Why does Mc Cain lost the election?

[Paul Weinstock]

Hi, Does anybody could give 5 reason why Mc Cain lost United States' Elections.

Paul Weinstock

[M.Dancer]

Hi, Does anybody could give 5 reason why Mc Cain lost United States' Elections.

Paul Weinstock

1) because votes more for Obama

2) because Fey got laughs more Bidden Than

3)Because Tired People of Bush

4) Is our Children Learning?

5)Empathy

[kimmy]

6) Obama did has so much campaign funding and did buying so much advertising very much also helping Obama beating McCain.

k-

[sharkman]

Interesting thread...I'd add my own response, but I'd only be parroting what's already been done.

[kimmy]

Interesting thread...I'd add my own response, but I'd only be parroting what's already been done.

If you can't take the heat, you does got out of the kitchen.

-k

[punked]

Bush

[stevoh]

1. Obama raised more money.

2. Palin appealed to base but alienated other voters.

3. Obama appeared to be steady and solid during crisis, McCain appeared reactionary (calling off campaign but not really, couldn't get own party to vote his way).

4. Bush's legacy.

5. Lack of support for McCain within his own party that resulted in a disorganized, last minute campaign.

[daniel]

1. Ballots were secret;

2. Women had the right to vote

3. Blacks had the right to vote

4. Minorities had the right to vote.

[DogOnPorch]

Hi, Does anybody could give 5 reason why Mc Cain lost United States' Elections.

Paul Weinstock

Hello. Can anyone give me five reasons why McCain lost the US election?

Why does Mc Cain lost the election?

Why did McCain lose the election?

---------------------------------

That's better...

[Topaz]

Bush doesn`t like McCain and McCain isn`t a relative of Bush.

[sharkman]

I want that my kids should've spoke just as good of english as I done!

[BubberMiley]

Yeah, ESL people are hilarious.

Maybe McCain lost because the GOP was complacent, believing that the Bradley Effect would have the same effect as in the 1980s, that young people and black people don't vote, and that Americans would never vote for a liberal with a terrorist-sounding name.

But I think it comes down to one word: Ayers.

Basing their campaign around a tenuous acquaintance screamed desperation. It made every person who ever personally met an asshole feel defensive and want to take Obama's side.

[Shady]

The death of objective journalism.

[August1991]

Hi, Does anybody could give 5 reason why Mc Cain lost United States' Elections.

Paul Weinstock

I will give you two reasons.

1. House prices fell.

2. The stock market collapsed.

If you look at the states where house prices fell, particularly swing states, they all went Democrat. And the boomers were looking at their 401k accounts. Even with this, Obama barely garnered 52% of the vote.

If credit markets hadn't frozen, McCain would be president now.

----

IOW, Obama is an accidental president. He's America's Bob Rae.

Like Bob Rae as PM of Ontario, Obama is about to oversee a huge government budget deficit and harsh choices to protect ordinary people. Unlike Bob Rae, Obama has experienced people around him and Obama has a large margin of manoeuvre. Obama could move to the right of Genghis Khan or Barry Goldwater and his supporters would still vote Obama.

Obama seems to be capable of compromise even more than Rae.

Edited January 13, 2009 by August1991

[ft.niagara]

McCain just had no charisma. His over use of "my friend" and his "war hero" status just got old. In the end, he just seemed to be trying to go down like a good soldier because he wanted to be a player after his loss.

[sharkman]

I think the economy tanking had a real impact on the election because people felt scared about it.

I agree with a theory that states that by the mid-sixties, the majority of people were living their lives based on emotion, or how they felt about things, rather than reasoning. All of the decisions one makes, from what to believe to who to marry. This would no doubt lead one to shrug and say, "so what?". But previous to this, people depended on applying logic and reasoning not coloured with emotion or feelings, even though they might be afraid about the economy for instance.

In case the pitfalls of feelings and emotions are not obvious to some, I'll point out that they change like the wind. They can be affected by silly, shallow things. Many of the decisions we make in life will impact our future in ways we can't tell. To base our decisions on emotion, rather than counsel and reasoning, leaves us open to regrets that emotions couldn't see beforehand.

Today, emotion impacts daily life and decisions so much that for the most part, advertisers and marketers gear their campaigns towards making you feel good about owning product x rather than any other benefits it might have. And that is how the last US election was run, trying to make voters feel good about their candidate. Imagine making a decision so important to the world based on pure emotion. This is in part why the average person can not tell you why they believe what they believe, they can only tell you they feel good about it. Of course, on this forum, we tend to be a cut above, but the masses are not so.

Voters placed Obama in the White House, not because he had more experience(he has none) or had rubbed shoulders with power brokers for decades like McCain, but because he's a great orator, or he sounded more polished than McCain. Even now, people reference McCain's overuse of the phrase, "My friends", as if that is the measure of what makes a good president.

And then there was the media, who fawned over him like a giddy school girl. They wouldn't so much as mention his middle name, which is quite funny now, since it will be fully used during his inauguration. All of the radical associations Obama had were deemed off limits by the media as was his lack of experience. Why? Because they wanted Obama to win, and let their emotions overtake professional ethics.

Was Obama the better man? Only time will tell if the voters regret their decision, but by then it will be too late.

[kimmy]

Maybe McCain lost because the GOP was complacent, believing that the Bradley Effect would have the same effect as in the 1980s, that young people and black people don't vote, and that Americans would never vote for a liberal with a terrorist-sounding name.

But I think it comes down to one word: Ayers.

Basing their campaign around a tenuous acquaintance screamed desperation. It made every person who ever personally met an asshole feel defensive and want to take Obama's side.

I certainly don't think they were complacent. "The Bradley Effect" was not a campaign strategy, it was a hope.

And Ayers was hardly the basis of their campaign. It was one of many things that they threw at the wall and hoped would stick. And like everything else they threw at the wall, it didn't stick. Ayers got some traction with people who already hated Obama, which is probably one reason why it's one of the few memorable things about the Republican campaign. The other reason it's memorable is that it was Palin, rather than McCain, delivering the negative campaigning. Palin, whatever her faults, was able to deliver her material effectively (meaning that it got peoples' attention and people talked about it.) McCain, by contrast, I don't think anybody can recall much that McCain said during the campaign.

Nothing they tried to campaign on had much appeal to anybody who wasn't already on their side. They were out-strategized and out-campaigned. Their negative campaigning may have had some effect, but none of their own platform struck a chord as McCain was more or less completely tuned out.

-k