I know we have talked about McCain’s problem getting all his people on message in several threads, but I wanted to start a new one for this.
A new ad from the Republican National Committee’s independent expenditure unit seems to dismiss the economic bailout proposals that John McCain continues to work on, potentially confusing voters by leading them to think the senator opposes the measures. The ad also criticizes Barack Obama for the size and costs of his government spending proposals.
“Wall Street squanders our money and Washington is forced to bail them out with – you guessed it – our money,” the RNC ad states. “Can it get any worse? Under Barack Obama’s plan, the government would spend a trillion dollars more, even after the bailout. A trillion dollars. Who pays? You do. New taxes. New spending. New debt. Barack Obama’s plan: It will make the problem worse.”
McCain told CNN this morning that in spite of fierce opposition to the bailout, “I’m glad to stay at it. That’s what my job is, I believe, as an American, not as a candidate for president.” McCain said he spoke with President Bush this morning and expressed support for a proposed increase of FDIC insurance levels on bank deposits from $100,000 to $250,000.
This really isn’t a McCain problem, it’s a Republican one.
There’s no leadership, so the party is splitting into factions.
It looks like Gingrich was actively undercutting McCain yesterday before the vote, and they were planning on running an anit-Democratic ad the moment the bill passed. Too bad nobody told McCain about it.
There’s no leadership in either the Democratic Party or the Republican Party. Obama certainly isn’t doing much except to tow the line. Had something like this come up in the Illinois State Senate, Obama probably would have voted “present”.
It’s unsurprising that you feel that way, given your ever-predictable irrational hatred for anything Obama does. It doesn’t make this argument any less idiotic, though. Consider this: it’s already hard enough getting legislative support for this bill this close to a national election. How many Republicans do you think would want to line up behind legislation if you tacked on the caveat that it was brokered by–or, god forbid, authored by–the Democratic presidential nominee? What Obama said about the two candidates steering clear of this was absolutely correct. Congress needs a bill that it can sell to the public as a bipartisan, group effort, not “Obama’s bill” or “McCain’s bill.” That’s the only way this legislation is going to have more than a snowball’s chance in hell at passing.
This whole thing has been pretty poorly led in Washington overall. From calling it a “Bail-Out” bill, which makes a lot of ignorant people easily led to believe it’s just about getting a bunch of fatcats and financial firms out of their mistakes, to Pelosi making her stupid ad-libbed attack on Republicans at the beginning of the House process, to allowing a vote before the tally had been pre-determined (and thus changes made to ensure it passed,) and more. Bush has no political capital at all, so when he calls a House member and urges him/her to vote for the bill, he is likely to hear a click and a dial-tone. McCain has never had much love in the Republican party and no real influence. Obama knows he isn’t in a position to presumptively assume the party will follow his lead and step over, say, Pelosi, and the Democrats had 40% of their members vote against it.
It’s always scary when we actually NEED Congress to step in, figure out a real solution to a critical problem, then implement it. They are much better at posturing and speeches than actual problem solving (see: health care, energy, etc.)
I partly agree with Dirt (ugh) that there’s no leadership with the Dems either. 40% or so of the House Dems, including both of my state’s Reps, voted against the bailout too. Nobody in either party is staying on message about this because nobody can agree what the message is.
Just to make clear that I am an equal opportunity griper, I’ll add that Pelosi’s speech pissed me off as well. What an incredibly ill-considered time for political grandstanding. There will be plenty of time for finger-pointing (on both sides) after we put out the fire. In the meantime, shut up and do your damned job, Nancy.
I almost posted a thing the day after the debate about how it’s a shame that “politician” has become a four letter word because there is something to be said for a person who can, through charisma and tact, work with others to get things done. Obama displayed this positive trait by saying “Well, I agree with John McCain on that, but I differ from him on this.”