Obama-Biden, McCain-Romney, and the Perils of Debate Footage
Warning: This post does not reference Jewish texts or religious authorities in any way. It's merely a political discussion, not a religious one. Those who are offended by lashon hara as it relates to elections should not indulge in the following post.
Shortly after Baruch Tov Obama announced on his website this Shabbos that Delaware Senator Joe Biden would be his vice presidential running mate, the McCain campaign released an ad attacking Obama as inexperienced, using Joe Biden's own words from a primary debate:
Yeah, Biden did sit next to Senator Clinton during the post-Iowa Senate meetings that were televised. Yeah, he did criticize Obama's inexperience on more than one occasion. Yes, he has been consistent in his delivery of fantastic gaffes.
But Biden does bring much to the ticket: Foreign policy experience, the perspective of a Washington insider, an appeal to Catholic and working class voters, and a charming and personable way of handling himself in uncomfortable political situations (as demonstrated in the following video).
But is the inconsistency in his perception of Barack Obama something that should worry liberal voters? Hardly, especially if McCain chooses former Massachusetts governor and current businessman Mitt Romney.
Clearly, Barack Obama has demonstrated that he has the judgment, if not the experience, to lead on matters of foreign policy. He bothered to read the briefings on Iraq and came to the conclusion that Bush should not receive the "okay" to use military force there. I would assert that Barack Obama's skillful handling of his honorable campaign has better prepared him for the presidency. But for his VP pick, Joe Biden has the experience, and he has admitted that his decision to give Bush the authority to deploy troops in Iraq was a bad call.
But let's get back to Mitt.
Fortunately for the Democrats, Mitt Romney will (if pundits are correct that he'll be chosen as the VP) be a great choice. Why do I think so? Well, Romney's political philosophy can be accurately described as "liberal conservatism." If that sounds like an oxymoron, that's because it is.
For example, here Romney is speaking on behalf of McCain and his "We are all Georgians" message:
And yet here he is debating against the notable Democrat Ted Kennedy when he ran for the U.S. Senate:
(Interesting to note: Log Cabin Republicans actually used this debate as a positive and true portrayal of Mitt Romney when they made their pro-Romney ad.)
Good for conservatives and for liberals? Everybody loves Mitt!
Well, that simply mean's he's good for Democrats. If McCain wants to play dirty with his attack on Biden's disapproval of Obama, you better believe the Democrats are going to play dirty with Romney's disapproval of McCain, like in this ad:
Studies have revealed that the VP selection has never really made a significant difference in the preference of voters. Nonetheless, if Mitt Romney can show that he is so liberal on social issues when he's under pressure during a debate against a well-known Democratic senator, just imagine how he'll fare when he's up against Joe Biden.
And just for kicks,
Shortly after Baruch Tov Obama announced on his website this Shabbos that Delaware Senator Joe Biden would be his vice presidential running mate, the McCain campaign released an ad attacking Obama as inexperienced, using Joe Biden's own words from a primary debate:
Yeah, Biden did sit next to Senator Clinton during the post-Iowa Senate meetings that were televised. Yeah, he did criticize Obama's inexperience on more than one occasion. Yes, he has been consistent in his delivery of fantastic gaffes.
But Biden does bring much to the ticket: Foreign policy experience, the perspective of a Washington insider, an appeal to Catholic and working class voters, and a charming and personable way of handling himself in uncomfortable political situations (as demonstrated in the following video).
But is the inconsistency in his perception of Barack Obama something that should worry liberal voters? Hardly, especially if McCain chooses former Massachusetts governor and current businessman Mitt Romney.
Clearly, Barack Obama has demonstrated that he has the judgment, if not the experience, to lead on matters of foreign policy. He bothered to read the briefings on Iraq and came to the conclusion that Bush should not receive the "okay" to use military force there. I would assert that Barack Obama's skillful handling of his honorable campaign has better prepared him for the presidency. But for his VP pick, Joe Biden has the experience, and he has admitted that his decision to give Bush the authority to deploy troops in Iraq was a bad call.
But let's get back to Mitt.
Fortunately for the Democrats, Mitt Romney will (if pundits are correct that he'll be chosen as the VP) be a great choice. Why do I think so? Well, Romney's political philosophy can be accurately described as "liberal conservatism." If that sounds like an oxymoron, that's because it is.
For example, here Romney is speaking on behalf of McCain and his "We are all Georgians" message:
And yet here he is debating against the notable Democrat Ted Kennedy when he ran for the U.S. Senate:
(Interesting to note: Log Cabin Republicans actually used this debate as a positive and true portrayal of Mitt Romney when they made their pro-Romney ad.)
Good for conservatives and for liberals? Everybody loves Mitt!
Well, that simply mean's he's good for Democrats. If McCain wants to play dirty with his attack on Biden's disapproval of Obama, you better believe the Democrats are going to play dirty with Romney's disapproval of McCain, like in this ad:
Studies have revealed that the VP selection has never really made a significant difference in the preference of voters. Nonetheless, if Mitt Romney can show that he is so liberal on social issues when he's under pressure during a debate against a well-known Democratic senator, just imagine how he'll fare when he's up against Joe Biden.
And just for kicks,
posted by I, the Progressive Jew at
12:02 AM
1 Comments:
Those desperate to see Mitt Romney as McCain's VP are, as logic indicates, his supporters. Some on conservative radio I listen to(with their Townhall.com contributing hosts) also believe that the proposal of Lieberman and Ridge was only made to make the possibility of Romney more agreeable to the conservative base of the party. Conservatives like Hannity and the like still love Romney, and to be honest, they're desperate for him to be on the ticket. It's not the liberals who want him so badly, although as I've shown here, he could be used as an asset for the Obama camp.
How can you possibly assert that the mainstream media is trying to paint Romney as the VP while also "goading" Lieberman and Ridge? That's a serious conflict of interest, especially if you believe the media is disgustingly liberal.
Otherwise, yeah, I completely agree with your first point. He's rich (and though conservatives say we shouldn't punish or ridicule the wealthy for being successful, they should realize that jealous John McCain did something similar by criticizing Obama as too famous and too popular). He's flip-flopped on issues (and I don't mean bills and votes, but actual fundamental issues central to the Republican national platform).
Don't you think that now, with the recent McCain ad that features Clinton's criticisms of Obama and highlights the outrage Clinton voters should have with Obama's choice in Biden, McCain is in trouble? Romney somehow secured the conservative base of the party during the primaries, so there are two possibilities I see:
(1) Pick Romney, and allow the Dems to highlight how Romney attacked McCain and how Romney flip-flopped so dramatically.
(2) Pick somebody like Palin, but then watch the ads that claim the decision isolates Romney voters (even though it really shouldn't, just like Clinton voters should not feel isolated by Biden).
I think Palin would be a fine choice for McCain, but I also see a few problems. She's a woman, which could attract some people who voted for Clinton simply because she was a woman, but then again, she could be seen as an "affirmative action" candidate due to her relative inexperience (compared to Biden, Romney, and even Obama) and popularity in an Electoral-ly insignificant state. I'm not even sure if she'll attract so many women; she is very anti-abortion, which is a pretty large wedge issue for female voters.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home