extremely unpopular. My guess is if McCain was at the helm from the beginning things would not have gone so poorly to begin with and who knows, maybe he would not have pushed to go in at all when Bush did?
Originally posted by whodeyThat is what the US really needs, a VP who thinks the war in Iraq is "the will of God" and that abortion should not even be allowed when rape or incest caused the pregnancy.
[b]Overall, I think he did what he needed to do and what he needs to do which is to be seen as a vehicle for change. One way he has done that is his selection of Palin. Another way he did that in the speech is to outline himself as a "Maverick" that will shake up Washington.
McCain voted with Bush over 90 per cent of the time, now that is a REAL maverick.
Examine his voting record concerning veterans, it is pitiful coming from a veteran.