McCain Didn't Lose--Conservative Ideas Lost

Was it a debate or a sporting event? Hard to tell from the post-game coverage. It's all about "who won?" McCain seemed angry, Obama presidential. One pushed the other well, the other played a mean defense. McCain had his game face on, yet Obama wasn't easily psyched out. Was Joe the Plumber the ref or the mascot? Who knows. It's all a game playing out in prime time.

And, if the snap polls and focus groups are to be believed, Obama won and McCain lost. And it wasn't even a photo finish.

But it's not because Obama had his red power tie on (he does well with that tie), or because the close-ups on McCain were unflattering. It's not because Obama was sympathetic, and McCain "negative" (the new euphism for inaccurate). Or because McCain was dismissive or didn't understand the difference between Down's Syndrome and autism.

And, in my opinion, McCain was sharp, aggressive, articulate (not eloquent). He was internally consistent. I'd be frustrated, if I were McCain. "I was more gracious, I answered the questions more concisely. Why can't I win?"

John McCain hasn't won any of the debates because his ideas have lost.

The Senator was an effective spokesperson for these ideas, but they no longer resonate. The anti-government motif, the big government theme, however Reaganesque, are falling flat. Most Americans want more government intervention in righting a free market ship that, left to its own devices, creates wealth for the few and stagnation and loss for the many. (Even the Manhattan Institute, that stubborn bastion of conservative ideology, today acknowledged in The New York Post that markets aren't up to policing themselves.)

Most Americans want government to require that the private sector live up to its part of the bargain, to take an active role creating an economy that is consistent with our democratic values. They don't believe that a trickle-down tax policy will work because it hasn't. They don't believe that a free market solution to health care will work, because it hasn't.

If Obama wins, it won't be McCain that he beats. It will be a legacy of a conservative ideology that has failed the majority of Americans.

That doesn't lend itself as easily to the post-game show, but that's what happened.

Comments

[pawleybrian]

Is it just the policies that count, or being more aggressive, appealing to the electorate as a 'six-pack' ordinary Joe?
The American electorate are not, collectively, stupid.
Maybe it is more to do with the media expose of George W. Bush as a cartoon character, or some of the more extreme Republican measures towards winning this election and the demeanor of John McCain. Who, seriously, wants a beer drinkin', gun-totin' "good ol' boy" as President; a 'maverick' warrior. We are living in the real world, aren't we? Yes, we want a President who understands our needs, who can empathize with middle-America values but we need a President who can also communicate with other world leaders, can talk to Wall Street, who looks and sounds Presidential. We also need someone who is able to convince us that the future is not bleak, that America has the ability to regain a world position of respect and leadership. Whether we like it or not, we need a great politician, not just a figurehead.
Barack Obama has not won each of his debates with John McCain because he was the only one right on every issue. No, he is ahead because his approach is statesmanlike, calm and collected, wise and compassionate; in a word, Presidential.

[Nahnmon]

There is no conservative movement to speak of. There's only a fractured coalition based mostly on tired-out, old ideas. Progressivism is just that - progressive, emphasis on progress. Progressives are the future - conservatives are pasee.

[Galt907]

It is the american People who lose (Again). I am a dedicated Liberal, but I usually listen to serious speakers on the Conservative side because they encourage me to think, rethink and reevaluate.George W. Bush has done his party a terrible disservice, were I aRepublican I would be furious with him, not only for the harm to our country, but for the nearly total devastation of the Republican Party. In the short term, Republican candidates lose, in the long run, we all lose by not having a full range of ideas and choices available to us.

[Henry]

The problem is market branding. I know a Republican or two who actually are conservative in the living sense of the word. The Republican Party and the constituent elected officials have nothing to do with being conservative. They are a bunch of pretentious clowns running some crude marketing campaign to maintain the tap of power. And this is what it has turned into. This has little to do with governance of a democracy. They are in the midst of the identity crisis. Is it really Nation Building? Is it really Funny-money Lending? Is it really abuse of the environment? These things have little to do with the word conservative. And... this is their fundamental problem.
It is the Will Rogers quip about not being a member of an orgainized political party ("I'm a Democrat) that exposes the difference between the two parties.