Worst Campaign Ever?

« Return to Article

Discuss

  • Posted By: Dang Media Bias @ 11/05/2008 5:12:42 PM


    Obama's camp really ran the campaign. Obama's focus was on the speeches, and conveying his message to the people. Obama's campaign ran well primarily because of the never ending financial backing making staff help and support never ending as well, media bias to the extreme, and the failing economy. I think too much credit is giving to him, and not spreading the other factors out there that worked in his favor. McCain didn't run a great campaign, but I believe that factors that were out of his control hurt his campaign, especially being a Republican when our economy was failing, and media bias, and being compared to Bush. McCain just didn't have the charisma needed. People are drawn to that. I think saying it was the worst campaign is a little extreme. Hillary didn't have a chance either, Obama was a fresh face, and people are often drawn to new things. If Obama had been a familiar face things wouldn't have been in his favor so much.

    • Posted By: elizabethpaige @ 11/06/2008 6:35:15 PM

      McCain bragged, "I know how to win wars." He didn't. Nor did he know how to win the presidency.

  • Posted By: ThePrairiePrankster @ 11/06/2008 6:32:26 PM

    I don't know if McCain's was the worst. How good was Mondale's in 1984? Or McGovern in 1972? They got clobbered.

    I think a lot of it has to do with tone and theme. McCain had no thematic consistency, he was all over the road. And the tone was negative and occasionally mean spirited, not about what McCain would do but more of a series of attacks on his opponent that changed every day for no apparent reason.

    Ronald Reagan was a relentless optimist and did well with many who did not agree with every policy statement he made. Barack Obama demonstrated American optimism and had a steadiness I never saw in the McCain 2008 campaign unfortunately.

  • Posted By: romneypalin2012 @ 11/05/2008 8:55:41 PM

    This is another disgusting liberal slam. The comments "to be fair" were an understatement. The McCain campaign was leading in the polls before the financial meltdown. Honestly, Obama should have crushed McCain with President Bush's unpopularity, the war etc. Obama spent $600.000,000.00 on his campaign and spent 5:1 on media. Obama had damn near free media coverage without any real scrutiny from the media who kept tossing him softballs to hit out of the park. Was McCain perfect, hell no. However, your assertion that Palin was a terrible pick is DEAD Wrong. Before Palin conservatives like me, and I talked to a lot of them, were not energized by McCain, only distressed by Obama's left leaning. Palin brought an energy and enthusiasm to the campaign that McCain did not have. We conservatives like McCain, but loved Sara Palin, because she was a true conservative. As a final note, I will support President Elect Obama and give him the benefit of the doubt. But, the swing left is not a crushing blow like many think and those who would have voted Republican but voted for Obama will give him a short time frame for results (fair or unfair).

    Romney/Palin 2012

    • Posted By: elizabethpaige @ 11/06/2008 6:31:53 PM

      Conservatives' darling, Palin The Evangelical, was pregnant with her firstborn son before her marriage. Palin holding forth about 'God, faith, religious principles', has catapulted her to 24-karat hypocrite status.

      Palin's loopy interpreation of Thou Shalt Not Kill is to slaughter beautiful wildlife in front of children.

      When God was handing out brains, Palin was at the tongue counter. Low IQ. Low character.

    • Posted By: TripMoon @ 11/06/2008 6:52:25 AM

      It is nice to see a rational person. i am liberal, and I recognize honor when I see it. Let me say that you are a true American to me, a person who waits to see and think, before judging. I hope we won't let you down, andI will give the same courtesy to your party of prefernce when next time they win. We are Americans, let's get this right!!!

    • Posted By: summer1216 @ 11/05/2008 10:57:56 PM

      The McCain campaign only led in the polls once, and only briefly. They never really led.

  • Posted By: grandmamoses @ 11/06/2008 6:26:22 PM

    It is my opinion, if you know your competion has more money than you, wouldn't it have been wise to spend the money in the light of issues, not the vile attacks to your opponents character. It was as if they discounted the voter's needs. Palin will never be Presidential . I hope someday a woman will be our President, although she must be uniquely designed for the job. Stop the Hate, lets all work hard to be the best of America. Our children depend on it.

  • Posted By: politicsgirl @ 11/05/2008 3:48:49 PM

    Obama is not a Muslim ... and by the way I have met nice Muslim people.
    Call me insane, but I don't think it's right to judge people on their religion. On their actions, yes. On their religious beliefs, no.

    • Posted By: brokeroncall @ 11/05/2008 4:05:50 PM

      O.K. you're insane. I don't think there were any Baptists, Catholics, Presbys, or protestants flying those planes on 911. It's for certain, not all Muslims are terrorists, but to date, it has been proven all terrorists are Muslims.

      • Posted By: joe_mama @ 11/05/2008 4:35:42 PM

        For the record:

        Ted Bundy - Psychopathic killer and White American male

        Jeffry Dahmer - Cannibal, psychopathic killer and White American male

        Gary Ridgway (aka Green River Killer) - psychopathic killer and White American male

        John Wayne Gacy - Pedophile, rapist and psychopathic killer AND White American male


        If all Muslims are terrorists, does this mean that all White, Christian men are serial killers?

        That's what I thought.

        Love,
        JM


        PS--these are just the most notorious, I could name dozens more

        PPS--don't forget Adolph Hitler was a devoted Christian.....does that mean all Christians burn Jews, Gypsies, and the physically/mentally impaired in ovens?

        • Posted By: pbpace @ 11/05/2008 6:47:40 PM

          Hitler was a nut job who professed Christian ideals when it served his purposes and railed against them when they stood in his way.
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler#Religious_beliefs
          To say he was a devout Christian is simplistic.
          All Muslims are not terrorists and all terrorists are not Muslims. However, the majority of terror acts in the world are perpetrated by individuals professing Islam as their faith.

          • Posted By: pbpace @ 11/06/2008 6:19:12 PM

            Btw, if you people are going to play that card it's spelled ADOLF not ADOLPH...sorry just amazes me when people don't even know how to spell his name.

      • Posted By: HurleyOkeiffe @ 11/05/2008 7:46:38 PM

        If you still believe that terrorists drove the plane into the WTC....please please please watch a documentary called Zeitgeist you can find clips of it at www.Zeitgeistmovie.com.

        • Posted By: pbpace @ 11/06/2008 6:15:43 PM

          Oh geez...may we call out the conspiracy nut case police on you? What utter nonsense!

  • Posted By: celeste47 @ 11/06/2008 5:52:10 PM

    What worries me at this time is as Powell stated, "..the narrowing of the Republican party." It really bothers me to say that what I witnessed in this political season was a party that became exclusive vs. inclusive. After Palin arrived the definition of a Republican could only be: against abortion, against taxes (even with the biggest deficit in our history), small town, uneducated, angry/scared/mean (border line violent) white people.




  • Posted By: nickgr @ 11/06/2008 5:41:08 PM

    I read some nice comments here...

    My opinion is that if Palin delivered & posed as an alternative to Hillary,the election would be very close.

    If both McCain & Palin run a slick moderate centrist campaign,promising change & denouncing the Bush era,they would have a slim victory.

    It is just that both persons were weak,while Obi delivered ...

  • Posted By: LuisaInCA @ 11/06/2008 4:16:40 PM

    drenn73: I am fully aware of Landon's loss to FDR, which is why posted the following comment YESTERDAY at 8:15:27 pm EST:

    Posted By: LuisaInCA @ 11/05/2008 8:15:27 PM
    Comment: Is the author of this article serious? He really thinks McCain's campaign was the worst campaign ever? Wow. I guess Julian E. Zelizer forgot about Mondale's loss to Reagan in 1984. Mondale only won his home state (MN) and DC, earning him a total of 13 electoral votes. Reagan carried 525 electoral votes. That was the worst electoral defeat since Alf Landon's loss to FDR in 1936. (Landon secured 8 electoral votes, FDR secured 523.) Since both Republicans and Democrats have experienced worse defeats than McCain's, I'm guessing there were some pretty bad campaigns run those years. Oh, and let's not forget Jimmy Carter's defeat in 1980. Carter carried 49 electoral votes and Reagan carried 489. That was the worst electoral defeat for an incumbent president since Herbert Hoover lost to FDR in 1932.

    Let me guess: Julian E. Zelizer is a Democrat. Either that, or he's a revisionist historian. Or both. I really don't see how Carter, Mondale, or Landon could have run better campaigns than McCain and lost their elections by wider margins than did McCain. So I figure McCain's campaign couldn't possibly be the "Worst Campaign Ever."

    I love how unbiased the media are.

    • Posted By: drenn73 @ 11/06/2008 5:15:20 PM

      If a baseball team loses a game 1-0 in the bottom of the ninth it is completely different than a team that gives up 7 runs in the 7th all on errors, wild pitches and a couple of hit batsmen.

      • Posted By: LuisaInCA @ 11/06/2008 5:38:55 PM

        And that's different than the team that gives up 7 runs in each of 9 innings, all on errors and wild pitches.

  • Posted By: talmage101 @ 11/06/2008 1:35:12 PM

    No, McCain's campaign was not the worst ever! Please! Your guy won...now get over it and stop bad mouthing McCain. He is a great American and he deserves your respect.

    • Posted By: nmbrldy69 @ 11/06/2008 2:22:36 PM

      He deserves a Geritol, white teeth, and a clue. Yes, it was the was worst campaign ever, with many mistakes and vitriol. No wonder his supporters booed Obama's name during McCain's concession speech - they were simply mirroring Grampa Goodgums McCain. Be honest - if, as a McCain supporter, you can.

      • Posted By: jymrs @ 11/06/2008 5:15:56 PM

        you call yourself a Obama supporter? An Obama supporter will not disrespect anyone as he did not during his speech. shame on you! you should check yourself

  • Posted By: LuisaInCA @ 11/06/2008 5:13:20 PM

    Even in an opinion piece, where it is obvious that the author will be showing his bias, he should make an attempt to be fair. Titling this "Worst Campaign Ever?" raised a red flag with me, because historically, there is no way that McCain's campaign could come even close to being the worst campaign ever. I think the campaigns of Landon, Mondale, or Carter might be in the running for that distinction. McCain at least carried 22 states.

  • Posted By: MICKYmouse @ 11/06/2008 5:02:24 PM

    Lets kick him some more, America loves a winner and hates a loser.

    He lost, get over it, all sides......

    There is no need to do like the author and show the world how mean and hatefult you can be.

  • Posted By: GregHere @ 11/06/2008 4:58:36 PM

    .................................................McCain conducted a very bad Campaign for sure.....It is up to others to say if McCain & Palin were the ultimate all time worst or not..............America saw them as Loosers even before they lost!!!!

  • Posted By: Brooklyn Gurl @ 11/06/2008 4:49:33 PM

    McCain's mistake was that he had 2 giant albatross hanging around his neck just like Hillary had a monstrosity of an albatross hanging around hers.

  • Posted By: Brooklyn Gurl @ 11/06/2008 4:48:56 PM

    McCain's mistake was that he had 2 giant albatross hanging around his neck just like Hillary had a monstrosity of an albatross hanging around hers.

  • Posted By: tbass @ 11/06/2008 2:05:58 PM

    McCain's greatest mistakes were being outspent mroe than 2-1 by the Obama campaign and failing to secure the fawning press coverage Barak managed. One has to wonder what the race might have looked like but for those factors.

    • Posted By: drenn73 @ 11/06/2008 3:36:24 PM

      he had the fawning coverage of the press aboard the Straight Talk Express during the primaries. Then he stopped talking to them...When the press pool gets the same talking points day after day there isn't much to report.

      • Posted By: tbass @ 11/06/2008 4:43:52 PM

        You're thinking of the 2000 election cycle. And even then, the press only preferred McCain to his primary opponents. He wouldn't have been feeling the love had he made it into the general election to face Gore.

  • Posted By: PSU#1 @ 11/05/2008 5:57:22 PM

    Typical Newsweek. McCain did seem inept but so did Obama. Only difference was the press downplayed or made excuses for Obama while blowing every misstep by McCain totally out of proportion. The public isn't as dumb as you think, and the press isn't as smart as they believe.

    • Posted By: eagles1776 @ 11/06/2008 4:41:56 PM

      It is amazing how one sees things through a filter. You claim that Obama got a free pass but others seem to think that McCain with his many visits on talk shows and comedy shows late at night were more like free passes. It is all in one's perspective. Some claim that Palin was picked on yet those who saw what they saw saw what they saw and there was no free pass for her opponents. She was as ditzy as she was.
      Biden made some gaffs and they were all over the media but that was, of course, a free pass in the nids of some. It is all perspective.

  • Posted By: joe42067 @ 11/05/2008 5:34:06 PM

    The day of reckoning has come and passed judgement on the Republican Reich and extinguished it. To keep America safe from the American Taliban, err, Republicans. THE WORLD NOW HAS HOPE ! In order to fully restore that hope, american needs to purge and rid itself of Republicans, our own version of the Night of a Broken Glass. I was watching the reactions of the world to this. And only TWICE can I remember the world rejoicing together. The first was new yrs eve 1999-2000 and the new millenium and the end of WWII. In the latter a Reich was extingushed and yesterday the same occurred. The world cannot and should not tolerate Republicans anymore. GOP - means GREED OVER PRINCIPLE.

    God is smiling down on us again. He turned his back on us out of shame during the last 8 yrs and now we are back in his good graces.

    • Posted By: pbpace @ 11/06/2008 4:24:28 PM

      Wouldn't count on it my friend. The Repubs are better armed. Go ahead and try though...."locked and loaded" as they say.

  • Posted By: khughesk @ 11/05/2008 10:04:47 PM

    This article supports typical 'politics as usual' which is to base everything on image- rather than doing what your convictions tell you would work. This campaign has been a very eye opening experience for me. It has done well to expose the fact that many of our so called 'objective' media outlets are self serving, and have lost any sense of objective & balanced perspective. Newsweek is among the worst. This is a shame as I grew up with Newsweek. Why don't you do a story about how the mainstream media failed the american public?

    • Posted By: eagles1776 @ 11/06/2008 4:18:35 PM

      Is FOX among the media that is liberal and has failed the public? I think not. They are and have been the propaganda arm of the uber right wing for many years. So don't complain about the media simply because they don't agree with your narrow view point. Look at a variety of media and then decide who to trust and what to trust when presented to you. By the way Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and their ilk are not NEWS media and so don't believe what they say either. They spout lies and hatred because that is what their audience wants to hear. It is all about $$$$$ without listners or readers the media dies. They give the people what they want or perish.

  • Posted By: whiterock @ 11/05/2008 3:34:28 PM

    To all of you who beleive this was a landslide, I need to remind all of you again that Obama won the popular vote by ONLY 6%. That means that there were only 6% more of the people that wanted Obama over McCain. THe "landslide" was in the electoral votes. The electoral college is different than the popular vote. Remember the Bush/Gore election? Everyone was upset because Bush won the electoral votes and Gore won the popular votes but Bush got to be president and a lot of people thought that was unfair. As far as the popular vote...which means the people's vote...Obama only won by 6%. Now if Obama had achieved more of the popular vote than a one-point spread, than I would agree with you about the landslide.

  • Posted By: sanfordrm @ 11/06/2008 12:32:17 PM

    Worst ever? Are you kidding? What about Walter "I will raise your taxes" Mondale in 1984? Didn't he only win 1 state? How many votes did he actually get?

    McCain's loss would have been more dramatic if Palin was not his running mate. She is the only reason most Republicans voted for the moderate-minded McCain. If not for her, I would have voted McCain ONLY because it wasn't Obama.

    • Posted By: LuisaInCA @ 11/06/2008 1:03:06 PM

      Mondale only won his home state (MN) and DC. He garnered a whopping 13 electoral votes to Reagan's 525. I'd say Mondale's campaign might actually have been in contention for the "worst campaign ever." If not the worst ever, it was undeniably a monumental failure. And Jimmy Carter's loss was ugly as well. He won only 49 electoral votes to Reagan's 489. Yet somehow, Mr. Zelizer is trying to convince us that McCain's campaign was "The Worst Campaign Ever." I remain unconvinced.

      • Posted By: drenn73 @ 11/06/2008 3:53:10 PM

        if that is your criteria for the worst ever then that honor would go to Alf Landon who only got 8 electoral votes against FDR's 523 in 1936.

        • Posted By: LuisaInCA @ 11/06/2008 4:13:45 PM

          Exactly. I will cut and paste my post from yesterday:

          Posted By: LuisaInCA @ 11/05/2008 8:15:27 PM
          Comment: Is the author of this article serious? He really thinks McCain's campaign was the worst campaign ever? Wow. I guess Julian E. Zelizer forgot about Mondale's loss to Reagan in 1984. Mondale only won his home state (MN) and DC, earning him a total of 13 electoral votes. Reagan carried 525 electoral votes. That was the worst electoral defeat since Alf Landon's loss to FDR in 1936. (Landon secured 8 electoral votes, FDR secured 523.) Since both Republicans and Democrats have experienced worse defeats than McCain's, I'm guessing there were some pretty bad campaigns run those years. Oh, and let's not forget Jimmy Carter's defeat in 1980. Carter carried 49 electoral votes and Reagan carried 489. That was the worst electoral defeat for an incumbent president since Herbert Hoover lost to FDR in 1932.

          Let me guess: Julian E. Zelizer is a Democrat. Either that, or he's a revisionist historian. Or both. I really don't see how Carter, Mondale, or Landon could have run better campaigns than McCain and lost their elections by wider margins than did McCain. So I figure McCain's campaign couldn't possibly be the "Worst Campaign Ever."

          I love how unbiased the media are.

    • Posted By: eagles1776 @ 11/06/2008 3:10:18 PM

      Probably the reason for McCain's campaign being called the worst ever despite Mondale and Carter is that in the case of Mondale and Carter they stayed on message. The wrong message, obviously because they lost big time. I wasn't quite sure what McCain's message was. I was stunned when he picked Palin for his running mate. Surely, I thought, there has to be someone in the Republican party of either gender better than this woman. A dear friend of ours who just turned 70 told us that she was a Republican and had never voted for a Democrat for president until now and it was because of McCain's pick of Palin that did it. So what went wrong for McCain? Bush, Sarah Palin as running mate, negative campaigning and irattic campaigning.

      McCain gave a very good consession speech. Had his entire campaign been that positive and that cordial he might have been giving a victory speech instead.

      • Posted By: LuisaInCA @ 11/06/2008 3:24:20 PM

        If Mondale obviously picked the wrong message, then he ran a bad campaign. He only picked up one state -- his own, Minnesota -- and DC. John McCain picked up 22 states to Obama's 28 states+DC.

        Again, I'd say Mondale's campaign was worse than McCain's.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse