When politician lacks something, they typically try to make up for it by projecting their flaws onto their opponent/adversary. They hope that people don't take notice that the "flaws" that are being "exposed" about their opponent adversary are acutally their own. For example:
When your record of bi-partisanship is vague, you accuse your opponent of being staunchly partisan.
When your record on supporting veterans is weak, you accuse your opponent of being un-American.
When your record on helping the Middle Class is non-existent, you accuse your opponent for not caring about "Joe the Plumber."
When your voting record matches that or an unpopular and disasterous president, you accuse your opponent with being a potential disaster to the country.
When you choose a VP candidate based on the wishes of your base, you accuse your opponent of being beholden to their base.
When you've failed your own Commander-in-Chief tests, you accuse your opponent of being "untested."
When you can't get the big crowds or generate the type of excitement needed for GOTV efforts, you accuse your opponent of being nothing more than a celebrity.
When you can't hold states that the last candidate of your party won pretty easily, you mock your opponent's tactics (like the 50-State Strategy.)
When you have family members who you refuse to acknowledge publically (they refuse to support you), you accuse your opponent of not caring about his family.
When your own religious convictions are questionable, you allow assaults on your opponent's religion to go with little opposition.
When your party has a history of voter supression and caging, you attack your opponent for supporting an organization that registers voters.
When you've practically said anything to get elected, you attack your opponent for "saying anything to get elected."
When your VP candidate has used state and party funds for clothes and her family's own personal well-being, you accuse your opponent of supporting "welfare queens."
When you have a well-documented history of making tempermental decisions, you accuse your opponent of being risky.
When you have a history of making misogynistic statements, you try to frame your opponent of being dismissive towards women.
When it's public knowledge that you were eating cake while a major American city was drowning, you try to frame your opponent as not be ready for unexpected crises.
When you've failed to get a firm grasp on the extreme religious faction of your party, you frame your opponent as being a false prophet.
When you've been part of a party that's ruled all three branches of government for about six years, you tell voters that having the other party in charge of two branches will damage democracy.
When your record of being a "maverick" boils down to petty posturing between you and the person who beat you (and not actually challenging your party on key issues), you accuse your opponent of not being independent-minded.
When people at your campaign rallies shout "Kill him!" and "He's a terrorist!" you accuse your opponent of not being able to control his crowds.
When your party's supporters mutilate themselves in order to sway voters, you accuse your opponent of trying to unfairy influence the election.
When your stance on the issues are either unpopular undefined, you accuse your opponent of being naive.
When your campaign doesn't have a lot of money, and spends what funds they have unwisely, you accuse your opponent of being fiscally irresponsible.
When you are friends with someone convicted with theft, conspiracy and illegal wiretapping who also advocated the shooting of federal law enforcement agents, you try to frame your opponent as being friendly with terrorists.
John McCain's entire campaign has been about deflecting his flaws and projecting them onto Barack Obama. But this time, people are voting on issues that matter to them, not lame character attacks. Putting "Joe the Plumber" up to give speeches doesn't equate to caring about the Middle Class. Picking a female running mate doesn't excuse the "why is Chelsea so ugly" and "gorilla rape" jokes. Not liking George W. Bush but supporting the GOP platform doesn't make you a "maverick."
Tomorrow, let's show "John the Projector" what a reality-based community can do.