« Quoting emails from "John McCain" | Main | How not to fact-check political ads »

July 21, 2008


A politican who steadily supports immediate withdrawal of American troops might be acting for what she believes to be the best interests of the country, if she believes that American efforts are hopeless are counterproductive. A politician who steadily supports letting the American troops finish the job might be acting for the what he believes to be the best interests of the troops and country, if he believes that we can and must succeed in Iraq.

A politician who supported immediate withdrawal during the Democratic primaries but supports letting our troops finish the job during the general election was looking out for his own self-interest in at least one of those elections, rather than the best interests of the country and the troops.

David, your comments are more questionable than the ad itself.

It's even false that Obama has "changed his position" but you use that premise to support the statement that he's "looking out for his own self-interest...rather than the best interests of the country and the troops".

Howard, Obama during the primaries supported a scheduled withdrawal regardless of conditions on the ground. That position helped him win the nomination.

Since he wrapped up the nomination, he has made a series of statements regarding Iraq that are not entirely consistent. If he didn't change his position, he sure fooled USA Today. Today they wrote,

it's equally difficult to imagine a President Obama insisting on an inflexible withdrawal timetable if that means squandering security gains won with great American sacrifice. Though Obama has repeatedly insisted on a timetable, he has pointedly not said that every U.S. troop will be gone when the timetable ends. In fact, he has promised to leave a "residual force" of undefined size in Iraq, and carefully left himself an escape hatch in case the situation worsens. "You've got to make sure the country doesn't collapse," he says.

Where is there evidence in that quote (or that editorial) that Obama made statements that are "not entirely consistent"?

Where in that quote (or that editorial) does USA Today say Obama has changed his policy?

I can find Obama saying that exact same thing in speeches in the fall of 2007.

There are two false arguments being made -

1) Obama doesn't agree with McCain 100% so Obama doesn't "support the troops" or doesn't "put America first" (that's the message of the ads)

2) Obama changed his position, which proves he values popularity above all else (that's the message of your initial posting)

I dunno about the flag factory but he did the supermarket just the other day. You'd think the GOP would want him to stay away from supermarket scanners after the HW Bush debacle. "This tells you how much it is, you say?"

Saying a Presidential candidate shouldn't visit a flag factory is a bit like saying they shouldn't go to a local county fair. It's a photo op.

BTW, I once lived near that flag factory.

It was noteworthy because it dated back to the time of the US Civil War - a family owned operation in a classic old brick factory building.

So it was sort of a "George Washington slept here" type of place with a small business/made-in-America theme. It made normal sense as a campaign stop, at least locally.

Change you can trust, a slogan that could turn around McCain's campaign?

Change you can trust contrasts beautifully with change you can believe in.

Everyone wants change, only with a team that we can trust to implement it.
If you're in a tough spot, you want someone to come to help you that you can trust, not someone you believe may want to help you.

John McCain, polls show, is rated as highly qualified and highly trusted. This slogan, change you can trust, reinforces this message.

It can even be added on to John McCain’s current slogan. Country first, change you can trust. Or perhaps Change you can trust that puts Country first. Or how about Change you can trust that puts America first

It implies without directly saying it that the other side is perhaps a little less trustworthy.

It also reinforces the message that in a time we were facing battle with Al Qaeda worldwide and two conventional wars, John McCain is a commander in chief you can trust to lead us to victory.

There are 30 days left before Election Day. Sarah Palin’s debate performance was good, but it's really up to John McCain to win.





John, are you listening???


The comments to this entry are closed.