That is the question of the day and it is continuously asked in MSM. Can Obama counter all that Clinton is throwing at him? The 3 a.m. phone add is the one that comes to mind. Can he counter Clinton's claim to having the experience to handle such an emergency?
my answer is YES it can! The latest Pew poll shows that American are not as skeptical on Iraq as they were 6 months ago. So the claim that Obama is making about Clinton's war vote is not playing as well as it did in the past.
But it can be countered. How, you ask? One thought: show Clinton's add in background and a list of the dead American in the foreground--and say that these Americans could have been lying productive lives if Clinton and others had voted differently. Show counter with money spent on war--say while showing Minn bridge and New Orleans and a dilapidated school and the pipeline explosion in NYC and say that money could have been spent on much better projects. If Clinton and others had not voted for war.
Then ask how could have American's lives been improve if the war cost had been spent in the US? Next show bin Laden before 9/11 and then after 9/11 and say could this criminal have been brought to justice if Clinton and others had not voted for war in Iraq?
My point is if your opponent has no problem been sleazy then tell the people the truth and let them stew in their own votes. Obama needs to find away to counter the "fear factor". If the war was still going badly, he would have closed the nomination by now. But since it is looking better in Iraq, a new plan must be found. I know the voter may get turned off with the negativity, but a counter to that of Clinton must be found or Obama looks weak and inexperience and that is what they are fighting to overcome.
There are no easy choices, but something has got to slow Clinton's roll.