Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowperson
He's been consistent in his message.
When the conflict appeared to be going badly, his candidacy disappeared even as he stayed on message. With the conflict appearing to go well, the message has remained consistent and he's shot back to the top.
Americans, generally, have never seemed to be bothered by any moral ambiguity regarding Iraq. What bothered them is they were promised an easy win and the thing got tough, potentially even a loss since Pres Bush put it into that characterization. At that point, it was the age-old rationale of "fire the coach." Now that the coach (McCain) appears to be winning, with a strategy he touted all along, he's a genius again.
Iraq has really been a key to his revival. His policy is not a repellant. It's an attraction.
A little known factoid that he's kept largely under wraps is that he had a military age son volunteer in the Marines and was scheduled to serve in Iraq . . . . not sure if he's there or not.
An interesting point that seems to be overlooked about his candidacy though is that he's the guy most likely to initiate a military-age draft, something that would probably defeat him outright if he were ever backed up to the wall on it.
Another McCain problem: he lacks charisma. He's older now, and a lot grumpier than he used to be, and whoever the Democratic nominee is, he's likely to face a funding gap and a charisma gap at the same time.
His lack of charisma is his charisma.
Seriously.
Crotchety old fart/curmudgeon has a certain attraction for voters at certain moments.
Cowperson
|
Personally I'm not surprised either that IRAQ has dropped down the list of concerns to the electorate. Democrats have realized that the "surge" indeed did work. Bringing it up only helps McCain's cause as he has been calling for it all along.
I think the Dems concentrate on economic issues when if they go up against McCain -- this and NOT Iraq looks like his more vulnerable spot. IF I'm an American and with the war in Iraq having at least as many positive stories if not more than negative I would go right back to what would get my vote everytime anyway. The economy.
I'd use his age, the fact is he has been in Washington forever and Iraq(to keep the anti-war leftist nutjobs happy) among the side issues.
But if they use Iraq as their main issue which I doubt they will they will get hammered as badly as one-trick pony Rudy G did.
