Changing the Subject

McMegan’s analysis of the politics between the joint US-Iraqi agreement to withdraw all combat forces by 2011 seems really off to me:

McCain gets to claim that the Surge worked, the war issue is off the table, and McCain gets the credit for steely resolve without people fearing their sons will end up in Iraq.

Okay, let’s grant that the war issue is off the table. I don’t think something that’s cost $3 trillion and over 4,000 lives deserves to be brushed aside that cavalierly, especially since one candidate let it happen and the other would have stopped it, but let’s grant that for a second. What would be on the table, then? The economy. The economy that McCain and his advisors have appeared utterly out of touch on. The economy that Obama outpolls McCain on by double digits. And Megan thinks making this the main issue of the campaign helps McCain how?

One thought on “Changing the Subject

  1. I made the argument over at my own place that McArdle’s point about taking Iraq off the table was at least part of the reasoning in trying to quietly push this agreement – sure the economy is a bad issue for McCain, but it’s not like Iraq was much of a better one. I don’t think McCain wants either to be the main issue. They’re going to try to change the topic back to how presumptuous Obama is. Or, if they have to do issues, they’re going to have to decide whether Russia or the amorphous “Terror” is the greatest existential threat to America.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s