As your old Uncle Dave was wandering through the news sites this morning, a few sets of events have occurred or are occurring that make me wonder if there is a side to this election that we’re missing.

First was a story about how Obama’s poll numbers are having a stunning rise in ‘battleground’ states. Some of that is simply because it’s getting closer to the election and people who were probably going to vote for him are now declaring so. Some is because as the more they hear and see McCain and Palin, especially conservatives, the more worried they’re becoming about them.

Second, related to that last point, the sheer number of articles, TV interviews, YouTube videos and so on demonstrating Palin’s astonishing lack of knowledge about history and events leading to her inability to go beyond talking points (and even that comes out badly in interviews to where McCain has to defend her!) has got to be demoralizing to supporters. Obama may not have much experience either, but at least he has a good grasp of all the issues. Tonight’s debate should be a defining moment for Palin.

Third, for over a year, as a result of Bush and the war primarily, it’s been a given that Republicans will lose House and Senate seats. Nothing they can do about that, meaning the Democrats will continue to control both.

Fourth, anyone with the slightest understanding of the economy could forsee the housing bubble bursting. It had to happen eventually, it’s just that the mortgage mess perhaps made it happen sooner. Combined with all the other bad economic trends over the last few years, it was clear the next Prez was going to have a mess to deal with.

So, knowing all that, did the Republican leadership decide to take a fall by nominating two people who ultimately couldn’t win once the public got a good look? Let the Dems have it so that he/she gets blamed for the pain that would be endured fixing it all? Get the blame for dealing with Iraq, Afghanistan, etc that was going to happen anyway because of how Bush handled it all? Then in 2012 come to the ‘rescue’ of the country with someone — anyone — who wasn’t a Democrat?

McCain supporters, before answering, ask yourself this question: At any other time and ignoring who the Democratic candidates are, would McCain and Palin be the ones you REALLY want leading this country?

What do you think? Sound off!




  1. Thinker says:

    You’re thinking too hard, that or you have too much time on your hands. 🙂

  2. LotsaLuck says:

    If the R’s had wanted to lose they would have nominated Huckabee or maybe even someone more third-string (Ron Paul, perhaps?).

    I can’t believe that either party is smart enough to come up with the Machiavellian concept you mention, and then spend millions and millions of dollars to make it happen.

    Who would I have rather seen runnin’?

    How about Colin Powell and Kay Bailey Hutchinson? That would be an interesting race.

  3. contempt says:

    Neither side sets out to lose on purpose. We are just witnessing the result that anyone with the necessary competence to be a good leader is smart enough not to take a job where every decision they make is criticized by one side or the other on a daily basis.

    As a result we are left with those that can only boast of a massive ego and an excessive lust for power. Leadership skills are no longer required given the climate of partisan media anal exams and gotcha politics.

  4. Rich says:

    Uncle Dave, this is how I think when I first wake up and I am not feeling good and border-line paranoid. You are either this or brilliant! Did you take your meds?

  5. loconavi says:

    This is how its gonna play out. McCain-Palin ticket is gonna win and then conveniently McCain is gonna step down/beremoved (use your imagination), that will install the puppet Palin who is gonna dance to every tune of lobbyists and every extreme right wing nutball. All she has to do is be president for one term to push the agendas and after she completes her term she will be rewarded with plum speaking fees etc as a testament to her achievements. I think Palin was forced on McCain for this reason alone! Poor McCain he is so desperate to be president that he has made a deal with the devil!

  6. Sinn Fein says:

    At any other time and ignoring who the Democratic candidates are, would McCain and Palin be the ones you REALLY want leading this country?

    Honest Answer: No.
    Never, ever, cared for McCain’s VERY WIDE Democrat, Anti-Conservative tendencies/preferences.

    BUT, considering the competition, Hell Yes! The USA is not ready for an anti-capitalist, anti-democracy, anti-business (the ones who provide the hobs in the USA), anti-freedom President.

    IF Obama wins, it’ll be Carter II.

  7. clockwork oranjaboom says:

    No, but what an excellent opportunity for fiscal conservatives both blue and red to stand up and oppose both candidate’s endorsement of the latest proposal to prevent the markets natural reaction to the drunken orgy of the past years.

  8. Chris says:

    Actually, I think the Rep. party is fighting as hard as they can for the White House. They know they have an uphill battle with the Senate and House races, so they are putting everything they have into the Presidential race in hopes to have someone to counter the bills the Dems. will pass next term. It’s just that the Rep. brand is so tarnished from the Bush mess that people don’t trust him, or the Reps. to fix what they created, with the tacit approval of Congress that is.

  9. Hyph3n says:

    I don’t think they wanted to intentionally lose the election… but if McCain’s poll numbers continue to slide, are they willing to throw McCain in front of a bus.

    Regardless of what you think about the House bail-out bill, who it seemed had to most to lose was John McCain. Not only was he the most public individual in that fight, but by voting it down, Republicans guaranteed that the economy is going to be on the front burner until the election.

  10. Breetai says:

    “would McCain and Palin be the ones you REALLY want leading this country?”

    Is none of the above an Option?

  11. Mark Derail says:

    For many people, it’s a choice between the candidate you hate the least.

    Hey, here in Canada, I’m stuck with the same dilemma with our Federal elections.

    Good choices are limited. Rather, the good choice, can’t possibly make it into power.

  12. Scott says:

    I would definitely want McCain circa 2000 as president. I am not sure about this current version of McCain, who has sold out to get his party’s support. I think the real issue is that McCain is not the nominee that the RNC really wanted, and so they are not going to put in much effort to save his campaign. With that said, I think any other Republican candidate would have much much worse numbers against Obama.

  13. chris says:

    NO.

    If the Republicans were trying to throw an air ball they would have picked someone who is extremely far to the right. A Goldwater like choice, one that riles the base but goes down to flaming defeat was seriously discussed by conservatives last year. Many on the far right feel that it would be a good thing to lose the election. They feel betrayed by W’s spending ways and when things really go bad it would be convenient to have a Dem in the Whitehouse.

    Only a Democrat would think this. It seems like every election cycle the Democrats set out to pick the weakest candidate. This time is no exception.

  14. Paddy-O says:

    “Then in 2012 come to the ‘rescue’ of the country with someone — anyone — who wasn’t a Democrat?”

    Seems possible.

    “At any other time and ignoring who the Democratic candidates are, would McCain and Palin be the ones you REALLY want leading this country?”

    Who knows. A pol is a pol is a pol.

    Just a little info, the Repubs know that 2 years of Obama will cause a couple of seats in the Senate to be loosened up for Repubs. There is a long term strat on the Repub side.

  15. green says:

    Vedic astrology predicts the 44th president dies in office. Would you want to win?

  16. Improbus says:

    Dear Uncle Dave,

    Don’t blame malevolence where incompetence will suffice. Occam’s razor is your friend.

  17. Ah_Yea says:

    So, Uncle Dave, at the very basic level you are saying that it’s a win-win for the Republicans.

    If the win this election, then they have a repub in the white house.

    If they loose this election, they set themselves up for a bigger win in 4 years!

  18. Sure, that was their plan all along.

    They know that nobody is going to be able to fix the mess that Dumbya has created with his eight years of incompetence and malice.

    If though some fluke, McBush DID win, that would just cement the party’s legacy as the party of incompetent, bungling fools.

    And even the GOP isn’t stupid enough to put forth a candidate who’s so far into the Limbaughsphere that he’s GUARANTEED to lose. People even from within the party would be crying foul.

    This way they get an at least semi-interesting campaign (and ultimate loss), and when Obama/Biden can’t pick up every last piece of shattered America, they can come back with a candidate in 2012 who may actually be a contender.

  19. Mr. Fusion says:

    I disagree.

    The Republicans were forced to chose from a group of flawed candidates.

    McCain – Bucked the party too many times,

    Romney – Mormon wacko,

    Hucklebee – Extreme religious wacko,

    Thompson – Carpet Bagger,

    Paul – Extremist Libertarian,

    Gingrich – Screwed too many Republican wives,

    Giuliani – One trick pony,

    Lieberman – Still under contract to Democrats,

    Reagan – Dead.

    It didn’t matter who was nominated, they came with a lot of baggage. Of the entire group I mentioned only Reagan had any national executive experience and, perhaps, is the most intelligent and mentally alert of the group.

  20. Paddy-O says:

    #17 Uncle Dave hasn’t a clue. The plan isn’t to win back the Presidency in 4 years if they loose this year. That’s improbable. The plan is to take back Congress, where the real power is.

  21. Somebody_Else says:

    I doubt they’re trying to lose.

    I think McCain was able to do well in the primaries because of name recognition and generally low enthusiasim/turnout among republicans. Huckabee or Dr. Paul would have been a stronger choice than McCain.

  22. John Paradox says:

    # 12 Scott said,
    I would definitely want McCain circa 2000 as president. I am not sure about this current version of McCain, who has sold out to get his party’s support.

    Having lived in AZ since 1971, I have watched McCain go from a Maverick (remember ‘agents of intolerance’ comment about the R-wing theocrats?) to having ‘drunk the kool-aid’ of the W years.
    His attack ads are TOTALLY different from the ones he did for the Senate.. those were basically ‘how much he’s done for us’, not ‘what a jerk the other guy is’, which he apparently learned from Rove after the ‘illegitimate black baby’ in S. Carolina in 2K.
    IF the ‘old’ 2K McCain were running, I would actually have a problem deciding (exception is his Tina Fey clone without the active forebrain).

    J/P=?

  23. Mr. Fusion says:

    #14, Cow-Paddy,

    A pol is a pol is a pol.

    I guess you aren’t familiar with Alexander Graham Bellinski. He was the first telephone Pole.

  24. The Monster's Lawyer says:

    #19 Mr. Isotope – “…only Reagan had any national executive experience and, perhaps, is the most intelligent and mentally alert of the group.”

    I agree. Even dead Reagan is the most intelligent and mentally alert.

  25. gquaglia says:

    I have a feeling that a lot of people, both Democrat and Republican, won’t be voting on election day. Neither candidate is good and I can’t, in good conscious, pull the lever for either one.

  26. Paddy-O says:

    #23 Hadn’t heard that joke before.

  27. Paddy-O says:

    #25 The next two likely retirees are Ginsburg & Stevens. No change in the next 4+ years.

    Ginsburg comes from the American Communist Liberal Union so you can’t get more commie than her anyway.

  28. ibdense says:

    Like I said before:

    “If the GOP doesn’t want better choices than these, then I figure that they have decided to make McCain and Palin sacrificial lambs. This would be a great way to get this extremely screwed-up mess that Bush is leaving us with out of their hands.”

    I’m predicting the debate tonight will not go all 10 rounds. Something unforeseen will happen and Palin will ask to leave early or be excused.

    Or maybe it will be stopped by the referee…

    Ms. Palin? Ms. Palin? How many fingers am I holding up? What city is this? Who is the president of the United States?

  29. contempt says:

    I agree with your earlier statement that it is improbable Obama will win. Not sure what McCain will do but if Ginsburg and Stevens can be replaced with someone of the caliber of Scalia, Roberts, Thomas and Alito then he will have done his job.

  30. brendal says:

    Something is afoot…he almost seems too lax about it all…or, maybe it’s fixed and he already knows he’s going to win?


1

Bad Behavior has blocked 4734 access attempts in the last 7 days.