About who to vote for:
I believe this election has put a lot of people in a strange place. It's a place that I've never personally been before. Put simply, I couldn't care more, and I couldn't care less.
Couldn't care less -- that's how we feel about you, too, Glenn; but apparently some Americans actually watch your show. I'm sure they want you to tell them how to vote, right?
As far as who to vote for -- I'm not sure. Hopefully, I'll come up with an answer or two by, say, early November.
You go, Glenn! And let's consider what that means for the other side.
For us, here's the money, and the attack line to use against McCain:
The scenario that keeps running through my head goes like this: John McCain somehow wins; the major problems we're likely going to face regardless of who is elected kick in; McCain gets blamed; and conservative ideals take the fall for McCain's decidedly nonconservative policies. Plus, it's always been my theory that you should be voting for something, not against something. Trying to win an election by just being against something is usually fruitless; see John Kerry.
Forget the first part of that, and focus on the latter. Obama has already started the counterpunch on that score:
"You haven't heard a positive thing out of that campaign in a month. All they do is try to run me down," Obama said while campaigning Wednesday in Union, Missouri.
The accusation came the same day that the Obama campaign released an ad comparing McCain to President Bush, and the McCain campaign released one likening Obama to Britney Spears and Paris Hilton.
"Since they don't have any new ideas, the only strategy they've got in this election is to try to scare you about me," Obama said.
Yes, I'd like to see that bolder and harder. But I'm keeping in mind one important aspect of McCain's strategy: It will piss off a number of voting blocs and encourage GOTV among them. Do you think voter registration of African Americans is easier or harder when one of their own is essentially told to stay in his place? Or browns, or women? McCain's focus on Obama is likely the only thing he could do, given how off track his campaign has been. The most this tactic can do, though, is consolidate his GOP base. That might have been enough in 2004, but McCain's liabilities among Rebublicans remain, and it won't be hard to remind his newest adherents that there are plenty of reasons not to vote for McCain.
Witness, again, Beck's dilemma. I'm sure he's happy to see McCain's attacks on Obama; but I don't think he's being disingenuous in his opinion piece. I also don't think he's alone.
Obama, IMHO, is playing the right cards, albeit not forcefully enough. It's time to pivot and point out that McCain, by waffling all over taxes, by owning with his wife umpty-eleven homes, by launching attack ads in July, is the actual arrogant empty suit in the campaign. He is the one who must resort to these tactics, since Americans are rejecting what he has to offer -- that is, more George Bush. This will require a coordinated counterattack, replete with surrogates, ads, speeches and media attention. I'm confident his campaign is polishing it as I write this. Keep in mind, also, that while the Bushies now running McCain's campaign are disciplined, their boss is not. He could -- and just might -- undermine his whole message with one stroke. Obama will certainly be ready to pounce if he does.