McCain Throws Up a Brick
I forewarn you that this post may be a bit more on the opinionated side than what I usually write, but I will strive to keep my more subjective thoughts out of the conversation.(No Promises) I have deep respect for Senator John McCain, based both on his service in the armed forces and his record of maintaining respectful relationships with members of the opposite party during his tenure in the Senate. I respect his refusal to accept earmarked funding for pet projects in Arizona, and commend his efforts toward campaign reform.
With that said, his speech during the Republican National Convention did nothing but confirm that he is not the candidate I will be voting for this November. I am a believer in constant innovation and evolution in government, and I am simply not convinced that McCain is in touch with the needs of the American public. I base this belief on the Republican Candidate’s attention to his war stories over the purported “straight talk about policy” that the republican party is known for. I found it a bit hypocritical that McCain’s primary critique of Obama has been a lack of details on his policy plans for Presidency, yet when given a national stage, he refrained from spelling out the details of his own policy. I understand that much of what goes into a nomination speech is rallying the party with emotionality, but that has never been John McCain’s style, and frankly that is what I always liked best about him.
To be fair, Obama has done his fair share of pointing out the ineffectiveness of the republican platform and vaguely discussing his own policy. (For the record, you can find out a lot about both candidate’s policy plans by logging onto their campaign websites, and I highly encourage you to do so and gather information yourself) What I would like to see is a frank conversation between the candidates about what solutions will work for America’s most pressing problems, and what solutions will not. Both candidates have hinted that there is a tendency in both parties to overlook their own weaknesses, and I would like to see this explored more as a dialogue between the candidates.
What McCain failed to do on Thursday night was address the American people about issues that are close to their heart. I have no doubt that he has ideas about what needs to be done in this country, but he failed to communicate that when given what may be his best opportunity to. For left leaning independents, Thursday might have been McCain’s best opportunity to reach out and connect, and he failed to do that.
I do not wish to McCain bash, because I do believe he is qualified for the administrative duties of the presidency. I am leaning towards Obama primarily because I agree with the policies he has supported moreso than I do with McCain. Unlike others, I do not think the country will fall apart if one candidate is elected and the other is not. The choice is not purely dichotomous. However, I am not the kind of person McCain needed to reach Thursday night. He needed to reach those who are not straight ticket republican or democratic voters, and I simply do not think he was successful in that venture.
What do you guys think? To the independents, I ask whether or not McCain’s speech sold you on him. To the right, I ask if you are enthusiastic about your candidate. And to the left, I ask that you kindly steer away from inflammatory, exaggerated rhetoric and explore why people might be excited about McCain.
Philip Gibson
Columnist
philagan@gmail.com
“I understand that much of what goes into a nomination speech is rallying the party with emotionality, but that has never been John McCain’s style, and frankly that is what I always liked best about him.”
John McCain’s never been in a position where tradition requires that he deviate from the “straight talk express” to rally the party. The point of the acceptance speech is strictly to rally the base.
“I am a believer in constant innovation and evolution in government, and I am simply not convinced that McCain is in touch with the needs of the American public.”
Name one piece of major “innovative” legislation that Mr. Obama has authored. John McCain has created more works of political innovation than Mr. Obama has years in the U.S. and Illinois Senates. I’m not too pleased with some of those works of innovation, but I can’t accept the claim that Barack has had any more experience actually working towards change than has John McCain.
Jared Sutton
September 9, 2008 at 4:15 am
I would like to point out that Obama’s legislation authoring history is available at the Library of Congress’ website and includes a lobbyist reform bill, veteran services improvements, and over 100 other pieces of legislature. This does not include the legislation he worked on white in the Illinois state senate. Not all of them are dramatic, but I would do your research before making claims.
I would also like to point out that I never said Barack had more experience as a public servant than John McCain. There is no argument there. My argument was that his finger is not necessarily on the pulse of the current needs of the American public. That is very different from experience.
Finally, I think it is a bit narrow to limit the purpose of an acceptance speech to rallying the party. Anytime a candidate is given the opportunity to reach the huge number of people that was available to McCain during the convention is a chance to connect with voters you might not normally connect with. I believe McCain simply missed an opportunity there.
Now, I’m still not saying McCain is a bad candidate, I just want to here what stands out about him that makes him a good candidate to people beyond him not being Obama.
philestine
September 9, 2008 at 6:54 pm
I’m not discounting any of the bills that Mr. Obama has created; I’ll even note Obama-Coburn and Obama-Lugar to his bipartisan credit. The point that you’re trying to make is that Mr. Obama brings a new vision for government to the table; I wouldn’t disagree. But judging from his 96% voting record with the Democratic majority as opposed to John McCain’s 88% partisan voting record, I would challenge you to reconsider whether Senator Obama is anymore of a unifier than is his opponent (WashingtonPost.com).
I was only prodding about Mr. Obama’s inexperience; I know that experience is often the poison that pulls Washington politicians into ineptitude. I also know that experience in Washington often only puts the politician’s finger to the pulse of the Beltway’s needs.
After re-reading the transcripts of both speeches, I find both pointing out the opposites deficiencies, as you noted. I read Obama playing on the nation’s disgust of Bush and the fun comparison of McCain to George W. I read McCain alluding to his Vietnam days, perhaps to stir emotion. I read Mr. Obama continue to talk about Bush’s failed policies, again playing on a comparison between a President and a Senator from his own party that was a thorn in his political side more than a few times in 8 years. I read both talking about real-name examples in order to make the listener feel like the candidate has been among true plight.
I never really understood people’s votes being suddenly solidified by a powerful or disastrous speech. You advise the reader to check each candidate’s website for policy. Yet you said that McCain’s speech only confirmed that you would not be voting for him, and I am forced to wonder just how important the issues were if a speech from an obviously inferior orator was the final straw.
Jared Sutton
September 9, 2008 at 9:55 pm
Well, I will not vote for Obama or any other modern Democrat simply because of their radical views…but McCain’s speech was the essence of boredom…I mean if I ever need to get some sleep I will just youtube the speech.
Joshua
September 11, 2008 at 2:07 pm