All these rumblings regarding Sen. Barack Obama and his mythical terrorist ties now have Sen. John McCain nervous. After launching a Republican lead smear campaign with Gov. Sarah Palin tying Obama to radicals and rumer mills falsifying a Obama Muslim upbringing, it appears that the nastiness of it all and the increased racially cloaked remarks from audiences at McCain affairs caused McCain to defend his opponent.
If Obama does win, McCain said, reassuring a voter, you have nothing to fear. "He's a decent man, a family man."
Gee, thanks.
I can't commend someone for taking an action they're supposed to take, but there is an irony in that the McCain campaign stoked these fears intensely over the past week and after some disturbing commentary with news cameras in attendance, had a change of heart and decided to back off.
I'm not sure if this was sincere or just another ploy to win voters. But I can say that the fear tactics are highly aggravating. And they're not working.
When people are worried about their retirement savings, keeping their jobs, and trying to figure out how to keep up with mortgage payments, they could care less about a connect the dots affiliation between a presidential candidate and a former radical.
Speaking of being annoyed, I'm also bothered with the new found media infatuation with the Bradley Effect, a phrase coined after the former L.A mayor was predicted to win as governor of California. Pollsters later found that many white Americans reported they would vote for Bradley but changed their minds in voting booths due to Bradley's race. Some argue that the Bradley effect could play a role in Obama's race and that his slim lead in the polls is not due say an upswing in Obama voters tired of the economic downturn, but rather a result of some indiscernable number of white voters lying to pollsters.
But the Bradley race was 20 years ago. While I get that their aren't many high level races with African American candidates to compare Obama's campaign, too, I think the analysis of the Bradley Effect is totally misleading and that the same elements aren't applicable in the Obama race. While a casual debate on the matter may be entertaining to some, there is no quantifiable data to substantiate or explain its relevance in this election.
Frankly, between these terrorist charges and Bradley effects fears, I've been highly annoyed by recent campaign tactics and coverage. Rehashing old news to fan fears is a strategy we were all familiar with in the primaries.
The real issue is the economy. Obama's position on the economy was strong before the current market flip flop and it's ironic that his knowledge on this matter may be the key to victory.
If Obama does win, McCain said, reassuring a voter, you have nothing to fear. "He's a decent man, a family man."
Gee, thanks.
I can't commend someone for taking an action they're supposed to take, but there is an irony in that the McCain campaign stoked these fears intensely over the past week and after some disturbing commentary with news cameras in attendance, had a change of heart and decided to back off.
I'm not sure if this was sincere or just another ploy to win voters. But I can say that the fear tactics are highly aggravating. And they're not working.
When people are worried about their retirement savings, keeping their jobs, and trying to figure out how to keep up with mortgage payments, they could care less about a connect the dots affiliation between a presidential candidate and a former radical.
Speaking of being annoyed, I'm also bothered with the new found media infatuation with the Bradley Effect, a phrase coined after the former L.A mayor was predicted to win as governor of California. Pollsters later found that many white Americans reported they would vote for Bradley but changed their minds in voting booths due to Bradley's race. Some argue that the Bradley effect could play a role in Obama's race and that his slim lead in the polls is not due say an upswing in Obama voters tired of the economic downturn, but rather a result of some indiscernable number of white voters lying to pollsters.
But the Bradley race was 20 years ago. While I get that their aren't many high level races with African American candidates to compare Obama's campaign, too, I think the analysis of the Bradley Effect is totally misleading and that the same elements aren't applicable in the Obama race. While a casual debate on the matter may be entertaining to some, there is no quantifiable data to substantiate or explain its relevance in this election.
Frankly, between these terrorist charges and Bradley effects fears, I've been highly annoyed by recent campaign tactics and coverage. Rehashing old news to fan fears is a strategy we were all familiar with in the primaries.
The real issue is the economy. Obama's position on the economy was strong before the current market flip flop and it's ironic that his knowledge on this matter may be the key to victory.
1 comment:
Sistah Ytasha I enjoy your analysis but how can you doubt the bradley affect considering Obama and New hampshire. Remember how he was supposed to close Hillary that week and all hell broke loose? Let's not talk about the bradley effect and Clintons comebacks in PA and other states when towards the end of the primaries she started defeating him despite polls and bigger bank rolls from the Obama machine. I think we have seen enough evidence of the bradley effect to give it credibility when it comes to white voters and Obama. I am inspired by Obamas hope but a bit too cynical towards america until he takes that oath. We have less than a month left, plenty of time for some right wing october surprise, some Obama youtubed mistake, or a bin laden spain style synchonized terrorist attack to influence american voters this november. Obama must keep acting like the underdog and ignore this chorus of ITS OVER coming from liberals and arrogant democratic operatives naive about nixon style right wing acts of desparation. Peace luv.
Post a Comment