How should McCain be painted / labeled?

[DaveofCali]

The Republicans have had success before painting and labeling Democrats in a simple but effective way, like Kerry the elitist flip flopper. This has an effect on voters, pretty much summing up how they are and leaving voters with an impression that lasts through election day.

My question is, what should the theme for painting McCain be if Obama or another organization would go on the attack on McCain? McCain needs to be painted in a simple but effective and memorable way, and continually reinforced and reinforced till election day.


My Idea is: "McCain the imposter, can you really trust him?"

- McCain claims to be a moderate but is really a conservative
- McCain was no patriotic war hero, instead he caved in and helped the enemy
- McCain's advisers have not done things in the best interests of America: If you can't trust McCain's advisers, how can you trust him and his loyalty to this country?
- McCain continually says one thing and does another
- McCain is no maverick, he's just another politician
- McCain cannot be trusted to handle the U.S. Economy.
- McCain has a temper that is too dangerous for a president to have
- McCain claims to be of change but will continue the destructive policies of Bush
- McCain is a hawk that will take us into more costly wars and further damage America's relations with the world

The intended result: People will enter the voting booth with Obama as the hope for real change, while people will see McCain as the imposter of change and untrustworthy.

The idea about this is that labeling McCain as 4 more years of Bush is effective but may not be enough to keep people from being scared from McCain's casting doubt of Obama's leadership abilities (thus, a repeat of 2004 with people voting for Bush in fear.)

[clydefrand]

1. He's an old, white headed," wrinkly" senile republican.

Do you need more?

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

2. 3rd term bush douchebag that needs to be flushed...

[DaveofCali]

3. Ok, so he's just another angry old republican politician? n/t

[liberal renegade]

4. I'm going out on a limb

and calling him a loser.

[TheCowsCameHome]

5. A washed up, washed out has-been.

[FKA MNChimpH8R]

6. Out of touch, angry, paranoid

the second coming of Chimpo, warmongering, pandering to the fundymentals, anti-woman, more of the same old Bushit, not the person to be trusted with the nuclear football.

[justiceischeap]

7. One PTSD episode

from nuking the world.

[DaveofCali]

8. Actually, this is really an election of contrasts

The Future vs the Past
Change vs more of the same old politics and policies
Swift Action vs Gridlock
Hope vs Fear
Peace vs War
the Rebuilding of America vs More Destruction of America

As Gov. Mark Warner said, this is about the past vs the future

[1Hippiechick]

9. How to Win at Politics - Machiavelli McCain - we need to find an appropriate cartoon

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2005/jan/12/arts.politicsphilosophyandsociety

[Proud Liberal Dem]

10. Obama et. al need to somehow EXPOSE McSame for what he is

Tying Bush around his neck is certainly important but most people don't really know McSame or at least only know the "mythos" that have been created about him in the (national) press and exposing and puncturing those mythos is what will need to happen in order to make people think twice (or thrice) about voting for McSame. For that, one need look no further than to present some of the information (which is all on the public record) presented in David Brock's "Free Ride" about McSame's cozy (is it less cozy nowadays?) relationship with the national press and the "legend" the MSM has created about him. I must confess that prior to him starting his second run for the WH even I thought he was a fairly decent and honorable guy, particularly when he defended Kerry against the SBVT and Sean Hannity (about Kerry's support of the military) at least in one instance in 2004 but I later realized that I myself had at one time bought into his "legend" for which there is little or no basis in fact. I even still feel somewhat sorry for him about how Bush, Rove, et. al mercilessly crushed him in 2000 but my respect for him did a major U-Turn in 2004 when he embraced (quite literally) Bush/Cheney and promoted their re-election and, particularly when he started pushing for escalating the Iraq occupation (a.k.a. "surge") and, even worse, calling for even more war against Iran. Also, as evidenced by the conduct of his campaign so far, McSame appears to have fully embraced the Rovian political destruction "machine" that was previously used to destroy him in his pursuit of becoming President. The conduct of his campaign so far is so completely contrary to the lofty ideals and desires he previously expressed in regards to run a "civil" campaign with Obama and there should be no question or doubt that he fully approves of what his campaign managers and advisers are doing. The only questions I have are who's going to do this and when is it going to start in earnest? My thoughts are that the Obama campaign is putting it off until next week when McSame will be in the spotlight but it really needs to start soon.

[mwb970]

11. Little John is a loser.

He's lucky he's in America, where losers win!

[4themind]

12. As a guy that cast away the last vestiges of his "maverick"

credentials in his pursuit of power. He changed from who he was in 2000, because it didn't get him anywhere politically (he lost to W) so to win this time, he cast away almost all of the moderate/independent issues that some people valued. The McCain "THEN" vs. the McCain "NOW", which one can one trust to actually show up in the white house, especially if he was voted in and beholden to the conservative and fundamentalist right.

[cali]

13. as a dangerous war monger who will lead us into a disastrous

conflict with Iran.