Scenario: You wake up tomorrow morning (or Nov. 3rd, if you like) and see the news that Osama bin Laden has been captured in Pakistan.
Would you change your vote to McCain?
Would you change your vote to Obama?
Would your vote remain the same?
For Americans & non-Americans alike: Do you think this event would swing the election in McCain’s favor?
I’d be thrilled that the Republicans left a terrorist at large until such a time that his capture had the greatest political benefit.
I don’t see any reason at all why Bin Laden’s capture would have any correlation to the efficacy of either of the candidates’ platforms.
He won’t be captured, because only McCain knows where he is and how to catch him. And he’s only going to tell us if he becomes president, so there!
Otherwise he’d not going to tell, and then we’ll all be sorry. And we won’t be his BFF either. And he’ll totally cut us off when Chrissy has her birthday party.
That’s the thing – I’ve always believed the Reps were holding OBL as the ultimate trump card for whoever would run in '08. Didn’t work out so good, huh? Obama’s campaign is a runaway juggernaut, and as it turns out, people are far more concerned about the economy than the boogeyman of terrorism.
It wouldn’t surprise me if OBL were instead “captured” around Obama’s Inaguration Day, just like Reagan and the Iran hostages.
My vote wouldn’t be affected by such an issue. I care more about domestic issues, and that bit would be great w/ foreign policy and all. But it wouldn’t affect my vote so much as to change it because of the vastly different domestic policies of the candidates.
Why would ANYONE change from either candidate if OBL got captured? Would one of them be more responsible for it or something? The logic is escaping me completely.
My vote would not change.
Considering the fact that McCain has attacked Obama for stating that we need to go into Pakistan to get OBL, with or without permission, it would be reinforcement for the idea that the only time Obama agrees with Bush and McCain disagrees is when Bush is right.
Well, in all fairness, McCain didn’t say we shouldn’t go into Pakistan with or without permission. He more or less said that we shouldn’t announce to Pakistan that we should go in with or without permission. I believe the phrase “we shouldn’t telegraph our moves” or some-such was used.
That’s still a load of crap since Pakistan already knows good and well we’d strike without permision if we had to. It’s not a secret.
In adding my previous post, my intention wasn’t to suggest that it wasn’t a load of crap plated by McCain, but to clarify that they didn’t necessarily express differing opinions about what the US should do in such an event (policy-wise). I saw Soggy Biscuit’s post prior to mine as an attempt to explain why someone might consider changing their vote if OBL was captured, yet there still is no logical foundation, that I can see, for even the consideration of a vote-change on that basis. In fact, I’m really curious how the question in the OP even entered KGS’s mind.
But they play more nicely if we don’t holler, “I’m gonna kick your ass!” 
Personally, I think OBL has been dead for years. (Or am I thinking of McCain…?)
No, it would not change my vote. Still Obama.
If McCain himself tackled OBL at the supermarket it would not change my vote. I am voting today for Obama by absentee ballot… and hoping Nevada goes for Obama as it is close in my state.
Hmmm - Would OBL also have the super-secret secret to global financial success in his pocket & only John McCain had the decoder ring to understand it?
Have you ever tried running an international terrorist organisation on a budget? It’s harder than it looks.
“It’s the economy, stupid!”
True then, true now.
Isn’t McCain’s plan simply to declare the OBL is not the top guy at Al Qaeda, therefore reducing to #2 status. Once OBL is a #2 we should be able to capture and killhim quite easily.
Of course it wouldn’t change my vote.
There’s a certain logic to that. We’ve whacked the Number Two Guy what, three or four times?