A single-pronged approach is considerably less than called for here. Here are grounds on which McCain should be attacked, simultaneously, and ferociously:

1) He is a liar with no core beliefs and only the elaborate illusion of a backbone. A great example - Andrew Sullivan's recent observations about torture, McCain's condoning thereof, the Keating 5, nearly non-stop praise of Bush, and the like.

2) He is not just a "hothead", John McCain would be, by far, the most militaristic president the United States ever elected in its history to date. Yes, MY FRIENDS, there will be "more wars". He is itching to push that button.

3) McCain = Bush, but with LESS understanding of policy in terms of economics. Phil Gramm will go from lobbying lawmakers, to writing economic policy the way the oil companies write the Bush/Cheney energy policies.

4) Targeted specifically to conservative Dems and Indies - You can't trust John McCain. Look at how many times he has drastically changed his mind about very important issues in just the last decade alone. If he is pitching something that sounds reasonable to you - clean energy, no torture, etc - DON'T buy it. If he manages to claw his way into the White House he will be sooo beholden to the far, far right wing that there is no way in hell he's going to turn around and fight for any of those causes he's trying to convince you he cares about.

5) McCain is deeply anti-woman. The rape jokes, the dessertion of his first wife, the current trophy wife as stepping-stone to power, the fact he's voted against nearly every issue/initiative important to women in his entire career that he's had a chance to. McCain was also one of those old white men that Chuck D. was talking about what he was going to do to them 'by the time he got to Arizona' - voted with white supremecist governor Evan Meacham numerous times against MLK day.

Posted at August 20, 2008 5:28 PM in response to Obama Campaign: McCain Is A Reckless Hothead

Thanks for at least pointing out at the end that Obama is still crushing McBush in the only measure which will matter - the state by state electoral vote counts.

People, national polls mean NOTHING. Polls showing how much % of the white vote Obama will lose mean NOTHING. Little variations and fluxuations in these polls mean just plain flat-out n o t h i n g. Our elections are state by state contests. How can people who are into politics keep falling for this time and time again?

Now, I'm definitely in the camp of those who think Obama has done a pretty poor job recently of both defining himself and attacking McCain. I'm still just stunned that he decided to take a damn vacation in the middle of this contest. Who on earth thought that was a good idea? Take the damn vacation in mid-November, dude. Now, NO!!! He missed a major chance to be a voice of reason in contrast to McCain's ludicrously over the top statements about Georgia. Now, McCain is seen as having gained great advantage there, even though what he was saying was utter crap, simply because there was no drumbeat from Obama or his camp refuting what McCain was saying. Coming out of vacation (especially one you shouldn't be taking in the first place) to make a single tepid statement about an issue your opponent is using against you does NOT cut it. This is a fight. You can just win by virtue of fighting a cleaner fight. Nobody is keeping track of how clean the damn fight was!

Posted at August 20, 2008 5:06 PM in response to CNN Poll Of Polls: Obama's Lead Is Gone

oh, and not to mention of course the first and most important rule in choosing a VP - "do no harm" with the choice. if Obama picks Bayh we'll lose a Dem. senator in a red state where it would be nearly impossible to replace him with another Dem. that alone should be a disqualifier when we're trying to get as close to 60 seats as possible.

Posted at August 12, 2008 5:48 PM in response to New York Times Hits Bayh For Membership In Committee For Liberation Of Iraq

exactly what foreign policy experience does Bayh have? he doesn't have any! he'll be easily torn down as a flip flopping waffler with almost no real experience except being an ineffective Senator who admits to being wrong about the most important decision he's made as a Senator. and not just a little wrong. no useable FP experience in Bayh as a VP choice, sorry.

Posted at August 12, 2008 4:55 PM in response to New York Times Hits Bayh For Membership In Committee For Liberation Of Iraq

So far all signs point to Bayh being Obama's VP choice, and I think he's a terrible one. awful. he's a Clintonian trojan horse. it won't just be his record which undermines Obama, he himself will actively participate. just watch. ugh, it won't be pretty.

I think there are two absolute no-no's here: picking someone who supported the war, especially as whole-heartedly as Bayh, and picking someone anti-choice, like Tim Kaine, in a year when Hillary Clinton was so close to being the nominee. This would definitely be taken as a slap in the face by legion female voters, and with good reason. I'll still vote for Barack pretty much no matter what, but his VP choice should not be someone who will be seen as a rebuke of Democratic ideals and beliefs the way either Bayh or Kaine would be.

Posted at August 12, 2008 4:47 PM in response to New York Times Hits Bayh For Membership In Committee For Liberation Of Iraq

I'm highly confused. If Obama is leading with women, with white working classers, with blacks, with latinos - how are the polls so even? Add up all those people, its nearly the whole country. All that's not being counted is white elderly people, asians, and the rich. What is the major discrepancy which explains how this can be the situation?

Posted at August 4, 2008 5:12 PM in response to Poll: Obama Leading By 10 Points -- Among Working Class Whites!

not to mention the poster's 'walking upright' credentials.

Posted at August 1, 2008 5:32 PM in response to GOP Strategist Accuses Obama Of Trying To Start "Race War"

Think about it for a minute. If you've given McCain enough rope to hang himself with on an issue like this, do you want to quash it right away, or wait until everyone's talking about it, and then 'release the hounds', showing everyone who is paying attention that McCain is playing dirty? Time is on Barack's side here. He's got the ammo, and he will use it, believe me!

Posted at August 1, 2008 5:30 PM in response to GOP Strategist Accuses Obama Of Trying To Start "Race War"

Also, stop using Ron English's 'Abraham Obama' image if you're going to be an anti-Obama troll. FU.

Posted at August 1, 2008 5:26 PM in response to GOP Strategist Accuses Obama Of Trying To Start "Race War"

you do realize that was a sarcastic and ironic post, right? it was obviously a joke, the last line anyways.

Posted at August 1, 2008 5:25 PM in response to GOP Strategist Accuses Obama Of Trying To Start "Race War"