Sunday, January 20, 2008
|
|
Straight Talk on McCain's Chances ...
|
|
Posted by:
Matt Lewis at
8:02 AM
|
|
For months, I have been writing that John McCain is a viable candidate and that he has a "chance" to win this nomination.
Some people have taken this matter of political prognosis as an endorsement of McCain; It is not. What I have, instead, done is be one of the few writers to make an accurate prediction of McCain's chances, given the current political environment.
It's important to separate the two; For example, I believe the New England Patriots will win today -- but that doesn't mean I want them to ... In fact, I hate the Patriots. But if I were writing for a sports blog in, say, Indianapolis, I would still be honest enough to write that the Patriots are probably the best team in the NFL. That's an analysis. Not an endorsement.
While other bloggers and pundits were making wild predictions that "McCain is finished" or that he will be "out by Labor Day," I noted his strength in New Hampshire, the fact that he gets credit for being right on the Surge, and the fact that he is the one candidate who always reaches out (and gives access) to the media and bloggers.
This does not mean he is right about campaign finance reform -- or stem cell research -- or any other issue, for that matter. What it means is that he is, in fact, a viable candidate. That's what a political analysis is ...
|
|
McCain Can't Win In November!
He would be the Ned Lamont of Presidential Elections if somehow he managed to secure the Republican Nomination. Ain't gonna happen though.
Fred Thompson, Duncan Hunter, Michael Bloomberg, John Edwards, Joe Lieberman, Barak Obama and a host of others would get more support from the Average American Voter than the Snarky, Snearing McCain. I guarantee it and, if I can see the truth regarding the final outcome - Why can't the Sherriff?
In a primary or caucus 30% or so looks & sounds good, even great to some, BUT when one takes into account that approx. 20% of the entire Voting population take part in the various Primaries, 30% starts looking like the very paltry number it actually is!
The fact that he is getting (or so it seems) the Independent & "moderate" Republican voters and nothing more speaks volumes!
Think about it...in Reality Fred Thompson is in much better shape than Mac, because it is starting to look like the Anti-Free Speach/Illegal Immigrant Advocate Senator would place third in a Three Man General Election. Fourth in a Four man race!
If there is anyone who should wake up and smell the coffee it is War Hero McCain! I have come to the conclussion he is either a Lib sympathizer whose mission it is to fracture the Base of the GOP to ensure a Dem victory or an Egotistical Fool who wants more than the alotted 15 minutes.
Fact is, too many people have listened to and REALLY heard his plans & ideas, lived through his actions (McCain/Kennedy - McCain/Feingold etc) for him to ever significantly break into the Average Republican Voter pool.
So, at what point do you figure a man would recognize the harm he is about to do the Nation and Opt to do the Right thing by Us, his constituents, his 'countrymen'?
ps
Go Pats!!!
W/O=
|
|
|
McCain Lock Republican Based in South Carolina with such issues a pro-abortion and a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants. In last night primary shouldn't we ask why 50% of those considering themselves liberal choose to vote for McCain? Shouldn't we ask we 50% of those who are pro-abortion voted for McCain? Shouldn't we ask why 50% of those who want a form of amnesty voted for McCain? I hope we ask this. We need to ask this. In a general election those that value amnesty and abortion will indeed choose the candidate that best reflects what they want. it could be McCain it could be a Democrat. My guess is a Democrat. Shouldn't we ask Republicans choose a candidate that most closely reflects what we want? |
|
Michael Medved, who has endorsed McCain, pointed out correctly that Mitt Romney probably cannot win against Hillary or Obama. http://michaelmedved.townhall.com/blog/g/56375486-5a44-49e b-b0ff-7002afd5d0bf
McCain can. Do not let perfect be the enemy of good, McCain is a good conservative (not a perfect one) who can win a critical election for the GOP. If you want to throw the White House to Hillary and say we can come back later and win it after the Dems run hog wild over the country, well that is loser talk and would be very dangerous.
At least Matt you did not call Mitt a "Metroconservative" like Ruffini did. http://www.townhall.com/blog/g/cf85ea08-1326-4886-a634-cee 4a2e8e93f That is why you are a superior political analyst. Ruffini's new term is way too close to the "Metrosexual" lable that got slapped on Howard "Don't Make Me Scream" Dean.
"Mitt Romney, Metrosexual Conservative?"
I am sure Team Romney will have nothing but thanks to Ruffini if that sticks. |
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJHb9m4ccmQ
HT to AofSHQ. This is hilarious. |
|
Approx 400,000 Republican Voters turn out in SC.
McCain & Huck each get approx 30% of those votes
BUT BOTH should recognize that they have reached the High Water Mark...their Numbers in November will not rise appreciably...
THEY ARE TOAST & If they REALLY cared about the GOP & the Country they would both drop out NOW!!!
W/O=
|
|
When we allow 20% of the populace to 'Decide' Who it is We can choose from (that percentage goes up when the MSM is added in) it reminds of how the Government awards contracts...
Does it make sense to give the job to the 'Lowest Bidder'? Isn't that a recipe for Disaster? Shoddy Work, Cost Overruns etc.
Maybe it is time to revamp the system...Register as an Indie, Vote Third Party, Write-In YOUR Choice...Protest!!!
W/O= |
|
|
McCain's win only proves that, once again, a state with a unique demographic has supposedly sent us all "signals" of the final outcome of the GOP race. Wrong. South Carolina's disproportionate number of families with military ties (preferring war hero McCain) and evangelical Christians (preferring Huckabee) supported the two candidates who one would expect to benefit from that demographic. Those ties trumped Thompson's "true" conservatism and Romney's tacit endorsement by Talk Radio. But these ties won't exist in a majority of races in GOP states yet to come. It's still wide open, with a slight advantage to Romney, who remains the choice of Talk Radio (a fact which will never change in favor of McCain). |
|
Matt,
If either McCain or Huckabee somehow manage to receive the nomination, I will sit out the election. It will be better to have a professed Democrat in office so that the public can see and understand the effects of their ruinous policies, rather than RINO's with the same ruinous policies. |
|
|
I would implore conservatives NOT to sit the election out if McCain is the nomninee. Either Clinton or Obama would nominate extremely liberal Supreme Court justices (Hillary might even nominate Bill!) who would wreak untold havoc on our nation for generations if they became members of the U.S. Supreme Court. That's a form of deep damage we would not be able to undo in 2012, no matter how terrible a Democrat president proved to be. Vote to keep liberals OFF the Supreme Court - it's our only way to influence what goes on there! |
|
|
If McCain is the nominee I won't sit out. I will probably write in a candidate or vote for a 3rd party candidate, but there's no way in Hades I'll vote for McCain. If a dem wins b/c of conservative voter apathy then so be it. At least a dem will reunite the Republican party. McCain would actively try to destroy the base. |
|
Get a grip, America.
You aren't going to get what you want for president.
Choose HELL or PURGATORY!
It's not a difficult choice. |
|
|
is alive ONLY because of how the early primaries and caucuses allow non-Republicans to influence the voting. It is not a good thing for the GOP that there aren't enough Republicans to negate this. I'm with Sam, if McCain wins the nomination, the GOP is doomed. And it is not a little disingenuous of you to now say that you are a disinterested analyst. You are McCain's man here at TH and everyone knows it. Nothing wrong with that except that you keep denying it. |
|
|
The GOP turnout has been very weak which also doesn't bode well for November. The Democrats and independent liberals are picking the GOP candidate they want to defeat in November. Go ahead and gloat. It's like winning the honor to be the first to go "over the top" on the Somme in WWI. |
|
|
I agree that McCain cannot win in November. The more I look at all of this the more I see Hillary in the Oval Office, again. |
|
|
It is important that everyone vote but seriously consider voting for a third party candidate. The idea is to water down the winner's share. It won't matter who wins if all they can garner is 38% or less of the vote. Conservatives still hold sway in the Congressional elections and a president who wins with only a third of the vote will not have the power to impose an agenda. It will also scare the bejeezers out of both "major" but wildly unpopular parties. It will give us hope for 2010 and beyond. A low turnout would allow the winner to garner 50% or more and doom us to wander the wilderness for decades. Re-register as an unaffiliated independent NOW! |
|
What makes you think there will be a 2010, if mc cain is nominated..and hillary will win!?
she is going to get out the female vote ...those ,mostly who can barely read, have 2/6 kids out of wedlock, just out of high school
and dont know the difference between jim jones kool aid and......strawberry flavored paint thinner! gee, i guess there isnt much difference!
i think i blew that one ..but you got the point!
i have read many different women comment about one candidates looks they like it...MITT ROMNEY! SOOO IF WE HAVE TO PUT UP BARBIE DOLL MITT, WHO ...ALSO HAS BRAINS TO HAVE A CHANCE TO WIN! LET'S DO IT! ELVIS |
|
|
Imagine you are a conservative Republican (like most) running for Congress and you have to distance yourself from McCain AND either Hillary or Obama while your Democratic opponent is tacking to your right. Forget about coattails, McCain, Giuliani or Huckleberry are additional liabilities. Think November 2006 with the additional burden of having to distance yourself from the party's national nominee. The GOP will get crushed in the national election while losing even more seats in Congress to conservative Dems. We need to either win with a conservative candidate or lose strong so we have something to build on for 2012. The next two years are going to be awful for whoever wins. Team Bush has so screwed up the economy that it will take many years to undo the damage. If we lose liberal, we are doomed. If we lose conservative, we have a solid message to build on. It seems that the only thing the GOP elites want to establish this election is to purge conservatives out of the party. Mission accomplished. If we conservatives continue to be influential as a non-aligned block (we account for about 33% of voters), we might be able to form our own party out of the wreckage or at least the GOP will have kiss our butts next election. When you have the numbers, as conservatives do, make it count. The GOP consists of about 20-25% of voters and they are mostly bobble-headed "GOP uber alles!" types. We have the numbers and the ideas. They have the Stepford vote. |
|
|
As people hear Romney and see his record, he will continue to garner votes. He is by far the most electable republican. He's who the democrats fear the most. He is very strong on the economy and has the track record to prove it. |
|
Bloggers and right wing talk radio hosts are usually not that great at analysis. Matt Lewis is right. Their bias usually gets in the way.
I will say though one McCain approach has alot of counterintuitive appeal and that is the endless droning on about spending cuts. In 2006 most republicans mentioned pork barrel spending as one of the main reasons they were turend off to their candidates against the dems (Which is ironic since the dems have been even worse).
McCain has had the most consistent stand against spending of all the cnadidates. When Romney went populist in Michigan McCain stuck to his guns on the spending issue.
I know the response I will get to this is McCain against tax cuts blah blah blah and this is not meant to be a pro-McCain analysis. I just think that this spending cuts piece will get alot more play, especially if Romney begins promising direct stimulus packages to states like Michigan.
McCain has alot of work to do with the Republican base to win the nomination, but to a guy who was only polling 12% 6 weeks ago, there is always the possibility. Especially with such a flawed republican field.
|
|
|
If McCain were the nominee, I guess I could hold my nose and vote for him, because if Hillary or Obama were to win, I'd have to hold both my nose and my wallet at the same time. And I'm not sure I'm dexterous enough to do that. |
|
John McCain would not have been my first choice, and I certainly do not agree with all of his policies, but we've got to stop insisting that a candidate must accept EVERYTHING a conservative Republican stands for. I,too, think McCain can beat the democrats, but only if he chooses the right vice-president, who will give us another shot in four years. My first choice would be Joe Lieberman, who has endorsed McCain. Yeah, yeah, I know. He's a former democrat,turned independant, but he is one of the most decent men in congress, and since some of his democratic collegues turned on him in 2004, he will have a lot of support from those who were angered by this. If that's too far fetched, then Mitt Romney would be a good choice.
Let's face it. There are no candidates that will give us everything we want, and we will get nothing if we don't win. I think McCain and a good vice=presidetial choice can win. |
|
McCain is alive. Mostly because the conservative base has split between 3 or 4 others who are better on the conservative issues that are most important to them. Huck is more religious, Rudy more security, Mitt more economic, Fred is well, - more Fred.
Freds next move is crucial to McCain in Florida. McCain is strong in a field of 4 or 5. Much less strong as the field narrows. If Fred stays in through Florida, it's only to help his buddy John.
For the record, if McCain is nominated - I won't sit out the election. I'll vote for the Democrat. Much better to have a democrat advance liberal agenda than a Republican. At least if Dems are pushing amnesty, taxes, and global warming totalitarianism there will be a possibility of stopping it with Congressional opposition. We also could look for some mid term congressional gains in 2010, and a real conservative in 2012.
Judges? Does anyone really believe that John McCain will nominate someone that's not acceptable to his pals Kennedy, Feingold, the gang of 14, or that his adoring press buddies won't swoon over?
Besides, he'll probably pick Obama as a running mate. |
|
In terms of where they stand on the issues, there really is not much difference. But in terms of how excited the respective party of each is about voting for them, there is a HUGE difference. Democrats that support Hillary are stoked about the idea of her winning the White House. Only moderates and independents are somewhat excited about John McCain winning, and if Obama gets the democrat nominee, they will all flock to him.
John McCain is a LOSER for the Republicans. His actions over the past 7 years speak louder than any pandering or rhetoric he could say now. Conservatives will not support him - including me! |
|
|
Actually I was thinking he'd pick John F-ing Kerry as his running mate. Im sure he owns him some favors just like he owes numerous other Washington insiders some favors! |
|
|
Maybe its time for conservatives to think about moving to Lithuania, someplace where conservative principles are still taken seriously. Obviously, the American people no longer believe in their own Constitution (anyone voting for a Senator who likes to vitiate the US Constitution is clearly not interested in preserving American liberties, such as freedom of speech). Remember that Teddy Roosevelt is McCain's hero. He was a "Progressive" (which Hillary also claims to be) who tried to vitiate the U.S. Constitution, and when he was blocked by Taft, et. al., he threw a hissy fit and formed his own party. McCain should do the same. Also remember that the most extensive agenda of the Progressive movement was its effort at "Human Reconstruction" was Eugenics, most characterized by forced sterilization of "undesireables", out of which came planned parenthood, a civic organization dedicated to preventing the births of undesireables. The "Modern Progressives" now believe that any human being is an undesirable. McCain is not a "Progressive" in name only--he is a dedicated Progressive, in a similar mold as Hillary, utterly convinced that his perspective is superior to that of the people he seeks to rule, adn that it is his job to reform us, in any way possible or necessary. This I think is the main point about McCain that sticks in the craw of American conservatives. He is larger than life, as was Roosevelt, but ultimately convinced of his superiority in judgment. However, he was at the bottom of his class at Annapolis and became a naval aviator which only the very top Annapolis grads can hope for only because of family influence, he never had a job outside of the military or the government, was ignorant enough to be bamboozled by a fly-by-night S & L charlatan, Charles Keating--is that the kind of president that we want? |
|
How can you say no difference between Hillary and McCain! This is the kind of rubbish that is hugely misinformed. I can name three enormous ones that was the centerpiece of the senate debate the last three years.
In 2006 Hillary lined up with the dems against the troop surge in Iraq going as far as saying the war was lost and it was time to bring the troops home. She voted against the troop spending bill also. McCain publicly casigated Hillary in the media and on the Senate floor. He insisted the troop surge would work and to give Patreaous time to do his job. Mitt Romney by the way was non-commital, approving whatever Bush wanted. To this day Hillary has said that Iraq will be a failure.
In 2004 George W. began the debate on reforming social security with private accounts and financial reforms with McCain pushing heavily for this in the Senate. Hillary came out full guns blazing (and still does) forcing McCain to have a slugfest on the issue to the point where he alienated the AARP.
And this last one I love because this is one of McCain's "liberal" issues.
In 2005 McCain proposed an energy to get rid of oil dependence that consisted of extensive oil exploration of the coast of Texas (but still holding off on ANWR, which I diagree) CAFE standards, and extensive use of wind and nuclear energy. Hillary came out against nuclear energy saying that much more draconian regulations and taxes would be preferable.
These are Hillary's three biggest issues, and they are ones where McCain fought her directly in the senate. Add to that gun control, spending cuts and abortion and you have pretty much the exact opposite. To say that McCain and Hillary are the same is silly. You can hate McCain on issues (I can name a few myself) but McCain and Hillary are much more opponents than any other candidate. They actually have fought it out on the floor of the senate. |
|
|
20% of all voters identified themselves as independents. McCain pretty much got all of the independent vote. McCain only got 33% of the total, which means he only got about 13% of the Republican vote. Its pretty sad when your whole campaign to be the Republican nominee is based on capturing the independent and moderate vote. Once the general election rolls around, the support from these weenies will evaporate. |
|
Michael Graham at NRO:
"If you really want to see McCain's weakness, however, try this thought experiment:
It's October, 2008. America's economy is in a recession. People are demanding change and new ideas, someone to give them optimism and hope on domestic issues. On stage, facing off in their final presidential debate to discuss jobs, economic policy and hope for the future are John McCain and Barack Obama.
And be sure to imagine how it will look on television, and to people who don't really follow politics (they are, after all, the swing voters who will pick the next president).
Now, tell me again how any Republican won tonight...?"
|
|
Are you talking about the energy bill he just signed that bans the incandescent light bulb because it hurts global warming? My recollection is that had broad support from both McCain and democrats.
Iraq? I keep hearing about how McCain wants to take credit for the surge, but I believe that was Bush and Petreaus' idea. You bash Romney for going along with Bush, but isnt this what McCain did with the surge? I guess McCain and Clinton differ on how long they would keep troops in Iraq. Clinton says she's for immediate withdrawl, while McCain says we'll be there another 100 years. I dont think either of these positions are winners.
Social Security reform? First of all this is more of a democrat issue than a Republican one. Secondly, Bill Clinton did toy with the idea of privatizing SS. The only reason Hillary was so vehemently opposed to it is because she want the reform to be her idea and issue. |
|
|
great post! No way can I envision McCain winning against any of the democrats in a live televised debate. Especially Obama! Obama is a young, fresh, highly intelligent, and articulate candidate. Meanwhile, the 71 year old McCain is the Senator who's been in Washington for the last 25 years with no new fresh ideas. It would be a bad day to be a Republican! |
|
McCain is much like Teddy Roosevelt. That much is true. But Eugenics! Please McCain has an adopted daughter of indian ancestry who was an orphan, one of the supposed mongrel races. Why didn't her thow her off a cliff.
Though I am sure you would say it is his illegitimate daughter. You hate McCain with much passion. You should explore those issues with a therapist.
Almost all the top (If controversial)republican presidents from Lincoln to Roosevelt to Reagan to George W. Bush believe their views were superior. Ego is part of the job and all our top candidates from McCain to Huck to Mitt to Rudy have ego to spare.
Warren Harding was the perfect Republican party yes man president. By all accounts he had no ego and just wanted to go with the flow. Unfortunately he is also rated as the worst president in history!
|
|
I brought up three specific areas where McCain fought against Hillary directly and you bring up Romney, Bill Clinton and the incandescent light bulb. I didn't say you had to agree with McCain's stands. Just that they were clearly opposite from Hillary. And by the way private accounts and social security reform is a conservative issue dude. It was started by Republicans and advanced by George Bush and Karl Rove. Hillary doesn't want to reform the system. She just wants to uncap it.
I by the way have no big issue with Romney on his stand on the war and would be perfectly happy (Well content anyway) to vote for him as president against Hillary or for that matter Rudy or Thompson. Huck for me may be a bridge too far.
I was just responding to a dumb line. That Hillary and McCain are the same. There are clear records on this. McCain voted the opposite of Hillary in the Senate about 85% of the time.
|
|
The corporate owners of The Unified Establishment Party* are already shifting funding from the RNC to the DNC. They don't care which one wins. They win either way. The RNC and the DNC are two divisions under the same ownership. The cheap labor express will be kept running, regardless of the will of the people.
That is, unless we nominate and elect someone who actually WILL secure the border and enforce the laws. It's up to us to save the GOP from itself and bring it back to its principles. The "handlers" have to be shown the door by voting your conscience in the primaries. Stop listening to the spin and hype, decide for yourself who best represents your values. If a cross-dressing, former mayor of a sanctuary city who marches in gay pride parades reflects your values, vote for Rudy. If a Senator who favors amnesty for illegals and Gore-bull warming reflects your values, vote for McCain. If that does not reflect your values, figure out who does and vote accordingly. We can nominate someone other than the MSM's choice. It's our country, we are the deciders.
*(h/t Pasadena Phil)
|
|
You brought up Romney. Here's your quote:
"Mitt Romney by the way was non-commital, approving whatever Bush wanted. To this day Hillary has said that Iraq will be a failure."
Anyways you say you don't agree with McCain on many issues fine. My point is, McCain's record over the past 7 years leans more to the left than it does to the right.
His positions on immigration, freedom of speech, taxes, appointment of federal judges, freedom of enterprise, and global warming make him sound more like a democrat than Republican. With the exception of immigration, he fought president Bush every chance he could. |
|
Matt,
And you wonder why you have such a damaged reputation.
Look, Matthew, you're a commentator and you have every right to be a John McCain supporter.
Nobody is 'angry' at you for supporting McCain; rather, it's the fact that you are not transparent about it---you deny it---which rubs people the wrong way.
When Dean Barnett characterized you as "Townhall's official John McCain supporter" early last summer, you responded with some silliness about how you were just playing devil's advocate because you didn't want Townhall to turn into "Romney Central."
You also admitted you didn't even think a blogger SHOULD be supporting any particular candidate 'this early in the race.'
Of course, if you were so worried about Townhall turning into Romney Central, then you would have spent time building up Rudy just as you did McCain---but you never did build up Rudy.
When Rudy was the frontrunner, all you did was mock his personal life and link to press releases from left-wing Catholics who said he was "a bad Catholic."
Matt, you spent all of 2007 slamming McCain's two perceived GOP challengers, Rudy and Mitt...and their wives, their hairstyles, their religion, their governing records, etc.
But you never found any time to lay a hand on your man, McCain, other than to criticize some missteps in his campaign strategy.
Even as recently as yesterday, you were sandbagging on behalf of McCain, when you wrote that post about how "faulty voting machines" might hurt...MCCAIN.
And have you noticed that Mary Katharine does NOT get accused of having a stealth agenda for any of the candidates ?
That's because she's transparent in her 'un-committed' status, just as Hugh and Dean are transparent in their commitment to Romney.
Matt, at the end of the day, all a blogger has is his (or her) credibility. |
|
Yes Mitt was non-committal but I was wrong to interject him into that blog. It was against the point, which I fear even I fall into sometimes.
But you still haven't addressed the issue. You said he was just like Hillary. I said they were on the opposite sides on about 85% of issues before the senate which is actually documented in votes.
Now you say he was against Bush, but then brought up immigration. In the last blog you said McCain was with Bush on the war. I also brought up that McCain supported Bush on social security reform, which was not denied, because it is true. Bush also came out in in favor of more moderate CAFE standards, which McCain (As well as 30 or 49 Repub senators supports). You do not have to agree with McCain or Bush on any of these things, but it doesn't change them.
Why am I even wasting time in this. You do not like McCain's stands on the issues and thats fine. And if your point is that you don't like McCain's left of center stands or even Bushes left of center stands that is also fine.
I just am tired of people making up things about all these Republican candidates (Including Romney and Huck, who are also far more conservative than Hillary) or saying blanket lines like this candidate is a Rino or is just like Hillary, or is in his heart is not a conservative.
Make your point withour making things up. I know this makes me a bad blogger, but I don't want us Republicans falling into Daily Kos land where everything is made up and the discourse consists of "Your mother wears army boots!"
|
|
And what makes you think McCain will put forth Constructionist Judges to fill Supreme Court Vacancies (which by some accounts may be as many as FOUR)?
Does the "GangOfFourteen" ring any bells? Wasn't Charles Pickering (among others) a Conservative casualtie of McCain's maneuvering behind the scenes with Dem-Libs and Like-Minded 'moderate' Republicans (nary a Conservative in the bunch)?
With so much talk from the Libs the last time around about "maintaining the balance & make-up" of the court do you think McCain won't be in a compromising mood when the opportunity to fill seats presents itself?
OUCH! Another Stick in Our collective eyes!! Thanks John!
I Feel Confident that Fred Thompson, the ONLY Staunch Conservative - Federalist left in the race would not only Nominate Strict Constructionist Justices like Thomas, Scalia, Aleto & Roberts BUT that HE would FIGHT to Get His Nominees Confirmed!!
No Compromise - No Surrender!
And Make no Mistake, THIS Presidential Election is ALL about the Judges and the Direction this Nation Will Move In For the Foreseeable Future!
VoteSmart
Vote YOUR Values
Vote Your Childrens Future
Vote NOW For Fred Thompson
OUR Next President
W/O=
|
|
But Neither Should We Throw All Our Conservative Values Out The Window Either.
The Only REAL Difference between John McCain & either Democrat still with a chance is...
They Won't Compromise Their Values (as shallow as they may be) AND He WILL.
It's Already Part of Angry John's Record! Look It Up.
W/O= |
|
|
Let's say McCain manages to secure the nomination. And let's say he determines he won't be able to win the general election without attracting a decent percentage of conservatives, because independents, faced with a choice between him and Obama (assuming Obama is the nominee - I think he can beat Hillary without extraordinary measures), will choose Obama. What would you do if you were McCain? How about select a bona fide conservative to run as his VP (assuming he could find one who could run with him)? This would do a few things: supposedly help show his conservative credentials for this election cycle, plus give conservatives a real reason to hold their noses and vote for him (to put a conservative in place to run in 2016 - or 2012, if McCain's health suffers). Conservatives may reason that it beats letting the Democrats grab the White House and conduct endless mischief for at least 4 years. The worst he could do would be to select a squishy RINO to run with him. That would attract neither conservatives nor independents. Just a thought experiment... |
|
If you are going to site statistics, please provide a source. Maybe he votes against Hillary 85% of the time. Fine lets assume that he does. However, all of the bills that he has written or co-written have been very far left leaning.
Start with McCain-Feingold. Russ Feingold? Just think about that for a second. He is one of the most loony leftists in the Senate. He continues to push for the impeachment of President Bush. This slimy piece of legislation basically spits on the 1st amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Next up, McCain-Kennedy. Ted Kennedy? Everyone knows this mans record for liberism. We dont need to recap what this bill was about, but we know its not in-line with conservative principles.
How about McCain-Edwards. Yes John "2 America" Edwards. What a piece of work this guy is. A bill designed to help trial lawyers. How conservative!!!
McCain-Leibermann. Pure global warming crap!
Please name some bills that McCain has sponsored that are meant to push the conservative agenda.
I agree, I dont want to get in the mud like they do on KOS. But McCain's record is not his strong suit. |
|
|
Sans pariel, I didn't mean to suggest that McCain would appoint constructionist judges. I meant that Hillary or Obama would no doubt appoint liberal judges. My argument was that no matter what happens on the GOP side, no one should sit this election out, because the outcome of Hillary or Obama winning are worse than the outcome regardless of who runs for the GOP. We have a second front to lose on if we sit the election out and a Democrat is elected: the Judiciary. You're right - McCain would probably nominate a Breyer or Souder type. But that would still be better than Ruth Bader Ginsburg. In the event of a McCain nomination, we'd have to play the hand we as conservatives were dealt. And that, in my opinion, would mean we should go and vote for the GOP candidate so we at least help protect the Judiciary. |
|
I almost never defended McCain until this election! but here it goes again. I may be a little biased because of my military bkground. I am not crazy about McCain's campaign finance stands at all.
Top McCain four conservative bills from last five years.
In 2007 McCain proposed legislation to end the AMT tax.
In 2003 McCain sponsored and passed a tax relief bill for active duty members of the armed forces, considered by many troops to be the single most important piece of pro-troop legislation.
In 2004 McCain was one of ten cosponsors on a bill pushing for immediate background checks on guns instead of 5 day waiting period.
In 2002 McCain sponsored the bill to remove 65 billion dollars in gov. subsidies from oil, farm producers.
McCain's top choice for Supreme Court Justice was Roberts. This is who he recommended as his top choice to Bush.
Alito was in his top five.
Most of McCain's top conservative credentials has been in three areas, spending cuts where he is considered the biggest hawk in the senate, Military and foreign affairs, and conservative judges!. Strange he gets attacked on this. He has been in favor of nearly every Bush choice on judges. In fact he recommended both top Surpreme Court choices.
Top three liberal McCain
Immigration. Not so much on the border fence, but granting a path to citizenship.
Environment - Yes McCain believe global warming is an issue. A liberal all the way.
McCain Feingold - The transparency ideas were all conservative, but the unnecessary rules on elections were all liberal.
Wash: McCain's tax ideas are a conservative wash. McCain comes from the early Reagan school of tax cuts being a "reward" for fiscal discipline. This has been out of favor with both democrats and republicans because of political reasons, not ideological.
|
|
As I mentioned before. Try to know McCain's record before saying these things. I think he is a great man and a great American, but whose views on certain issues show a victory of personal passion over discipline. That may be a good reason not to vote for him.
On the balance though I think he stands as a conservative on most of the social and foreign affairs issues of the day. He is a Goldwater Conservative on economics and a liberal on environmental policy. Immigration is not conservative or liberal, but has become democrat or republican. |
|
As I mentioned before. Try to know McCain's record before saying these things. I think he is a great man and a great American, but whose views on certain issues show a victory of personal passion over discipline. That may be a good reason not to vote for him.
On the balance though I think he stands as a conservative on most of the social and foreign affairs issues of the day. He is a Goldwater Conservative on economics and a liberal on environmental policy. Immigration is not conservative or liberal, but has become democrat or republican. |
|
He will NEVER be President. If he truly loved his country, he would bow out right now, and throw any support he has to Fred Thompson. Fred is the only one who can beat Hillary, period. McCain's personal arrogance and ambition, and your willingness to follow him, may destroy this nation and with it, the world.
The Press and the blogosphere like to treat this entire process like it is some kind of game. It is not. People will die if the wrong guy (or gal) becomes President. Sadly, those that suffer from this incredible mistake, will probably not be ones that caused it. |
|
"But according to exit polling, McCain narrowly trailed Huckabee in support from the 80 percent of primary voters who identified themselves as Republicans. Huckabee won 32 percent of their support compared to McCain's 31 percent."
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/ |
|
http://article.nationalreview.com/ ?q=MzY0M2U3ZTExMGExM2Q4YTJhYzJkZDMzYzgwMDAzZmE=
McCain has really won nothing, but the liberal media and party figures are trying to play mind games to trick conservatives into giving up. This article goes into great detail about how McCain is not a conservative, and why we should keep fighting.
Here's an excerpt about why McCain's Democratic views about the War on Terror put American in danger.
"Joining with the most irresponsible voices in and out of government, McCain spent weeks, if not months, condemning the detention of alien unlawful combatants (a.k.a. terrorists) at Guantanamo Bay...
If a president were to bring the detainees to the United States our ability to interrogate them would be severely hampered as they would like be afforded the full array of due process rights that were never intended to apply to terrorists at a time of war. This is stunningly irresponsible...
Moreover, failing in his campaign to close Guantanamo Bay, McCain has led the effort to confer constitutional and international rights on the enemy where they now sit. And his muddled thinking as applies to interrogations — comparing water-boarding to torture (a rarely used technique that has, in fact, saved American lives according to our nation’s top intelligence official) makes it difficult for any interrogator to do his job without concern for his career and financial well-being, given the litigation and congressional hearings that are the favorite tactics of the antiwar Left.
How can it be said, therefore, that John McCain is the best of the lot to lead this war against terrorism when he appears to have no clue how to fight this enemy on home territory? " |
|
"For months JOHN MCCAIN has been the Democrats' favorite co-sponsor on everything from a patient's bill of rights to gun control. TED KENNEDY and JOHN EDWARDS like him so much that they have been urging the maverick to switch sides. Though McCain has declined, he thought about it long enough to prompt a dinner invitation from the President last week. The shift in power only enhances his stature. "This move makes John McCain the de facto Republican leader in the Senate," says a top Republican operative."
Time Magazine. May 27, 2001
http://www.time.com /time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101010604-128089,00.html
|
|
McCain is not pro-choice. He is just pretending, like he lied and flip-flopped on so many other issues, including amnesty.
http://findarticles.com/ p/articles/mi_qa3827/is_199909/ai_n8855062
When McCain started the 2000 campaign, he said several times that he didn't want to overturn Roe vs. Wade, and he wouldn't select judges who would.
McCain only changed his mind and flip flopped when he realized he couldn't possibly win the nomination without pretending to be pro-life.
Here are his comments:
In an August 19 interview with the San Francisco Chronicle, McCain said: "I'd love to see a point where it is irrelevant, and could be repealed because abortion is no longer necessary. But certainly in the short term, or even-the long-term, I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade, which would then force X number of women in America to illegal and dangerous operations."
"Kate Michelman could almost have made the statement he made," Dr. David O'Steen, executive director of the National Right to Life Committee (RTL), told HuMAN EVENTS's. Michelman heads the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL). O'Steen was especially upset over the idea that abortion is somehow "necessary."
|
|
|
Fred is conservative but he is too laid back and he will end his race soon - hopefully before FL or Feb. 5th. McCain has a weakness in immigration, but he is strong on the culture of life and defense. These are two issues that predominantly seperate democrats from republicans in Main Street. Most americans are not engaged politically at a detailed level, so they still focus on the big issues like pro-abortion or pro-life, and since 9/11 keeping america safe. These two issues will allow republicans to keep the whitehouse. The economy may be important, but most social conservatives realize life is more important than money and if they have to choose between more money or preservation of life - the latter wins. Also, immigration is important but americans have contained Bush and congress in the past and they can do so again if an amnesty package is proposed - all americans (dems. and republicans agree they do not want amnesty and the demonstrations on the street changed congress' mind and Bush's push to pass the bill). We can contain Mc. on this issue. |
|
|
only if Mitt is nominated. If the republicans keep their distinction in the issue of life and a strong defense/foreign policy then i will stay. If these two are compromised by nominating Mitt who has funded planned parenthood, and all his half truths about raising fees not taxes, having lobbysts as advisers not managers, blaming contractors for having illegal aliens working on his lawn etc I am switching to an independent and for the first time in my life campaigning against the GOP (in every way possible). I do believe though that the republican party will change after this election, and we may have a new conservative party and let the GOP party become the fiscal party (all arguments for Mitt are about money, and it seems like the republican party is for sale). Let's wait and see but I have confidence that Feb. 5th will focus on the big two (Life and Defense). |
|
"Approx 400,000 Republican Voters turn out in SC.
McCain & Huck each get approx 30% of those votes
BUT BOTH should recognize that they have reached the High Water Mark...their Numbers in November will not rise appreciably...
THEY ARE TOAST & If they REALLY cared about the GOP & the Country they would both drop out NOW!!! "
Gee, I wonder if we can guess who sans peril supports? Nevermind his boy Romney also only got 30%. But, of course, he just thinks the other 60% would have went to his guy.
So why shouldn't Romney just drop out now? He has only 1 credible win under his belt and he got it by promising $50 Billion to the auto industry in Michigan (which the Michigan voters were apparently to stupid to realize that he was lying to them.) Wyoming was decided by his paid staff. And he won a *straw poll* in NV, but isn't going to get the majority of delegates there.
Romney has the money to stay in regardless of his lack of real support, even if people stop donating to him (the largest part of his campaign cash has been his own.) HE is the one that is stealing the votes away from the rest.
His entire strategy is to stay in with his own self-financing and be the last man standing and hope republicans will vote for him just out of party loyalty.
And the dems take the white house as a result. |
|
I hate doing this because I am against many McCain positions, but I am getting so angry at fabrications and untruths.
The August article the blogger referred to was in August 1999 (It sounds like 2007) and following that article McCain said he misspoke about the line. and that he was against Roe versus Wade.
There was a better one in 2005 where McCain said that Roe versus Wade was based on a misunderstanding that a fetus was only viable later in pregnancy. We now know that a fetus is a viable entity close or at conception. Many extreme pro-life groups took that to understanding that McCain was sympathetic to Ro, but that was not the case.
Nevertheless, in every McCain campaign speech from 2000 on McCain has spoken in favor of life, was a big backer of the late term abortion ban, and has backed supreme court justices who would like to see Roe ve Wade overturned.
One misspoken comment and one silly comment in ten years. And actions that are pro-life enough to warrant many pro-life group endorsements.
I am not even and ardent pro-lifer and now I am defending the positions about McCain I don't like.
Geeesshhhh.
|
|
McCain didn't misspeak about supporting Roe. He said it multiple times over multiple days, as the article I linked to showed. It was only after days passed and he read new polls that he flip flopped and started lying by saying that he was pro-life.
McCain flips, flops and flips on abortion
Human Events, Sep 3, 1999 by D'Agostino, Joseph A
In a series of contradictory and convoluted statements over the past two weeks, Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) signaled that he may do little to curtail abortion or reverse Roe v. Wade were he elected President...
In an August 19 interview with the San Francisco Chronicle, McCain said: "I'd love to see a point where it is irrelevant, and could be repealed because abortion is no longer necessary. But certainly in the short term, or even-the long-term, I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade, which would then force X number of women in America to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations."
"Kate Michelman could almost have made the statement he made," Dr. David O'Steen, executive director of the National Right to Life Committee (RTL), told HuMAN EVENTS's. Michelman heads the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL). O'Steen was especially upset over the idea that abortion is somehow "necessary."
[Continued in Part 2]
|
|
McCain spokesman Howard Opinsky insisted the senator has not backed away from his pro-life principles. "He will pick judges who share his values, who are strict constructionists," Opinsky said, but added that McCain would not impose any "litmus tests on any single issue." ...
See John Dance
...
But just two days after McCain was interviewed by the Chronicle, World magazine (in its Aug. 21, 1999, issue) reported on a recent McCain stump speech: "Though [McCain] insists he, personally, is `morally pro-life,' he said he would work to ensure that no voter felt 'excluded' from the GOP 'I would not seek to overturn Roe v. Wade tomorrow,' he continued, because doing so would endanger the lives of women. He promised not to screen Supreme Court nominees for their opinion on Roe."
McCain made yet another similar statement on CNN's "Late Edition" on August 22. "We all know, and it's obvious;' he said, "that if we repeal Roe v. Wade tomorrow, thousands of young American women would be performing illegal and dangerous operations."
...
Douglas Johnson, NRTL's legislative director, said in a statement, "This opportunistic flip-flop demonstrates that McCain will sacrifice any principle in order to curry favor with certain political elites, in an attempt to further his personal political ambition."
http://findarticles.com /p/articles/ mi_qa3827/ is_199909/ ai_n8855062 |
|
As the article I posted showed, McCain is pro choice. Everything he has said since that 1999 article has been a lie so that he can be elected President. Just like he has flip flopped on every other issue, pretending to be a conservative instead of the man the Democrats offered the Vice Presidential nomination to in 2000.
Once McCain was elected, he would flip back to his real, pro-choice position, and appoint judges who were pro-Roe.
|
|
From the National Right to Life web site:
The Pro-Life Case Against John McCain:
McCain Has Denigrated the Pro-Life Issue Elsewhere, But Now He Seeks Support From Pro-Life Voters in South Carolina
By Douglas Johnson and Holly Gatling
...
"McCain quite recently (on the Don Imus radio show, on November 23[, 1999]) ridiculed citizens who decide which candidate to vote for on the basis of the right-to-life issue – he referred to them as “otherwise intelligent people.” We suspect that the pro-life voters of South Carolina are quite intelligent enough to see through McCain’s current attempt to play them for suckers.
"
http://www.nrlc.org/Election2000/mccain/prolife_case_agains t_mccain.html |
|
From the National Right to Life site:
http://www.nrlc.org/news/2000/NRL02/doug.html
How John McCain Threatens the Pro-Life Cause
By Douglas Johnson
NRLC Legislative Director
(February 20[, 2000]) - - The presidential candidacy of Senator John McCain (R-Az.) has posed a threat to future advances by the pro-life movement...
"McCain Winks on Abortion
A revealing observation was made on February 8 by Steven Brill, editor of the magazine Brill's Content, which covers the news media.
Speaking on the Fox News Channel program "The Edge", Brill said two reporters covering the McCain campaign told him, "You know, he really doesn't feel that strongly about abortion and about -- he isn't really as pro-gun as he lets on in the campaign. He has to do that because it's a Republican primary, but he's kind of let us know that he's not that hard-edged on those subjects."
Brill went on, "The point I'm making is that he was given permission, at least by these two guys [journalists], to pander. One of them actually said, 'At least when McCain panders he sort of lets us know he's doing it, and he kind of winks and kind of enjoys it, so he's a good guy.' Well, he's not letting the rest of the country know he's pandering."
In the same vein, liberal Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen wrote on December 15, "McCain's people whisper, Don't worry. He's not really so anti-abortion."
" |
|
|
The idea that McCain is the strongest Repubican candidate is MSM myth. A large portion of the Republican vote will not support McCain and will not show up for him in the polls. McCain is out of money and cannot raise the $$ it will take make credible run. He is too old. He has gone too many times against the Republican party. It is time of this Washington fixture to get out of the way. |
|
So far McCain has only been able to do well in open primary states where a very big chunk of his votes come from Independents. NH and SC were tailor made for him (25% Military vote in SC).Further, Rudy was not dividing the moderate vote and the conservative vote was divided 3 ways.
FL will be the big test. If anyone but McCain wins that McCain's quest is in trouble. |
|
I doubt if you were tortured for 6 years in a hellish gulag by communist thugs such that you can no longer stretch your arms above your head and you can feel every painful blow for the next 5 decades in your mind, that you could even think of doing the same things to other people, no matter who they were.
This is possibly the most basic human feeling I can think of and to castigate John McCain about it is inhumanity of the lowest order.
There is a reason why Senator McCain is so virulently against anything that sounds even remotely like torture- because he never wants what happened to him to ever happen to anyone else.
I would, in fact, be worried if it were otherwise. |
|
|
conservative cause as president than he has already done as a liberal senator. Bush's "compassion" has already cost the Republican party the senate and the house. |
|
|
Can't argue with Matt here. No one beats the Cheatriots. |
|
Matt Lewis wrote;
--------------
"It's important to separate the two; For example, I believe the New England Patriots will win today -- but that doesn't mean I want them to ... In fact, I hate the Patriots. But if I were writing for a sports blog in, say, Indianapolis, I would still be honest enough to write that the Patriots are probably the best team in the NFL. That's an analysis. Not an endorsement."
--------------
Matt,
That's a weak analogy.
Fact is, you spent most of 2007 slamming McCain's two perceived challengers for the nomination, Rudy & Mitt.
You also slammed their wives, their religion, their hairstyles, their sports teams, and their governing records.
And after Fred threw his hat in the ring, you wrote an awful hit piece on his wife, Jeri, which was entirely dependent upon innuendos provided by old bitter men whose feelings were hurt because a young pretty woman (Jeri) didn't spend enough time bowing down to them.
You never made any similar personal attacks on McCain or his wife---and you well know that Cindy McCain has some skeletons in her closet that you would be writing about if she were the spouse of another candidate other than your own.
Seriously, brother, you should just be transparent---just as Dean Barnett suggested to you in a post last summer.
Everyone knows you're a John McCain supporter, and you're perfectly entitled to be.
I don't get why you continue to deny it---you only damage your credibility by denying it.
Next week you'll probably write a post trying to convince us that Mary Katharine Ham isn't really rooting for the Georgia Bulldogs to win their football games---rather, she's 'just' analyzing strategies for how the Bulldogs can win their games ! |
|
You Can't be Serious!!!
If you would only learn how to read with understanding you would see I am NOT in the Mittster's Corner...BUT the way this thing looks to be shaking out I will NOT critisize My Former Governor (11th Commandment) with the same Venom I choose to display my utter disgust for the Charlatons & Pretenders (Mike & Mac).
But Thanks for the response.
If you doubt my explanation you could always visit my Blog, where I believe I have left no doubt about who I support!
As a Conservative my support is reserved for the ONLY REAL Conservative in the Field!
The Only Candidate Conservatives can Honestly TRUST to further the Goldwater/Reagan movement.
VoteSmart
Vote Now
Vote Conservative
W/O=
|
|
McCain is a believer in the Kyoto agreement and is a global Warming wimp! The light bulbs are just the beginning. Now it is OUR thermostat!
Professional, political parisites listen to LOBBYISTS who eventually get them into trouble! Have you forgotten the Lincoln Savings and Loan scandal? Here are some of the things McCain has accomplished in Washington, D.C... Keating, the comptroller, of Lincoln S&L was convicted of over 70 criminal violations in Arizona, McCain's home state. Senator John McCain was one of the ringleaders of the "KEATING FIVE" that cost the American taxpayers $160 BILLION DOLLARS. McCain/Feingold(D) Bill (assault on 1st Admendment), McCain/Kennedy(D) Amnesty Bill (for 12M illegal aliens) and McCain/Gang of 14 (Democrats/Filibusters), voted against tax cuts, McCain/Lieberman(I/D) (Energy Tax). What will he do as POTUS? Be afraid! Be very afraid!
http://eclipptv.com/viewVideo.php?video_id=954&title=John_M cCain_in__quot_Missing__Presumed_Dead_quot _
http://eclipptv.com/viewVideo.php?video_id=956&title=Vietna m_Veterans_Against_McCain&vpkey=62acaf320c
|
|
Typically, it is the middle-of-the-road folks who decide who will NOT win the presidency. Now, it is the conservative folks who will decide.
McCain might win the moderate vote, but he will never win the conservative vote. That is just the way it is because McCain consistently pokes sticks in conservative eyes. |
|
According to Drudge, a poll will be released today showing that Romney surged 5 points in Florida from even with McCain to leading.
FLASH: RASMUSSEN Florida poll to be released: Romney 25, McCain 20, Giuliani 19... |
|
"I believe my party has gone astray. I think the Democratic Party is a fine party, and I have no problems with it, in their views and their philosophy." -- John McCain
|
|
|
Just wanted to commend Craig for his posts in this thread. They actually examine the truth, which some people obviously are too lazy to seek, or too biased to see. Just like Craig, I don't always agree with McCain, but he most certainly NOT the pinko-liberal some paint him as. If anyone cared to dig deeper, you'd see that most of his positions are actually grounded in sound conservative principles--even if some of his more transparent stands in the last few years have been more to the left. And those that continue to talk about McCain not being able to win are obviously blind to the polls that show him being the ONLY candidate who is ahead of the Democratic front-runners; the rest would be crushed. So to me, it comes down to McCain, or one of the Dems, and if you truly are a conservative, that should be a no-brainer. This business about not voting for McCain or writing someone in is just plain stupid, in my opinion. |
|
He would likely choose Democrat Joe Lieberman as Vice President. McCain refuses to rule out Lieberman out, and in the past refused to state that he would support the Republican running against Lieberman in the Senate.
The most logical theory is that as President McCain would legislate the same way he does as a Senator: start with the Democrats then win over enough liberal Republicans to avoid filibuster. Probably the main exception would be on military issues, where he would start with the Republicans for something like war funding, or mixed Democrats and Republicans for shutting down Guantanamo and on “torture”.
Judges would likely continue with the Gang of 14 approach. None of them would come anywhere near repealing Roe. They’d be liberal Republicans or Democrats.
If McCain tried to placate conservatives now, it could help him in the primaries. But he is choosing not to do so. The likely explanation is that he wants to run a centrist, bipartisan government.
|
|
McCain_ Lieberman's proposed obscene energy
tax hike will destroy this economy:
HE claims it is to reduce global warming:
He is sucking up to Al Gore and Hollywood:
NO SENIOR can afford that Obscene energy tax hike
and giggle giggle HE EVEN TELLS US WHAT TYPE OF LIGHT BULB WE CAN USE:
NO DRILLING IN ANWR, no this no that
anti alternative energy, then pro alternative
energy
and anti success:
in 1998 HE TOLD Microsoft that they could buy influence in the Congress with under the table cash:
MORE KEATING 5 activities: |
|
I just cannot keep up with McCain's flip flop flipped's record of 25 years:
What does he really stand for besides talking:
John McCain
--voted against the Bush tax cuts, one of only two Republican senators to do so;
--twice authored the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill with its Z Visas and path to citizenship;
--has done nothing to accelerate the construction of the border fence;
--stands behind McCain-Feingold even after the Supreme Court has struck down portions of it as unconstitutional;
--defends the Gang of 14 even though a long line of vacancies on the courts of appeal existed at the end of 1006 (and has only gotten longer in 2007);
--worked with Lindsey Graham to destroy the GOP's agenda in September of 2006 by grandstanding over the interrogation and treatment of terrorists bill;
--opposed drilling in ANWR; NOW supports kyoto treaty
--opposed the Federal Marriage Amendment, twice;
--advocates a massive energy tax; (he even dictates why type of light bulbs you can use)
--backed the law of the sea treaty ( which gives control over our SOVEREIGN NATION TO THE UN:
__Hates and punishes success: tells Corporate America to shove it: so Corporate America moves off shore
___supports GOVERNMENT PAID FOR EMBRYO Stem cell research
___Anti alternative energy, then pro alternative energy then anti alternative energy
|
|
The Stupid Party
The RNC wants an amnesty candidate.
Another amnesty will result in Democrat majorities for decades, or until they are supplanted by the La Raza Party, why doesn't the RNC know that? How stupid do you have to be to import voters for the opposition at the same time you alienate your own voters? Nominating any of the amnesty trio (McCain, Huckabee, Rudy) is a losing proposition, we will not support them. If the GOP intends to surrender our sovereignty and abandon the rule of law, they will find in November 2008, that they still have their big money/cheap labor donors, but they do not have voters. GOP-RIP
|
|
From a columnist:
"Rush is on a tear again today against the media and conservatives quick to surrender principle on the road to victory.
My words, not his: Don't throw out the dogma with the South Carolina results.(Take that, Brokaw.)
UPDATE: Some more Rush (I missed the first hour): What the media considers "straight talk" is anything they agree with.
"
It's great to see someone stick the "straight talk" right back into McCain's ...
|
|
|
Tom Delay said it best today. Plain and simple John Mccain is not a conservative. His record speaks loud and clear. He is also not a leader just my personal thought. |
|
We will probably need to fight McCain (and the media) all the way to the convention. It will take tremendous will power because the media will be telling us to give up.
The reason why is because none of the top tier candidates are likely to withdraw until after Super Tuesday, and the current 5-way split will hand some, maybe most states to McCain. Some of the states give delegates by voting percentage, which will be ok. But some states are winner-take-all, so McCain could run up some large numbers.
After Super Tuesday, which is 2 weeks from now, McCain could have a sizeable delegate lead and the most wins. The media and McCain's supporters will be telling us to give in.
But we need to keep going until some candidates drop out, so the conservative vote isn't split between so many candidates. It could take awhile to catch McCain. The advantage of the long time period is that we'd have time to run attack ads. If nothing else that could weaken him enough so he'd lose in the general election, if he got the nomination.
The only alternative for conservatives would be to roll over and let McCain win on 25% to 30% of the vote, in races where conservatives opposed him but Democrats and moderates gave him the margin of victory.
|
|
The global stock market meltdown probably doesn't work to McCain's advantage.
Does anyone believe he knows the first thing about economics?
Is amnesty for illegal aliens a satisfactory answer to the economic crisis our nation faces? |
|
"McCain can. Do not let perfect be the enemy of good, McCain is a good conservative (not a perfect one) who can win a critical election for the GOP. If you want to throw the White House to Hillary and say we can come back later and win it after the Dems run hog wild over the country, well that is loser talk and would be very dangerous. "
Joe, if McCain is elected President there probably won't even still be a United States of America in 4 years.
|
|
Why do people always lump Mike Huckabee and John McCain? The more logical connection would be Fred Thompson, who actually worked closely with John McCain on some of McCain's notorious bills. For example, McCain-Feingold, which was originally called Thompson-Feingold.
Mike Huckabee had nothing to do with John McCain's amnesty program, he's against giving drivers licenses to illegals, he never had sanctuary cities in his state of Arkansas, and he was the first candidate to sign NumbersUSA's no-amnesty pledge.
The reason people lump Huckabee with McCain is because of Mitt Romney's multi-million dollar attack ad campaign, which was so obviously negative that it was in the national news for weeks. Even this past week it was reported that the Club For Growth PAC which attempted to twist Huckabee's record on taxes to make him sound like a liberal was funded by Romney supporters.
I do not want to vote for John McCain, and I will never vote for Mitt Romney.
Mike Huckabee will get my vote on Feb. 5th, no matter what happens in Florida. |
|
Worse than Dole. I wasn't excited about Dole, but I wasn't pi$$ed off at him, so I voted for him. What's the likelihood of anyone who has been called names for wanting the gov't to actually enforce the laws, to vote for those jamming amnesty down our throats?
McCain-Kennedy, McCain-Feingold, McCain-Leiberman. Leadership like this I can do without.
Carbon taxes, constitutional rights for Gitmo detainees and amnesty for illegal aliens await us if he wins, whoopee!!!
I will not particpate in the dissolution of my country. |
|
Unless of course, all the rest of our primaries are "open" and libs can vote in them.
No, McCain will lose to Romney in FL after Fred's voters go for Mitt. After that, McCain is finished.
How do I know? Conservatives HATE McCain. Not just dislike - despise. He has earned it too.
I'd sooner vote for Olympia Snowe as I would for McCain. |
|
SO
McCain declares himself the FRONT RUNNER
I CAN COUNT !!!!!
WINNING IS BY THE NUMBERS NOT ALL OF THAT
HOT AIR COMMING OUT OF McCains big mouth:
BEWARE THE SLEEPING DOG:::::::::::::::::::::::::: |
|
OH dear:
delusional McCain is front running from
the mouth only:
THE NUMBERS tell another story:
winning is by the numbers in this game:
We are not seeking a PROM QUEEN
this is for real
Maybe McCain can't count or something |
|
Virginia Patriot: "Another amnesty will result in Democrat majorities for decades, or until they are supplanted by the La Raza Party, why doesn't the RNC know that?"
It's a good point, V.P, but the thing is that the Party Establishment has plans for a New Republican Party. John McCain will be a re-aligner, replacing Reagan Conservatives with moderate Democrats (and the illegal immigrants). "They" figure they need Reagan Conservatives for only one more election at most.
One McCain takes over, he will join with the Democrats to give amnesty and appoint pro-abortion judges. It will be clear that pro-choice and anti-amnesty conservatives are no longer welcome in the Republican Party, but McCain & friends figure that is ok because they will be replaced by the moderate Democrats who like McCain so much, as well as the new illegal immigrants and their supporters, along with pro-choice voters who would feel comfortable in the New Republican Party, which is now pro-choice.
Rush, etc. on talk radio will be silenced as McCain supports the censorship bills which Democrats have already proposed. All federal and party funding will be cut off from Reagan conservative groups, including social conservative / pro-life.
There are articles posted with this information all over the place, talking about how Reaganism is dead and we need to rethink in order to build a 21st Century Republican party. Consider too, how little resistance there is to McCain inside the party establishment, and how his record has been covered up. Most of the candidates are already rolling over to McCain, staying in the race without criticizing him in order to keep the vote divided 5 ways, which gives McCain the best chance of winning. Huckabee seems like McCain's little puppy, talking in his concession speech about being a good loser, while praising McCain.
|
|
Si se puede (Yes We Can)
Yes we can:
Ignore your laws.
Enter your country any time we feel like it.
Collect benefits to which we are not entitled.
Tell you what your immigration policies should be.
File thousands of lawsuits to prevent you from enforcing your laws.
Vote in your elections fradulently.
Take your country. |
|
The match ups between McCain and Hillary are meaningless. Bloomberg is getting into the race and there is very little difference between McCain and Bloomberg on many issues. Bloomberg will grab almost all of the independent support that McCain has and 1/2 of the base will puke over McCain and boycott.
Romney has a chance to get the 40 % most conservative of the electorate and win in a 3 way race.
The current head to heads mean little as they are media and name recognition driven. I remember Rep candidates being down 20 points at this point in the election and winning. The numbers shift once the real campaign starts up. |
|
"The current head to heads mean little as they are media and name recognition driven. "
I agree. Look at how far Giuliani has fallen in the national Republican vs. Republican polls since New Hampshire. Every time a different candidate wins a primary there are large shifts. Republican vs. Democrat polls have the same volatility. Many voters only focus on elections during the week before voting. When someone polls them a year before the election, they might only recognize the candidates who have been on television for years, like McCain and Hillary.
|
|
|
|