country first

Has the McCain campaign considered that the time to change their ad strategy is NOW, and only because two weeks ago is no longer an option?

In the last month, McCain's favorability rating has dropped 6 points, from 56.4 to 50.1, and Obama's favorability has increased, from 55.3 to 57.4, according to the RCP polling average.  The Obama-focused campaign is not working.

Now Election Politics 101 dictates that when you're down and your opponent is hovering at 50% in electoral polls, it's time to enlighten voters to the negative aspects of your opponent, commonly known as "negative" ads.  The McCain camp followed this rule to a tee.  And in this case, it did not work. 

They can blame the media and say it's because the media has a double standard for the two campaigns, and they do.  They can probably blame the failed negative ad strategy on other factors as well.  But the bottom line is it has not worked, and it's time to change course.

Rather than set their sights on Obama's unfavorables, how about playing to their strengths? Remember the McCain bio videos -- those that recount his experience as a war hero, a man who suffered for the sake of his country and his country men and women?  What happened to the Country First theme dominating the Convention?

And we never saw ads that tout McCain's independent, pragmatic record in the Senate.

No scramble necessary to concoct concepts, use McCain himself, at his best.  There's a reason this guy was popular -- at times.

Perhaps there is concern about shirking the playbook and going back up with McCain-centered ads with 20 days left to play.  Yet, the reasons for going positive at this point grossly outweigh any conceivable risk:

1) McCain may not win, but I'm sure he would prefer for it to be close rather than get trounced by a Senate newbie like Obama.

2) McCain may not win, but he doesn't want to be responsible for a Democratic filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, and a Democratic deluge in the House.

3) McCain may not win, but he can go out on a positive note and preserve his pride and his image.

4) McCain may not win, but he's not winning anyway, and he has nothing to lose.

While McCain's chances of winning are slim and getting slimmer every day, his campaign owes it to themselves, their supporters, and the Republican Party ... and John McCain ... to go back to basics.

Is our country more concerned about change, or trust?  

One might conclude that with McCain's recent insurgence in the polls, he is winning the change game.  Yet, are the voters who have moved to McCain -- since the choosing of Sarah Palin for VP -- convinced that he will bring about more change?  

Or do they like the air of authenticity that the ticket embodies vs. the urban, blue-blood, highly polished, Washington-insider ticket of Obama-Biden? 



I propose that voters' "change"-ing opinions of John McCain have to do with the likeability of Sarah Palin.  Her small town values and family life, and a "you go girl!" response to her mastery of unexpected challenges, win over voters.  Not just because she's a woman, but also because she's not an Ivy-league educated CEO or lawyer from the glamorous regions of America.

The undecided Midwest -- suburban and rural -- voters can trust Sarah Palin (she's real), and thus trust McCain by association. 



Compare the McCain-Palin ticket then to the Obama-Biden ticket.  The majority of American voters are likely to gravitate towards the service to country ideals more closely aligned with the Midwest and West, the ideals summed up in the "Country First" theme recently touted by the McCain campaign.  
Compare that to the lack of understanding, and even fear, that most Americans feel towards the self-serving inner-city and inner-Congress wheeling and dealing associated with the Northeast and big cities.  



Simply, McCain is from Arizona and Palin is from Alaska; Barack Obama is from Chicago, Illinois and Joe Biden is from Delaware.  McCain began his adulthood by risking his life many times for the security of our country.  Obama began his career in Harvard Law School and then spent a few years as a "community organizer;" he's on his way to career politician-hood. 

Palin did not attain political success due to overt political ambition.  She had pure intentions of serving her family and community, and then her town and her State. She is a "real" person.  Biden, by comparison, has spent nearly his entire adulthood as a member of the most exclusive club in the nation: the U.S. Senate.

Fair or not, the perceptions Americans have of the two presidential tickets are accurate ...  because they are the perceptions of the two presidential tickets. 

With trust in government at an all-time low, which bona fides are more Americans inclined to place their faith in?   



I’ve heard time and again from women regarding McCain's pick of Palin that it's quite "presumptuous" of McCain to count on women to “vote for Palin just because she's a woman."

Ok. So these women, from metropolitan areas outside Washington, DC, Chicago, Houston, Boston and Los Angeles don't need to vote for her.  Most of them wouldn’t have voted for McCain anyway.

Yet, if women, and men (yes, they like her too!), from the Midwest and West are more enthusiastic about McCain, and if they turn out rather than sit out, it’s all over. Make room for McCain-Palin in the White House.