McCain’s campaign manager says: “This election is not about issues”
September 3rd, 2008 at 01:36pm Pat Cunningham
Rick Davis (above), manager of John McCain’s campaign, seems to THINK that the election will be determined by personalities rather than issues.
That helps explain why none of the speakers at last night’s opening session of the Republican Convention said a word about the economy.
Entry Filed under: Rick Davis, John McCain
18 Comments Add your own
1. Mike Carroll | September 3rd, 2008 at 1:53 pm
By all means Patrick, lets talk about the economy.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122039890722392873.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries
2. Pat Cunningham | September 3rd, 2008 at 2:05 pm
Mike: So why are the Republicans afraid to talk about it? Perhaps one of them could mount the podium in St. Paul and read aloud the article to which you’ve linked. Even the convention attendees would fall asleep. They want red meat, not green-eyeshade stuff.
3. Mike Carroll | September 3rd, 2008 at 2:44 pm
Patrick-the truth is in the green eye shade stuff.
4. MDH | September 3rd, 2008 at 2:46 pm
Pat,
How does the last 2 years of Bush in office compare to the last 2 years of Clinton? I’m talking measurements of things such as interest rates, GDP, unemployment, etc?
I’d think it would be interesting to compare.
5. Veritas | September 3rd, 2008 at 3:11 pm
Pat, we all know the WSJ article wasn’t intended as a public presentation. But you fail to address the substance of its claim that the economic growth of recent years is relatively stronger than that of the rest of the world, thus deflating most of the contrary claims of Bush’s detractors. Nobody claims every American is better off since no administration, Republican or Democrat, could make that happen. We’d all be interested in your analysis of the facts.
Secondly, if you actually watch the Rick Davis video, you will see the full context of his comments. Yes, he shouldn’t have led with the “this election is not about the issues” statement because nobody heard anything after that. But he never used the word ‘personalities’ and Obama misquoted him. Davis went on to make the point that candidates’ positions on issues will be important but will be viewed by voters in the context of the candidates’ underlying values, character, principles and long-standing views.
In other words, a few eloquent words from a naïve newcomer about a particular issue is less impressive than a position developed over an extended period and based on real experience. Unfortunately, too many voters only see the varnish and not the substance. Here’s the video: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/09/mccain_manager_this_election_i.html
Hey, I don’t agree with every one of McCain’s positions, but at least I know what I’m getting. I just don’t see how a few years of Chicago-style politics and a couple in Washington (much of which has been spent campaigning) give you what you need to run the largest and most important enterprise in the world.
6. snuss | September 3rd, 2008 at 4:22 pm
Since something like 60-90% of black voters voted for Barack in the primaries, even though he and Hillary had nearly identical platforms, I would have to say that indicates something other than issues will affect the race. But why doesn’t Obama have a huge lead over McCain? Could it be that the voters are starting to realize that Obama is all show, and no go? Or, that by choosing an entrenched insider like Joe Biden, that he has proved himself as no more than just another politician? Or the massive Socialist spending programs he has proposed? I suspect the more we learn about Obama, and his agenda, the more his poll numbers will drop.
7. Billybeermonicagar | September 3rd, 2008 at 5:02 pm
Veritas, You forgot to say cue the crickets.
8. Pat Cunningham | September 3rd, 2008 at 5:33 pm
MDH: Why don’t you look up that stuff and let us know.
9. Pat Cunningham | September 3rd, 2008 at 5:57 pm
Veritas: Here’s the full quote from Davis: “This election is not about issues. This election is about a composite view of what people take away from these candidates.”
Well, if the composite view of what people take away from these candidates is not about political issues, then it’s about personalities. What else could it be about?
This kind of reminds me of Republicans deriding Jimmy Carter in the 1970s for his infamous “malaise” speech. Carter never used the word “malaise,” but he implied it.
10. Pat Cunningham | September 3rd, 2008 at 5:59 pm
Mike: Don’t use the word “truth” in connection with the Republicans. WMD. Global warming denial. Creationism. Etc. Etc.
11. Mike Carroll | September 3rd, 2008 at 7:20 pm
Patrick-you disappoint me. Partisan sure, but I never thought you would join the “Bush Lied, People Died” tinfoil hat crowd. At your age perhaps you are just tired. Perhaps a nap?
12. Pat Cunningham | September 3rd, 2008 at 7:29 pm
Mike: You disappoint me. I never thought you could be so obtuse to miss the voluminous documentation concerning the falsehoods on which the Bush administration sought to justify the war. Here’s just a sample: http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/lieofthecentury_text.html
13. Pat Cunningham | September 3rd, 2008 at 7:39 pm
Another thing, Mike: Perhaps the most egregious falsehoods were the repeated implications that Saddam and Iraq were somehow linked to 9/11. That was the stuff of cynical political calculation aimed at rousing public support for the war at a time when Americans were still angry and in shock over the attacks. Dick Cheney was a prominent peddler of this kind of crap. Is it any surprise that most Americans, for several years after the start of the war, continued to think Iraq was involved in 9/11? Gee, I wonder where they got that idea.
14. RickA | September 3rd, 2008 at 7:52 pm
Here’s a link to the actual video, not just sound bite journalism.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/video/2008/09/02/VI2008090201523.html?sid=ST2008090301716
15. Pat Cunningham | September 3rd, 2008 at 7:57 pm
Davis contradicts himself. First he says the election is not about the issues, then it says it is. Doubletalk.
16. Veritas | September 3rd, 2008 at 8:59 pm
Plenty of double-talk on both sides to go around, but it’s still clear that Davis’ comments were not viewed in complete context as I illustrated above.
I confess dismay and disappointment with the digression of political dialogue in recent years into a swamp of polarizing, partisan dirt-digging and name-calling—Democrats, Republicans, the media and this newspaper included.
Still waiting for Pat to analyze and comment on the economic data in the WSJ article. I think that qualifies as an “issues” discussion—one that Bush’s critics would apparently lose based on the facts. By the way, I can’t say I’m a Bush fan on all fronts, but his policies have at least resulted in relative economic growth.
17. Veritas | September 3rd, 2008 at 9:57 pm
By the way, the uncivility resulting from impassioned partisanship is exactly what George Washington forewarned about in his farewell address. He worried about a two-party system that becomes entrenched, and between them they “alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge.”
He continues:
“It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.”
Sounds way too familiar.
18. Peter Gunn | September 4th, 2008 at 10:37 am
“It serves always to distract the public”
“It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms”
“kindles the animosity of one part against another”
“foments riot and insurrection”
“foreign influence and corruption”
“Policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another”
!!!!!!!
George Washington was a very smart man.I’d take his prophesies any day over Nostradamus and his ilk
No vague references there
And it’s nearly word for word as to what this nation has experienced the past sixteen years
Bravo Senior Generali Washington
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed