terrorist attack would be "great" for mcCain

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

drexlersdad

SABAS
Joined
Sep 16, 2008
Messages
4,825
Likes
255
Points
83
abcnews.com

McCain adviser Charlie Black told Fortune Magazine that national security events help Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.

"The assassination of Benazir Bhutto in December was an 'unfortunate event,' says Black. 'But his knowledge and ability to talk about it reemphasized that this is the guy who's ready to be Commander-in-Chief. And it helped us.' As would, Black concedes with startling candor after we raise the issue, another terrorist attack on U.S. soil. 'Certainly it would be a big advantage to him,' says Black."

i know this is a little old, but ive been thinking about this recently, isnt that completely fucked? if we were attacked would the mccain campaign be happy?:crazy:

i bet they would be overjoyed. which is NOT good.
 
There was an article written about this general idea on fivethirtyeight.com:

This time around, we have one candidate who advocates a timetable to withdraw our troops from Iraq and divert those resources to Afghanistan in order to root out the people who actually attacked us seven years ago – bin Laden and his band of terrorists. And then we have a candidate who talks about maintaining U.S. forces in Iraq for 100 years if necessary, and sings songs in public about pre-emptively bombing Iran, which would set yet another gear turning in bin Laden’s scheme to bring about global war. Once again it appears that bin Laden would prefer the Republican candidate, and once again it appears that since any appearance by bin Laden is likely to tip voters towards favoring the decorated Vietnam War veteran, bin Laden’s best move is to show up with another October Surprise.

The McCain campaign has already attempted to label Obama as the preferred choice of Muslim terrorists everywhere. Back in April, McCain seized on favorable comments about Obama by a member of Hamas, stating, “If Senator Obama is favored by Hamas I think people can make judgments accordingly.” There’s no doubt the McCain campaign will pounce if bin Laden pops up with similar remarks. (It would hardly be a surprise if Hamas truly favors Obama, given that the Muslim world – and the rest of the world, for that matter – overwhelmingly favors him.)

With McCain lagging in the polls, bin Laden might even try a Hail Mary – with Sarah Palin on the ballot, I’d imagine that he’ll throw in some misogynistic comments about how a woman’s place is inside the home and that a nation led by a woman is sure to be cursed by God. (Which would be particularly rich if he goes that route, given that he’s probably holed up somewhere in Pakistan, where they’ve already had a female chief executive.) And then there’s the worst-case scenario: while Obama’s lead is substantial enough that he probably could weather a bin Laden appearance, the real game-changer would be if – God forbid – bin Laden is able to launch another terrorist attack on U.S. soil.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/10/guest-column-will-bin-laden-strike.html
 
Anything that diverts attention from "mundane", domestic issues probably helps McCain.
 
It would certainly help McCain's campaign, but to say that he'd be happy about a terrorist attack is just plain wrong. I don't believe much that any politician says, but I absolutely believe John McCain when he says he'd rather lose the election and win the war than win the election and lose the war.
 
Extremist websites have already stated that a terror attack before the election would be ideal, because it was scare the American voters into voting for McCain.
 
It's one thing to say that a terrorist attack on US soil, or any focus off the economy and on to an international crisis would benefit McCain.

It's another to say McCain's campaign would be happy about it.
 
It's one thing to say that a terrorist attack on US soil, or any focus off the economy and on to an international crisis would benefit McCain.

It's another to say McCain's campaign would be happy about it.

well, that is exactly what i am saying. people in his camp would be overjoyed. high-fives all around.
 
i was obviously embellishing, but if they were to look at it as a positive towards their campaign, it would be hard to differentiate feeling good/bad about it.
 
It would certainly help McCain's campaign, but to say that he'd be happy about a terrorist attack is just plain wrong. I don't believe much that any politician says, but I absolutely believe John McCain when he says he'd rather lose the election and win the war than win the election and lose the war.

It's more than wrong to insinuate that McCain would be happy about a terrorist attack.

Loony Tunes...
 
FWIW, I was quoting this:
'Mental health issues'
She will be housed in a mental health unit at the county jail for her safety and because of "her not insignificant mental health issues," prosecutor Mark Tranquilli said.
 
It's more than wrong to insinuate that McCain would be happy about a terrorist attack.

Loony Tunes...

I agree. McCain personally would be horrified at an attack. Nor is he personally responsible for the idiots who are rooting for such an event. I can't speak for others, but I was not insinuating otherwise.
 
Yeah, but insinuating that Obama is the anti-christ is totally acceptable.

That does seem to be a bit peculiar, if not flat out hypocritical. However, it's true of both sides. Every election year cycle, there are accusations thrown towards each side, and the side receiving complains about it, and the other side acts innocent. Then the roles are reversed. Wash, rinse and repeat.

It is funny how those who make the charges always seem to be the people who are on the far reaches of the political spectrum (both sides) and don't seem to care how stupid they make themselves look by saying it.
 
Everyone seems to agree that a terrorist attack would help McCain. Which means, obviously, that American voters don't trust Obama when it comes to national security. And if that's the case, why in the hell would we want to elect the guy?
 
So does this mean that a tanking economy is "great" for Obama, and that he is happy about it?

:dunno:
 
Insane McCain's feeble grasp on reality and his knee-jerk reaction to world affairs he clearly doesn't understand is exactly why I'm voting for Obama.

McCain = WWIII

An attack would simply solidify that feeling, but I've already voted anyway.

I would not be surprised by an attack arranged by those currently pulling the strings here at home though.
 
Insane McCain's feeble grasp on reality and his knee-jerk reaction to world affairs he clearly doesn't understand is exactly why I'm voting for Obama.
McCain = WWIII


Funny you would say that since McCain advocated "the surge" before anyone else, and now even Obama admits that everyone knew it would succeed (even though he opposed it).

Oh well, this is all for entertainment anyhow.
 
I haven't read the posts so this might of already been said:

The terrorist fanatics have already spoken out saying that they support Obama over McCain, so I doubt they would blow something up.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top