Despite the vast unpopularity of the war in Iraq and McCain’s parroting of the Bush position, recent polling has the candidates even on who would do the better job of handling the war. This is because McCain is seen, by a very wide margin, as the best at being commander in chief.
So Obama has a dilemma. He gained initial traction in the primaries largely by outflanking Hillary on the war and showcasing his early opposition. But the more he speaks about the war now, the more he makes national security and foreign policy the major issue of the election. And there is no way that this can help him. In making his trip to the Middle East next week, Obama is gambling mightily. While each day’s photo opps will help him to burnish his credentials in this crucial respect, it will just make it too clear that McCain would be the better man to handle these situations. He may win the day, but McCain will win the topic.
 |
Comments
Only subscribers to Dick Morris' '08 Play-By-Play may post comments. You must be logged in to post a comment.
I am still unsure why Senator McCain has given Obama a free pass on his “16 months” gaff. The fact is Obama, within MINUTES, contradicted himself in fropnt of the nation. If the pace of the withdrawal will be dictated by events on the ground, and if Obama plans to listen to his military experts (two reasonable proposals that sound a lot like Bush’s policies), he cannot say we will be out in 16 months. The only way he can assert that is if he admits that no matter what the pace of withdrawal is for the first 15 months (the slowest pace being we have NO troops out by that point), then he will pull all the troops out in the 16th month to meet his arbitrary time table (possibly in spite of all expert advice telling him not to). Either way, Obama loses on this issue. If he admits that his “pace” comment is his real policy, he differs very little from McCain (and Bush, for that matter!). If he says he’d pull the troops out no matter what, he looks like a fool. What kind of idiot plans to listen to the advice of his generals for 15 months, and in the 16th month simply abandon this strategy to fulfill some arbitrary time table?
David Silverman
Smyrna, Georgia
Well then, it must not be about winning the topic but rather giving Americans just enough assurance to feel secure with Obama as Commander and Chief so they can go ahead and vote freely on the Economic issues of the day….the desire to be capable of paying their PG&E bill, buy gas for their car, make the mortgate, and have enough left over to buy food, health care, education.
Geeze Dick…catch up:).
The war in Iraq is only one of the major issues for both candidates and Obama must make the best of those ills which cannot be avoided. And as to whether the poll trolls believe that McCain is better qualified to be Commander in Chief is deceiving. If we examine the qualifications of McCain, Hillary and Bush, they are all on the same level of the playing field. Because McCain served his country in the Military and was a POW, doesn’t make him more qualified. McCain is a derivative of the Bush administration and supported the decision to invade Iraq….a bad decision…so really McCain outflanked himself. And what experience did Bush have before he was elected? The American people, to date, are not concerned nor care very little about what a candidate knows; it is what the candidate is going to do that counts. Obama should not not fear lack of knowledge, talent or skill. He needs to continue to seek motivation and the others will come.
Practical politics in this campaign is to keep the populace alarmed with a series of hobglobins. That how it is and always has been. The Bush Administration committed the US to invade Iraq for one and only one reason……to protect the interest of the oil fields in the middle east….and to label this initiative as an invasion to protect America from WMD and promote democracy and peace, well that like is “fuc**ing for virginity,”and somehow or other the Bush Administration has taken to themselves the respect that is given to their offices.
McCain might win the topic………..but I’m afraid that Obama will win the election.
The real threat to our way of life is the deterioration of our economy not the terrorists Bush would like us to believe lurk under every bed. Look what we have reaped from the Bush Administration singular focus on the latter:
- dead and crippled brave young Americans
- an unwinable wars in Iraq and Afghanistan
- the enormous debt associated with the above and the effect on the economy
- a dept of homeland security that bungled and continues to bungle Katrina’s effects
- lack of focus and action leading to the mortgage meltdown
- lack of focus and a southern border that is not only porous to immigrants but drugs as well.
- food and drug administrations that cant cope with food and product safety
- 9 trillion in debt and a collapsing dollar
- completely ignoring the collapse of the manufacturing sector and the resultant job loss.
- and on and on
For seven years our administation has focused only on Osama style terrorism. The result is an economy that is spiralling down while Nero (Bush) plays his fiddle.
I want a candidate that is going to get real about the issue that is directly affecting 300 million + of us. Our economic future. The solutions are right in front of us and none of them involve staying in Iraq or Afghanistan. Right now I really dont care if McCain or Obama is the better CIC. What I want to see is:
1- get out of the wars … stop the deaths … stop the wasted spending
2- get a solid plan to eliminate the deficit and reduce the debt (see 3 below)
3- get going on building a new energy economy in the US with the resultant upsurge in jobs and reduction in the outflow of cash for oil.
4- get competent people running the administration. Appoint people who have credentials other the “pal of POTUS”.