Obama needs to better-answer the McSAME attacks !

[RBInMaine]

Whether it's using the Gergen argument about how R's like Reagan have supported so-called
resdistribution, or whatever, the attacks must be better-answered. Listen to Gergen ! He's right when he says so. Obama needs to drive the issue right back up McSAME's ass by touting his middle class tax cuts and then SLAM McSAME's failed right wing economic theory. THEN pivot back to the economy.
They also need to better-answer the "If Obama wins, we'll have ALL liberals in charge" attack. They have been SILENT on this ! How to respond? You talk change change change and how when the R's had complete control no one was pissing all over that, and look at what a fucked up mess they made !
C'MON Dems and Obama ! BLOODY THEIR FUCKING EYEBALLS !! Or it could get WAY too tight in the endgame. (Some may say "don't go negative." Believe me, many of Indy undecideds are still VERY persuadable, and the attacks CAN work ! HIT THE FUCKER BACK GOOD AND DAMN HARD !!) WE NEED TO BE OUT THERE SLAMMING THESE RIGHT WING ASSHOLES AS THE "CORRUPT RADICAL RIGHT WING IDEOLOGUES" THAT THEY ARE !!

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. He's kicking McCain's ass quite effectively, thank you.

[RBInMaine]

9. Look, I'm not hammering Obama. It's getting tighter though, and look at history,

things may get TOO tight in the endgame as they have in other races. YOU NEVER EVER EVER let attacks go unanswered. You always have very very tough hitbacks and counter punches, then pivot back to the positive message. DAVID GERGEN IS RIGHT. McCain's "redistribution of wealth" and "it will be ALL liberals if we vote Obama" are not being answered effeectively enough, and they are the very arguments that can still have sway with swing voters who don't decide until the very end. Yes, folks want a positive message, but NEGATIVE messaging unanswered DOES work. McCAIN's endgame attacks are designed to make undecideds stop and thing about "buyer's remorse." HIs attacks are firm and consistent. They must be better answered, and I know there are MANY Dems all over who feel the same way. The PUKES are trying to make this a referendum on Obama instead of a referendum on the last 8 years. It still has a chance to work. I know Team Obama is good. This endgame will show if they are truly good.

[RBInMaine]

24. I voted for Obama. So did my spouse. And the polls are tightening. (???)

[The Brethren]

27. According to the polls, the press, and Obama's supporters,

yes, he's kicking McCain's ass quite effectively.

However, most of the people I know personally and have spoken to about the race are buying McSame and Palin's garbage, including indep. and undecided voters. And they're not happy at all with Obama. Hopefully, the majority of Americans who show up to vote, will not share the same feelings. Especially the majority of those in my state, which is a key state in this election.

[RBInMaine]

29. Polls are TIGHTENING, and it's the Indys they can flip. Gotta hit back hard.

[BuyingThyme]

2. I think something like, "The Pukes have redistributed wealth like nobody since...

Herbert Hoover."

(He probably shouldn't say "Pukes.")

[JuniperLea]

3. I've taken to calling them Pubbies

Mainly because I like the mental picture of them crying in their beer when McLoser loses:)

[SoonerPride]

4. Gergen's argument was too convoluted for the LIVs out there

All he has to do is say McCain is desperate.

That's it.

On substance on one believes raising taxes 3% on those making $250k is socialism and no one except the rabid fundie base gets jazzed by McLame's limp dicked attack.

Sorry, but your concern is misplaced.

I'm much more concerned with purged voters and machines rigged to flip votes than I am anything that spews forth from McLame's caviar hole.

[RBInMaine]

14. Gotta disagree. They need a more specific argument than yours. And actual campaign strategy is far

more of a concern than near-paranoia about stolen elections, with all respect. Politics is a chess match and at the very same time a BOXING match. You have to be able to do both.

[Smuckies]

5. Obama not being tough enough

Might affect the election....we can't let it happen. Nice guys don't win.

[RBInMaine]

13. If you mean it , you are mostly right. You have to be nice AND TOUGH AS HELL TOO ala Clinton/JFK.

[JuniperLea]

6. I think Obama is handling things perfectly...

I trust him.

[K Gardner]

7. You really need to calm down. And Obama told me to tell you something..

He really does know what he's doing.

[kestrel91316]

8. Obama is doing very well, thank you, by BEING A CIVILIZED GENTLEMAN

to McCain's doddering and cranky old fool. And Palin's hysterical, shrieking, lying whack job.

[RBInMaine]

10. Kerry and Dukakis were "gentlemen" too, and look what happened to them. Think outside the box.

[kestrel91316]

15. Obama plays right into racist stereotypes if he presents himself as

an "angry black man". WHY ON EARTH DO YOU WANT HIM TO DO THAT??????

[RBInMaine]

19. Did I ever once use the word "angry." NO ! I said TOUGH and SPECIFIC on specific charges.

[Parker CA]

11. Seriously? Did you watch his speeches today? He smacked McLiar down HARD!

To suggest that you know better than Obama about how to win this race at this point is laughable. Do you recall months ago when people questioned his tenacity and said he should hit back harder, when people said that he had to get dirtier and bloody McLiar up? And do you see where we are now? Obama knows what he's doing. Getting into the mud seven days before the election is the worst tactic he could possibly employ. It would take him off message and bring him right down to the pukes level, a result they have been hoping for the entire time. Obama doesn't win in the mud, Obama wins being on top, in control, kicking the heck out of McLiar and the Moose just like he is now.

Don't question his tactics and don't suggest that he needs to lower himself to answering the BS non-issues that you site which are all right from Drudge/Faux. He will win by doing exactly what he has been doing, staying ON TRACK and ON MESSAGE!!!

[RBInMaine]

16. Look friend, don't lecture someone who has burned more shoe leather for Dems than you can shake a

stick at. I'm saying team-McSAME is making some consistent points that are not being answered well enough, and that is according to DAVID GERGEN and others. Look at how endgames work. Look at history. The McSAME goal is to plant seeds of buyer's remorse and shift it to a referendum on Obama.
I'm NOT saying Obama should throw back "dirt". But he does need to answer these specific charges very forcefully and convincingly so that it is about referendum-ing McSAME and the last eight years not Obama. Now, I'm sure Obama was good today, and I have seen some clips. Good if they are hitting back hard. Now COUNTERPUNCH and go on OFFENSE. I look forward to tomorrow night's address.

[Parker CA]

28. Okay, "friend." You request I don't lecture, I request you do not speak in condescending terms.

You say Obama shouldn't throw back "dirt." but you say that, "C'MON Dems and Obama ! BLOODY THEIR FUCKING EYEBALLS !!...HIT THE FUCKER BACK GOOD AND DAMN HARD !!) WE NEED TO BE OUT THERE SLAMMING THESE RIGHT WING ASSHOLES AS THE "CORRUPT RADICAL RIGHT WING IDEOLOGUES" THAT THEY ARE !!" That sounds much worse than throwing "dirt," and a method which would lower Obama right down to the level of the pukes, the BS from Drudge, Faux, and the rest of them.

Obama has advisors. He has followed their advice as well as his instincts and is doing better than anyone in his position could hope to be doing. Shifting the focus to a referendum on Obama is not going to pass the sniff test in seven days! The tactics the pukes are employing will solidify their base, sway "independents" who are already going to vote for McLiar, and push everyone else into our camp.

Giving credence to these accusations is worthless and only takes Obama out of the offensive position and immediately puts him into a reactionary stance. WHY, at this point in the race, when he is doing as well as he is and closing the deal would he benefit himself by muddling in the crap the pukes are throwing?

Your opinion is yours for reasons you understand, but I fully disagree, although I respect your points.

[RBInMaine]

31. My loud comments are intending to show the kind of spine a guts that this party has lacked for far

too long. I just don't get what it is about too many Dems. This is electoral politics. It's a BOXING MATCH just as much as it is a chess game. The Clintons know it. JFK knew it. Truman knew it. Keith Olberman knows it. So why is such a large proportion of the Democratic spine made of jelly? Shit, even Dennis Kucinich knows it. That little guy has some big balls. How is it condescending to SLAM THE REPUKELICAN SCUM WHO HAVE RUN MY, OUR, COUNTRY INTO THE GROUND??? Yeah I'm pissed, and rightfully so. This party has gone the "nice guy" route to our DEFEAT time and time and time again and I am so sick and tired of it ! Talk to Clinton. Talk to Carville and Begala. Those boys knew how to run a tough campaign. Now I'll say, as I HAVE said, that team Obama has generally run a better, more strategic, and tougher campaign than the last two. But it's the endgame, the polls are TIGHTENING, Indys are very swayable, and the McSAME RePUKES know very well how to bloody an opponent and win an election. So you have to be both a chess player AND a boxer. You never ever ever allow the opponent to hit you without hitting back and then counterpunching even harder and more effectively. I never back down to the Repukes. I have some R friends. They put the shit to me, and drive it right back in their face twice as hard until they go sulking off like wounded rats. Even Bob Shrum was tough with a right winger today. Called him a LIAR over and over and over again right to his frigging face. THAT'S HOW TO DO IT !!

[Parker CA]

32. The request to temper the condescending comments was in regards to how you addressed me, not how you

slam the pukes.

You should take your tactics and run for office if you have such success with the pukes you encounter. Thinking that a presidential candidate who is in the lead, in control, and dominating the news cycles and positive commentary would benefit from street-fight/hard-hitting tactics at this point is not a sound argument. Obama has never hinted at the notion that he is unwilling to fight back.

The problem is that McLiar is losing and losing bad. It makes perfect sense that he is grasping in his efforts to paint Obama in the negative. It doesn't make any sense for Obama to lower himself to such a level. It would be akin to Ali having accepted a brass-knuckle fight appearance in the streets against a thug. Doesn't make sense. He loses his arena and the ropes on which to control the fight and becomes more vulnerable to the thug's tactics and dirty tricks. Obama is smart enough to know that this is, and never was, the right course of action.

Your fear based on history is valid, but there is a point where you have to have the faith that this man can accomplish the task without compromising his essence and lowering himself to his opponents' level.

And to the point of never allowing an opponent to hit you without hitting back harder, sometimes you do let punches land because you know your opponent will be out of gas before you reach the final round. Obama will land the final punch. He might not hit back aggressively against every punch McLiar throws, but he will jab, as he has been doing all day and all through this campaign, but by doing so, he saves his energy for the final minutes of the fight during which he knocks McLiar the F out.

HOPE.

[soccermomforobama]

12. He answered it today by asking McCain a rhetorical question

. . .does McCain think that Reagan was a socialist too.

[RBInMaine]

17. What was the follow-up to that? Gergen's argument? That's a good tac.

[The Brethren]

18. I think Obama should be more aggressive

with the crap that both McSame and Palin have been pulling. They're desperate and will do anything to turn the tide and win. But Obama has been presenting himself as a calm, level-headed politician focused on the issues. Which appears to be helping him in the polls. And I think Obama is a genuinely nice person who doesn't like personal attacks.

However, the problem is, as awful and ridiculous as personal attacks may come across and may put-off undecided voters...there are still voters who may buy into them. And there is nothing new to personal attacks in poltics - or fighting back with the GOP. Except in 1988, when Dukakis let Bushie Sr. and his GOP cronies walk all over him because he was trying to be nice and assume the average voter not believe the lies. But not only did he lose, to the senior bush dictator, but according to polls at that time, many voters did they fall for the lies and it affected their votes.

I believe no matter how good Obama maybe as our next Pres., the main difference between now and then is that our country is in such an economic disaster/panic. In addition, most people are sick of King George. They want a change. In other words, I think if the economy were in better shape and junior wasn;t such jerk for 8 yrs., then Obama would need to be much more aggressive. Or McSame's attacks could cause more damage. So if Obama's approach of "kill them with kindness" works (re: the GOP), then great. Likewise, the worst thing we could do right now is to be overly confident.

You're right, a lot of people are persuadable. But to me, the trick is, with as aggressive as McSame/Palin are, which approach affects the undecided most right now -- fear of our economy, fear of a candidate being labeled as "socialistic", or a candidate allegedly being friends with "terrorists", etc.? No matter what the outcome, I still want a President in office with a spine and who will do the right thing for us. I hope that will Obama.

[stillcool]

20. Perhaps that is why..

Obama feels it necessary to buy air time. Swat all the lies flying around with one shot.

[RBInMaine]

22. What time and on what networks tomorrow??

[stillcool]

30. NBC, MSNBC, CBS, and FOX

at 8 pm..

[SoonerPride]

21. Weren't you the one screaming bloody murder about Obama not being tough enough last week?

Yes, yes you were.

I call ouy on your bullshit.

I'm ignoring you from now on.

You add nothing.

[RBInMaine]

23. And the national polls have tightened and show signs of continuing to tighten. So there.

[RetroLounge]

25. Thanks for your concern

but I think he's got it handled.

RL

[Beregond2]

26. Uh huh...the same crap that people have been urging on him

for a year now. Meanwhile, he is polling landslide numbers. When will you admit that he knows what the fuck he is doing?

What Obama needs to do is ignore everyone and do just what he is.

[cliffordu]

33. Backseat drivin' is a concern of mine. Since we're sharing concerns.

[wvbygod]

34. What is wrong with redistribution?

A majority of people stand to gain wealth if the minority of those with the wealth
are forced to share it. What is so hard to understand about getting that majority out
to vote and make the laws work for them?