McCain: Obama’s Economic Positions “Far Left”
Campaigning in Ohio on Friday, Republican candidate for president Sen. John McCain said that his opponent’s economic plans are “far left” and bad for America.
McCain is campaigning in Ohio for the second day in a row, because his campaign considers this state to be crucial on election day. Without Ohio, McCain advisers believe, it will be virtually impossible for McCaint to win the election.
“We’re going to fight it out on the economic grounds,” McCain himself told ABC’s “Good Morning America.”
“Sen. Obama’s economic policy is from the far left of American politics and ours is in the center,” McCain said. “He wants to raise people’s taxes—that’s clear.”
Recent poll show McCain making comeback and winning support for his economic plans. Where his opponent Sen. Barack Obama had a solid, double-digit lead on the economy only weeks ago, that has now decreased to in the single digits. Some polls even say that McCain is now considered best able to deal with the economy.
“Ohio is hurting,” McCain said. “People in Ohio are having trouble staying in their homes, keeping their jobs. We have to get this economy out of the ditch,” he added.
His economic message seems to be working rather well in Ohio these days, where he is often joined by Joe ‘the Plumber’ Wurzelbacher, who became famous after asking Obama whether the latter wanted to raise taxes on him. Obama then answered that he did not “want to punish” anyone’s success but merely “spread the wealth around.”
Ever since this exchange, McCain has made a comeback in the polls, and has been unafraid to talk about the economy, which was once considered to be his main weakness.
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Comments are closed.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
The thing is that McCain’s plan is per definition more costly and more liberal with the US budget, so who is he to throw the l-word around?
Also, why the heck did he put redistributionist Palin on his ticket? How come he thinks Obama’s healthcare plan, that includes private players, is far left and how come anyone should trust him when he seems more ready to offer bail-outs for the auto industries simply on ideological grounds? How come regular folks shouldn’t get welfare when the US auto industries get support for not running their companies correctly?