who has campaigned on supporting the war in Iraq and making the Bush Tax Cuts permanent is going to be able to successfully co-opt the message of change.

"McCain wants to blah blah blah. That's not change. And it's not what the American people deserve."

This stuff writes itself.

inherently negative.  It is the negative basis of Obama's campaign against Edwards, Hillary and all the others.

Change you can believe in as a slogan only exists if there is Change you can't believe in.

After "35 years of experience" and inevitability didn't work, Hillary Clinton adopted the "change" mantra. It didn't help much as that was back in early February. In desperation she quipped, "Change you can Xerox."

For "change" to work you need three things:

1) A political environment that demands change. Clearly this one qualifies.

2. A candidate who credibly offers change. Obama clearly does. McCain will have a very hard time pulling that off, though he does represent a minor change in GOP philosophy (accepting climate change is real, etc.)
   
3. The right kind of change. This is the real issue: do people want change the way Obama promotes or do they want something else entirely?

The fact is, McCain is, in many respects, a "change" Republican.  That's change from Bush, not change to the Democratic party though.  I think the worst thing for Dems this year would be to underestimate some of the appeal of this guy.  He has personal bravery (as opposed to Bush), he is open to listening to new ideas (as opposed to Bush), he is capable of standing up for something in his own party that is unpopular (aotb).  He really is not an unappealing candidate and I would warn those Democrats who see him simply as the old fart bush clone, to take him a lot more seriously than that if we want to win this thing.

Whose fault is it that the war has lessened as an issue? Why arent we concerned that the Democratic Party has spectacularly failed at making it clear to the public what effect the Iraq war has had on many facets of American life? We seem passive about it. The public doesnt think it is such a big issue anymore. They are more concerned about other issues. Yet, the reason why other issues are still issues now is because of the massive opportunity cost of the iraq war. It is a war that has hogged

1. Discussion time that could have been spent on many other issues
   
2.  Massive amount of money spent that has led to "other" more important issues being ignored.
   
3. Dead lives and injured soldiers that will have a mini social impact in some communities.
   
4. Still unresolved terrorism issues because of time spent on this useless war.
   
5.  Points 1 -4 will still be issues and do we really want to elect someone who doesn't realize the error of their ways on such a blunder other than the strategic outook?
   
6. Some of the neocons who were cheerleaders for this war are McCain's friends (Bill Kristol).

If the public doesn't see this as an issue of an indicator of future leadership, it is probably because our party has failed to clearly present the case of what a blunder this war really was. People kind of realize it judging by the polls, but it hasn't sunk it 100% yet.

"Change you deserve" is a warning to America.  They aren't campaigning on their own merits, they're warning you of what you'll deserve if you elect their opponent.

I'm going to need some anti-depressants if they pull something like that off.

I think the viability of this tactic depends heavily on who McCain is facing the in the fall, if it has any legs at all (which I'm personally extremely doubtful about, but I'm going along with the premise here for the sake of argument).

Against Sen. Clinton this tactic might have some legs, just because of the nature of her campaign as the experience candidate, which by its very nature hinges on being playing the role of a Washington insider who can get things done.

Against Sen. Obama, the idea of McCain trying to run as the candidate for change is such a non-started I can't see it being anything other than a half-hearted attempt that gets quickly smacked down and abandoned in favor of the stance that McCain is the old hand in the race and the go-to guy on security. However else you may feel about Obama, he has absolutely owned the issue of change and a pro-war, pro-tax cut republican like McCain who is as tied to Bush as he is won't come close to co-opting that position.

can't continue to "stay the course" with their rhetoric, does not mean that their obvious "stay the course" policies are not going overwhelm their rhetoric.  Bush is the president; the president is the establishment.  Thus any person with an R next to their name is going to be painted as the establishment.  Not matter what rhetoric they use.  I can't believe you're even concerned about this.  Boehner is flailing to try some method to blunt the overwhelming CW that the Republicans are going to lose big in November.  And you're buying into it?

Fortunately, Obama hasn't been winning simply due to a Change slogan, but due to the fact that the majority of people who've voted believe in what he's bringing to the table.

I wouldn't get too concerned about this.

If you run as a Republican who is not really a Republican, you are going to have trouble getting Republicans to vote for you. The blow-back on even a crappy global warming proposal was nearly instantaneous.

Change you deserve is a terrible, terrible slogan.  To me at least, it comes across as potentially negative change.  Meaning you could be wicked and deserve righteous retribution.  There's this whole weird, sexual, S&M feel to it as well.  You deserve a cookie and a spanking.  Or something like that.

Anyway, I bet this will go over like a lead balloon as a slogan.  

McCain and change? Oh it's a joke. Let him use it. Cause whenever I hear the word 'change' I immediately think of Obama.

Does every thread here have to devolve into a bitter battle about Clinton v. Obama?

I have one recommendation to Jerome and the crew here, once this thing is clearly Obama's in your mind, whenever that may be (and most pundits are already there), make a pronouncement here that this site backs the winner and put a stop to all of this BS.  You're playing into the hands of the Republicans if you let the Obama bashing go on, on this web site, after it's clearly his nomination.

McCain is the enemy now, folks.

McCain's stance will certainly alienate conservative Republicans, and reinforces Democrats' message.  Big business won't want to fund him if they're mainly getting weaker Democratic policy.  I don't think it's as great for him as you think.

I am constantly upset at all you taking heads. You talk as though everything McSame will do will be understood in a DC vacume way of thinking. The voters today are far more savvy than you think and when they compare McSame against the Dem they will ignore your rants choose REAL Change. As long as you all continue to see the world through the beltway mentality you will continue to dish out this kind of drivel.

Credit goes to No Brit

" haven't seen much of a dent being put into McCain's core brand (war hero, reformer, maverick) to date"

You want to see a dent put in McCain's core brand? Stop pretending that this nomination battle is a tie and let's end it. If we go all the way to the convention, we'll never get a chance to  brand McCain.

I think Obama's going to have a strong GE message against McCain. Do you really think McCain is going to be able to look like the change guy put up against Obama? Give me a break.

Now, if it were Hillary, which now we know it won't be, he might have more success tying her to the past.

Let's move on from our primary fight and start to fight back against McCain instead of giving him a free ride.

"Change you Deserve" sounds vaguely threatening.  Who knows what McCain thinks we deserve" or what neo-con republicans think we deserve?  To contemplate this question is more than a little scary.  

so J.A...is your implication that Clinton should be the nominee?

It sounds like the GOP is listening to Newt Gingrich, finally... Newt has been right on the past few months... he's in a complete panic of GOP prospects... saying that they have to act like Sazarosky, or whatever his name is, in France... pretend to be a "change" candidate... reframe yourself... and con people into voting for you one more time...  (he conveniently forgets that the people of France have buyers remorse now)

He's right, to a certain extent...  The American people have been con'ed by the Republicans for a very long time... but, it seems this year, they won't get fooled again!

We shall see!!

This is absolutely the battle of 2008. We paint McCain as McSame, we win. If he is a Maverick in November still, it is anybody's game.

I haven't seen much of a dent being put into McCain's core brand (war hero, reformer, maverick) to date.

Geez, I wonder why that could be?

3am.

Empty Suit.

Wright.

Ayers.

Etc.

It truly is a mystery why McCain's brand has been left untouched.

We're going to shatter that maverick image. Iraq may not be issue number one, but if we can successfully link it to the sinking economy in the minds of the voters, it'll become an even bigger hindrance to McBush. I'm not underestimating him -- we'll have a lot of hard work to do. But he's still toast. There is no way in hell that this man:

...can pass himself off as a change candidate. We simply won't allow it.

I think that's a losing proposition for McCain. He's never going to represent change on the symbolic level (which is what matters to most indy GE voters)as Obama. I think he'd be better off stewing doubts about "too much change," a sort of quasi-racist attack on his experience. You've already seen some of that with the Hamas crap. Of course, the problem with this tact is that the more McCain unravels his previous image and becomes more of the cranky old man, the more he loses media adoration and plays into the "losing his bearings" image.

People who think that change, hope, and unity are wonderful, new, progressive ideas in political campaigns are, by definition, low information voters. These mantras are not about changing the political system; they represent the same old empty centrism that perpetuates the status quo.

It's kind of funny. Remember how in 2000 McCain ran as a "reformer."

So, in South Carolina, W came out as the "Reformer with Results."

All it did was get McCain angry.

The GOP can push "change" all they want. America truly knows what's going on (bad things) who's behind it (the GOP) and who is not going to change it (McCain.)

You can say "change" and have it mean nothing. Obama has convinced millions that his call for "change" does, in fact, have meaning. Clinton supporters mock it, because they have decided to listen only to Clinton, who mocks it.

Fine. Try to turn his strength into a weakness. It hasn't worked yet, and I really believe it won't. With turnout like the dems have seen, there's no question that change is afoot.

"Change you deserve"

Wow.  That's channeling Mencken.

"Democracy is the theory that the people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."