« Fast & Furious Cover Up Coming Apart Fast and Furious |
Main
|
Obama: Capitalism Has "Never Worked" »
December 06, 2011
GOP Analysts Say Attacking Obama Personally Would Be Too Dangerous
But what do they mean by "personally?"
Republicans on a private Republican National Committee conference call with allies warned Tuesday that party surrogates should refrain from personal attacks against President Barack Obama, because such a strategy is too hazardous for the GOP.
"We're hesitant to jump on board with heavy attacks" personally against President Obama, Nicholas Thompson, the vice president of polling firm the Tarrance Group, said on the call. "There's a lot of people who feel sorry for him."
Recent polling data indicates that while the president suffers from significantly low job approval ratings, voters still give "high approval" to Obama personally, Thompson said.
Voters "don't think he's an evil man who's out to change the United States" for the worse--even though many of the same survey respondents agree that his policies have harmed the country, Thompson said. The upshot, Thompson stressed, is that Republicans should "exercise some caution" when talking about the president personally.
I don't know what this advisory means because "personally" means a lot of different things.
If they mean "it's dangerous to claim he's evil and deliberately wishes to plunge the country in Cloward-Piven chaos," I agree, that is dangerous. Those in the middle do not believe this (because if they did believe this, they sure wouldn't be in the middle!) and that's too much of a buy-in to expect the politically unaffected to kick in, intellectually.
On the other hand, is it "personal" to note he's a Stuttering Clusterf***k of a Miserable Failure? Okay, yes, with the swears, that's personal; but pointing out someone's policies are a complete and utter failure -- most likely because they are based on a wrongheaded and thick-witted ignorance/denial of the workings of the real world -- that's not personal.
They couldn't possibly mean that, I don't think. If they did mean that, what exactly are they suggesting we run on?