Posted 2:30 PM by steve

Here's some unsolicited (and likely not to be followed) advice for all those Republicans who think McCain needs to attack Obama's past associations with the like of Bill Ayers, Reverend Wright and so on.... FORGET IT, IT AIN'T GONNA WORK.

Why? I'll explain by analogizing voters deciding on who to vote for with potential customers deciding whether to buy a particular product (yeah, I know I'm not the first to make the analogy, but I need the analogy to make my point, so just bear with me).

People buy products because they believe they HAVE to have (not just WANT, but a full-fledged NEED) the benefit they think they'll receive by virtue of their owning the product. Thus, the critical components of this are, and IN ORDER:

(1) whether the prospect has convinced themselves they need the perceived benefit,

(2) whether the prospect believes the benefit is worth the price he is being asked to pay,

(3) whether the prospect believes the product will deliver the benefit they're seeking, and finally,

(4) whether the prospect dislikes or distrusts the provider of the product so much that he is willing to do without the benefit which he is convinced he needs. (Please spare me the righteous argument that the public cares more about who we do business with. We'd do business (and have done so) with the devil if the devil was offering what we wanted at a decent price).

Now, keep in mind that what DOESN'T matter is how crazy the prospect is for thinking he need the given benefit, that the price matches the benefit, or that the product really will deliver the desired benefit. If the prospect has managed to convince himself of all that, it's pretty useless to try to convince them otherwise.

In this election, voters are leaning towards Obama because:

(1) they have convinced themselves their lives will be so much improved with 'Change',

(2) they have convinced themselves they can afford the purchase (it helps that Obama is selling 'Change' as being cost-free to 95% of America),

(3) they have convinced themselves that Obama can deliver this 'Change' (remember, it doesn't matter whether we believe he can (or will), what matters is whether the voters think so, and it is pretty apparent that they do), and

(4) there's nothing about Obama (family, past activities, friends) that so sours them that they're willing to do without this 'Change'.

They're not concerned with his past, and, despite GOP thinking, it isn't because they don't know of his past associations. They're not concerned with Obama's past because they have feel it is irrelevant to Obama delivering the 'change' they so desperately want (a desperate want is, by definition, a need). Put another way, they don't care if he did X or Y when he was younger, they just want this 'change' he's offering.

Thus, if McCain wants to go after Obama, he has to forget about attacking Obama on #4. Even without the MSM running interference for Obama, there is nothing that McCain could ever say about Obama that would make enough voters decide to give up their chance to get 'Change'.

Likewise, there's no benefit in going after #1; with the markets dropping on a daily basis, McCain is not going to persuade voters they really don't want 'Change'. Nor will it do McCain any good to try and 'Out-Change' Obama; Obama was there first, he occupies that particular real estate, and McCain just doesn't have enough time to dislodge Obama from that spot, even if he did have something nice to try and sell to voters. And finally, since voters think they're getting Obama's 'Change' for free, McCain's not going to get anywhere trying to convince voters he is offering just as much 'Change' as Obama, but at a more reasonable price; you can't sell something for less than zero.

In other words, McCain can't undercut Obama's pitch. And that's why he'll probably end up losing.

|