It Isn't Obama - It's McCain

My friend Mark Levin expresses his concerns regarding a potential Obama Presidency here. One thing I would point out is that the people he lists as having become Obama converts all have one thing in common, they are or were part of the existing political or media elite. They ain't just common folk.

I'd also encourage you to read this American Thinker item on the signals pointing to a McCain win. Have you ever seen a political party win an election when so many of its members, prominent and not, are voting for the other side? I haven't and I have been watching elections for a while.

One last item I want to address, as someone who has been less than impressed with Palin since her debut but thinks she could become a good National leader one day - what we think of Sarah Palin is irrelevant to the winner and loser of this campaign. Post convention, even as the media piled on, McCain's numbers continued to rise with Palin. It was only when he pulled the now stupid move of suspending his campaign that his numbers started to tank.

This race is still close and were there an effective candidate who could counter Obama's liberal nonsense with solid Right of center answers, it would be a slam dunk in the end. From the debates to the stump, McCain has not presented an image of someone who is ready to be in-charge. I suspect a great many people want to vote for him very much. Unfortunately his decision making, statements, and his appearance of flailing about have done no good service to his cause. And still he might pull this one out.

Don't tell me what some inside the beltway, alleged all-stars want to do. And the last thing anyone wants to do is get caught up in polling in an election with so many variables and unique challenges. It's hard to find a reasonable number of polling firms who agree precisely from one day to the next on a single result.

There is only one opinion that matters - the opinions realized as the votes of the American people scattered across the breadth and width of America's great Heartland. When those are cast and counted, I'll contemplate the future of this great nation. But until November 4th, frankly, none of us can really say.

Comments

[Paul F]

@ Jo 12-Pack & jgrgys

I’m assuming, actually I’m hoping, that what you’ve written is some form of satire, because to think otherwise would be very, Very, VERY, scary!!!

[Mark_0454]

There seem to be quite a few comments about picking the person not the party.

When I was in high school, I took a gov't class from a little old lady who could have been a twin to Mrs. Thatcher. Her opinion was that you voted for the party not the person. The party represented a philosophy that should be close to your own world view. Small government, lower taxes, personal responsibility.

I don't particularly like McCain, but I know who I will vote for.

[Get Reall]

Who ever voted for BO gets what they have coming to them. This jakkaz cannot even raise his right hand to salute the flag. Sounds a lot the the behavior of the sleeper cell, rather than one to lead this country. His page touts CHANGE, well, he needs to become an American, before he comes close to being able to lead this country

[Tom]

This presidential election will be won by barack obama, a democrat. Obama presented the best case for the presidency, "Dreams from My Father". He also took mulitilevel marketing(MLM) to another "whole nudder" level.. This 2008 presidential election donot need to be a landslide. A landslide would be bad for the american two party system. If this election is a blowout it will be because of the obama presidential case that he presented. According to the american system, obama presidential case is flawless. Obama will win this election even if he had picked pee wee herman for his running mate. However,from an international point of view, his presidential case isnot flawless and has international weakness... To keep everybody honest, this election need to be close, america donot need a democratic blowout. Obama will make good "BIPARTISAN" decisions based on his weighing the evidence before him, therefore, making the best decisions for our economy.... On the otherhand, john mccain when pushed, can do similiar things. ..This election year, if left up to the democrats and hillary, would have all democrats in both house of representative and senate because george w bush( a republican) have ruin the american economical system. Having a nonbipartisan government isnot good for america. America is and always will be a two party system. Both democrats and republican rules and regulations are needed to regulate and maintain the integrity of this country.... First of all, the democrats need to stop labeling mccain as george bush junior. In 2004, the democrats(because of john mccain independent views) wre trying to recruit mccain as kerry(a democrat) running mate.
Barack obama, first, built his ideal case(dreams from my father) for an illinois senator position. He revised "dreams from my father" and fortified his case for the presidency, in 2008. However, his case wasnot built upon an international level. He probably will appeal his case, while in the presidential office, to an international level. Obama not having prior military or executive experience will be several of his weaknesses. All countries arenot predominant christianity like america. Some rules of america laws doesnot apply to others, non predominant, christian countries..
For america, al gore would have the ideal resume for president. He has the military background, the executive and federal experience. He also has the lawyer background and would be able to weigh the evidence, and would make good long terms decisions for national security because of his military background. Having the best resume or best interview doesnot means that they are the idea candidate for that position at different eras. BIPARTISANSHIP is needed for today economy. Al Gore lacked bipartisanship. There are few people that can practice bipartisanism..
When ever you have a political race between a statesman and a politician, the politician always win because he tells the people what they want to hear. The statesman usually is more honest and truthful. When politicians lack experience in some areas, the politician usually "pad" his or her resume. When two people agrees upon things or somethings it is taken as being truth when compared to only one person.
Since john kennedy, all other presidents have been non bipartisan. If they were democrats, they basically stuck to democratic policies, especially the american economy. If they were republican, they basically stuck to the republican policies, especially national security. When jimmy carter(democrat) got america into national security. He put pressure on the iran islamic country to conform to american culture. The shah of iran was just as much of a terrorist as saddam hussein. The shah also had his army to kill many innocent people who tried to overthrow his government. The shaw was introducing western culture to iran, such as the need for nuclear energy and western movies. Since jimmy carter was sticking his nose in iran business, ayatollah khomeini held american embassy employees hostages. It wasn't until the inauguration day of ronald reagan that the american hostages were released from iran.
Ronald reagan administration increased national security. He was, also, able to recruit some democrats because carter messed up the american national security. Ronald reagan had to clean up the mess that jimmy carter made on national security. George h bush continue to carry out ronald reagan agenda. Bill clinton had to clean up the economical mess that george h bush and ronald reagan created. Environmental laws and regulations were at their lowest under the reagan regime.
Bill clinton restored our economy, and al gore would have restore our environmental laws and competitiveness.
People talks about george w. bush. George w. bush has made progress, as a republican, to protect our national security. Once again, under the clinton administration our national security was reduced. The afghanistan war was legally justified, after 911. Our country could have restored our superiority, in intelligence, if george w bush hadnot went to war with afghanistan. George w bush tried very few diplomatic solutions. WAR IS ALWAYS THE LAST OPTION.
The war against iraq was illegal. George w bush made a fool out of colin powell. Colin powell made the case for war against iraq under the george w administration. Today, not only that the war in iraq need to be ended, it need to be ended without jeopardizing our national security. The democratic party is known for jeopardizing our national security. Again, it will take a democrat to restore our economy and clean up the mess that george w made. Bill clinton weakness was the lack of a military background. However, he employed al gore as his vice president to aid him on national security.

[Jargon]

McCain is not conservative and I am not voting for a woman in any office. I will never vote for a black president. This election is a total mess. I'll just stay home drinking beer with my friends and watch you all folks slug it out on Nov. 4th!

[Maria Vega]

I never cease to be amazed at conclusions people arrive at. Hypnosis? what hogwash! Honestly, you can fool some of the people some of the time, but definitely not ALL of the people all of the time.
Of course Reagan was a wonderful communicator (good actor too) but Obama couldn't possibly be a wonderful communicator also. Oh no he's using hypnotism. This would be funny if you didn't mean this seriously. I suppose Bill Clinton used hypnotism as well, right?
You people that voted for Bush twice and gave us the last dreadful 8 yrs should take full responsibility. Your vote gave us what we have at present. Now you insist on giving us MORE OF THE SAME. You want to do the same actions you did in the past and you expect a different result. That is insane.
For the record, I voted for Reagan and for Clinton. Good Communication is one of the most important qualifications a candidate can have. That alone can prevent wars. Those two men could communicate quite well and get their point across. Which is more than I can say about Bush/McCain. We need to elect leaders with good communication skills, all countries need that. Otherwise their communication descends down to bullets and bombs. No words, just killing and that kills all of us and future generations.
So Obama has excellent communication skills that can bring people together. Every once in a while a leader comes along who can accomplish that. You have to recognize it when it happens, it's that rare. You need to be sharp enough to spot it because it's a moment in history.

[Gerry]

I've always been a democrat, I voted for Clinton, Gore, Kerry. I am so embarrassed by the way liberals act that I can't vote for Obama and put these liberals in power. You've lost me and my family due to your nastiness.

[Lala]

Is this drunks night? Or have you all been hypnotized by Obama and sent over here. No one reads what you write, you've wasted your time.

[M. L. Kincer]

Has Obama and McCain been asked about their god or do they even belive
in GOD WE TRUST. Will they put their hand on the BIBLE for their promise
to be the leader with GOD wants them to be?
United States of American,needs to know!
Thanks for letting me speak my mind.

[Spartan112]

"Personally, as a woman I find Palin's ability to live a full and complete life without the need for victimhood laws created by new agey feminists who desperately need ways to prop up their weak and hapless sisterhood."

Umm...you find it what? You got so into your run on sentence you forgot to complete your thought. You aren't, by chance, 72 are you?

[Spartan112]

"Of course Reagan was a wonderful communicator (good actor too) "

Have you watched a Reagan movie? He was an actor, not a "good" actor. He starred in mainly "B" movies. His biggest claim to fame was that he was head of the union (and a Democrat).

[Philip McDaniel]

Another example of the reprehensible acts of a demagogue and his followers:

Justice and Vote Fraud
Lawyers who supervise voting rights are Obama donors
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122506752884870663.html
House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers recently sent two letters to Attorney General Michael Mukasey deploring a news leak that the FBI is investigating Acorn, and warning Justice to focus instead on "voter suppression." Barack Obama has also joined in this political intimidation, demanding in two letters that Mr. Mukasey appoint a special prosecutor to investigate Justice staff who he claims are engaged in "unlawful coordination" with John McCain's campaign to pursue "so-called 'election fraud.'" There is zero evidence that such coordination exists, but it is remarkable that a Presidential nominee would dismiss election fraud as a myth.