Senator McCain has been attacking Obama because Hamas made a statement in support of him.
McCain said, among other things, “If senator Obama is favored by Hamas I think people can make judgments accordingly.” Link.
I agree that we can make judgments accordingly. But what should those judgments be? Hamas is a relatively sophisticated organization. They know how this plays in the US. If we are to judge what their endorsement means, surely it means they prefer McCain to win, right? It seems to me that you have to attribute to Hamas an extraordinary naivete that is inconsistent with what we know of the group in order to take their words at face value.
I see no need to argue which President Hamas would actually fear more. It obviously depends on what you think is going to happen in Iraq, whether you believe our presence there is good or bad for these particular terrorists, and what you think each President will do with respect to Iran. But it is worth pointing out that one of the premises of McCain’s argument is that an Obama Presidency is good for Hamas. I’m not sure that “vote Obama and the terrorists win” is consistent with a respectful campaign.
So, how should we judge Hamas’ statement and is this above-the-board campaigning on behalf of McCain?
[I can already see the hijacks being formed, but I would appreciate it if this thread wasn’t hijacked into a debate about something else. Pretty please. Let’s just stipulate that Obama’s campaign is pure evil and we’re only asking about McCain for academic purposes, not to compare the two.]
McCain was wrong and petty to bring it up, although it may play well among some voters. Obama has no debt to pay simply because loonies support him. If the KKK came out in support of McCain, that wouldn’t be his fault, either.
It’s a non-story.
And I sure hope that we don’t see another season of “The terrorists want the Democrats to win!”
But until the election, even non-stories will get traction.
It seems likely to me; like the way Osama bin Laden appears to have carefully timed his releases to when Bush needed a push in the polls while running for re-election. The Republicans have handed the Islamic fanatics victory after victory; they’d be fools to want anyone but a Republican in office. The Democrats are much more dangerous to them.
That being said, crazies endorse mainstream candidates all the time, regardless of what those candidates want or how closely they resemble the endorsers. IIRC, there was a Nazi group that endorsed Bush and a Marxist one that endorsed Kerry; that doesn’t mean that either is a Nazi or a Commie.
Nah, he’s just doing a public service as Hamas’ mouthpiece in America. Without McCain’s efforts on their behalf, most of us would never hear the true thoughts of these terrorists.
Perhaps you could come up with some past instances where Hamas said one thing because they thought exactly the opposite. I’m guessing you don’t believe Hamas is a staunch friend of Israel because they said they want to destroy her in their charter. Anything else? Does Hamas often endorse candidates they want to lose, or is this a one-shot strategy for them?
Obama’s campaign manager doesn’t seem to think so. He said it was flattering.
So McCain and the Obama campaign both seem to think this is more or less what it appears - a straightforward expression of Hamas’ belief that Obama is the President they want.
And then the American people freak out about the terrists supporting Obama and vote McCain, who continues to stir up anti-US sentiment in the Middle East which works in Hamas’ favor. Maybe a bit of a stretch, but not a big one.
He said it was flattering that anyone would compare Obama to JFK. The linked article says nothing on whether he thinks it’s flattering that Hamas supports Obama.
Goddamn this anti-Obama shit is weaksauce. Is this what we’re going to have to deal with the whole time? I’m almost hoping that he accidentally runs someone over with his car or something so that we can talk about a real thing.
Definitely a pretty stupid thing for McCain to have commented on. If a bunch of nut cases support you there isn’t a lot you can do about it. I’m doubtful Obama is touting this as a major coup, or that he has published Hamas support on his campaign web page after all…
Then, again, did you have any evidence that this is what they intended, and do they have a history of saying the opposite of what they mean as part of a deeply laid plot?
This sort of reminds me of Wallace Shawn’s speech in The Princess Bride. “I can clearly not endorse the candidate in front of you!”
They actually want Obama to win, but they know that if they endorse him, he will lose, so they are endorsing him, knowing that we know that they know. But we know they know, and they know it. So, they endorse Obama. We, knowing what we know, vote for Obama anyway.
The question is which is a bigger stretch, that Hamas is unaware of the effect of its endorsement, or that Hamas would do something disingenuous. I think the former is a bigger stretch.
I must be missing something here…are folks saying that Hamas actually wants McCain to win?? That this is all a a ruse to discredit Obama so that McCain will win the election?
That sounds…nuts.
I doubt Hamas has a very good grasp of US politics or what the majority of people in the country think or don’t think about them. Hell, they may not have a clear idea of what the candidates actually stand for or even our political process at all. Seriously…I’ve been to other countries and it’s a bad assumption that everyone out there in The World™ knows all about our political system and how it actually works…let alone how the various citizens in the US actually think. Hell, I live here and I don’t claim to have all that much insight into how Joe Blow thinks about Hamas…or even if Joe knows who the hell Hamas is, what they represent or what they do. Nor do I think Hamas has a clear understanding of how our press works, or how the various factions in the US relate to the election.
I think the answer is simply that Hamas thinks Obama would be better for them as president (for whatever reasons in their own minds) than McCain would, and so they have supported him in the hopes of perhaps influencing Muslim voters in the election. All this double and triple think I believe is just wasted effort.
I think that they would say what would most effectively advance their agenda. They’re human, after all.
No, I have no evidence that Hamas has a history of reverse psychology. It’s just a possibility as much as any other. They didn’t give a reason for why they support Obama other than he’s like JFK, so whatever we might speculate is just that, speculation.
It’s not really any more nuts than voting for Clinton in the primary just so one can vote against her in the general.
Also, if they know enough about US politics to make a public comment on who they’d prefer as president, they probably know more than you think.
Yeah…it is. Voting for Clinton in the primary because you think McCain would wipe the floor with her but have trouble against Obama shows some level of understanding of our system (though I think that calculation is in error, so it really shows a level of stupidity in attempting to game the system).
I don’t think Hamas has anything approaching that level of sophisticated understanding of the US political system…and I’m at a loss to see how McCain as president would benefit Hamas in any way, shape or form. While I can think of some reasons why THEY may feel Obama would be good for them (if for nothing else he has Muslim roots, even if he isn’t a Muslim himself. He is also colored which they may take as a hopeful sign that he’d be more sympathetic to their cause. Also, he was and is against the war in Iraq. And they may be doing a simple calculation that Democrat=good/Republican=bad from their perspective as well).
You’d be wrong. Their spokesman, Ahmed Yousef, is a fluent English-speaker who has wirtten editorials in major American newspapers. He is very familiar with US politics. They are much more sophisticated than you’ve allowed.
:dubious: YMMV…I have my doubts, even if this individual has some level of sophistication wrt the ins and outs of US politics, the press, and public sentiment.
Saddam had a lot of individuals with at least as good of credentials about how the US operates…and you see where that lead him. Hell, the Soviets had experts on the US…and we constantly baffled them. I’m sorry but I’m not seeing Hamas as being more sophisticated than nation states. For that matter, the US has experts on places like Iraq…and look how badly we fucked up and misjudged them.