If McCain is down significantly a week before the election, we will DEFINITELY see something dramatic. A stable old fellow like Bob Dole could go quietly into the good night, but McCain is very different from Bob Dole. McCain is a compulsive gambler. He has a terrible temper. And he can't abide the thought that a whippersnapper like Obama is standing in between himself and the presidency he so deeply deserves. He simply won't be able to help himself: he'll do something crazy.

It's the only play a gambler could make. If McCain is significantly behind, he'll have nothing to lose by making a crazy play, because not doing anything would lead to certain defeat.

Posted at September 28, 2008 9:58 PM in response to Guessing at McCain's Final Gambit

This is all about avoiding the debate(s). McCain knows that he has lied too much, has switched positions too radically, to ever hold up in a debate. Forget Obama -- at this point, even softball questions from the moderator will expose McCain as a huge fraud.

Mark my words: there will be no presidential debates this year. No VP debates, either. The McCain campaign camp will come up with some lame excuse and stick to it.

Posted at September 24, 2008 3:16 PM in response to Breaking: McCain Campaign Suspends Campaign Due To Crisis, Calls On Delay For Debate

IT'S NOT A LOSING STRATEGY! At least, it hasn't been proven to be losing.

Eric said: "Obama has already faced down these same attacks -- and won." But this statement is only half true and wholly misleading.

Obama faced these attacks from Hillary only after Obama was so far ahead that it was almost impossible for Hillary to catch him, no matter what strategy she used. Look at the dates on the Hillary quotes -- almost all the attacks were made well after Super Tuesday. Hillary implemented her strategy only when Obama's delegate-count victory was pretty much assured, even though the MSM and Hillary herself did not yet realize that fact.

If Hillary had used the "low road" strategy from day one -- as McCain is doing -- instead of using it as a hail-mary play, it might well have worked. Do not make the mistake of thinking that the McCain/Hillary stragegy is a losing one. It's quite possible that Hillary's "losing strategy" was failing to go down the low road from the beginning. In any case, we simply don't know if the strategy is a losing one. Mr. Kleefeld should know better.

Posted at August 14, 2008 4:16 PM in response to McCain Recycling Hillary's Old Attacks Against Obama

I can't believe Greg is unsure of how Obama could effectively respond to the "celebrity" accusations. The answer is so simple it's painful.

McCain: He's a celebrity, but is he ready to lead?

Obama: I'm a celebrity BECAUSE I'm ready to lead. I'm a celebrity because people see that I'm the best choice for President of the United States. I'm popular because people like my ideas and like the thought of me in the White House.

Posted at August 6, 2008 6:10 PM in response to Obama Campaign Hits Back Against New McCain "Celeb" Ad

That was exactly my thought. In the context of a debate, Obama doesn't come across as a "celebrity" -- he comes across as a very smart, articulate, responsible guy. Pretty much the opposite of Britney Spears.

Posted at August 6, 2008 12:38 PM in response to New McCain Ad: Will "Biggest Celebrity In The World" Help Your Family?

"We have a Bill of Rights and a trial by jury in our country to protect our citizens - so that every person has their day in court.

Except, of course, if you're an alleged terrorist, in which case we can throw you in Gitmo forever without a trial.

I love how conservatives only truly appreciate the Bill of Rights when they need to personally avail themselves of its protections.

Posted at August 1, 2008 1:53 PM in response to Stevens Makes A Second Statement

"The report confirms that Attorney General Gonzales was completely and utterly clueless about any and all workings of the Department of Justice while he was in charge of that department. The report supports AG Gonzales' testimony before Congress that he knew nothing, was involved in nothing, and could remember nothing about the goings-on of the department he purported to run."

Posted at July 28, 2008 2:49 PM in response to Report Confirms Gonzales' Hands Clean, Says Rep

Should have read T-O-O-L in reference to Fournier.

Posted at July 14, 2008 6:39 PM in response to Fournier to Rove: "Keep Up the Fight"

Eight more years of disaster in Iraq, an attack on Iran, wholesale collapse of the American economy, execution of prisoners at Guantanamo . . . these things will result in GREAT TELEVISION RATINGS.

Withdrawal from Iraq, sensible diplomacy, and a strengthening economy . . . these things make BORING TELEVISION.

There is no question about who the MSM wants to be president.

Posted at July 14, 2008 12:21 PM in response to What The New York Times Won't Tell You About Joe Lieberman

This is what got GWB into the White House, twice. A simple message, repeated over and over and over again. Nuance? Over the heads of the voters. Adjusting to changed circumstances? Shows lack of resolve. Most voters have the political understanding of fourth-graders, so you talk to them like they're fourth graders.

Somebody tell me: what the hell happened to hope and change and a new kind of politics? Where is the message that got Obama the nomination in the first place?

Posted at July 3, 2008 7:43 PM in response to News Orgs Already Getting It Wrong On Obama's Iraq Remarks