12
   

The McCain that might have been.

 
 
Reply Thu 30 Oct, 2008 05:26 pm
In this election, McCain was faced with a choice.

He could have chosen to be the centrist-- the maverick who stood independently in the middle, not liberal but not overly conservative either. A man of honor who was strong on issues but short on attacks.

With this strategy, McCain had a natural advantage-- his reputation. He could have been honorable (above attacks), independent and strong which fits into a narrative that the adoring media would have loved.

Of course, this is not the McCain we saw this election season. But it makes me wonder... what if?

If McCain had played to the independents... he would have had to say to his conservative base; "look, you have a choice, come with me or live with the Democrats"-- and this would have been the gamble.

But he could have made a very strong case for the independents; on foreign policy and the taxes. Also the fact that McCain has made such exaggerated attacks has meant that no one takes him seriously and Obamas real weaknesses haven't been really addressed.

I think an independent McCain, taking strong stands on issues that appeal to the all important center while avoiding the nasty irrelevant attacks that only stoke up the base, would have been in a much stronger position.

What do you think might have happened?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 12 • Views: 1,277 • Replies: 12
No top replies

 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Oct, 2008 06:04 pm
With that as a true option, Id have considered him as a candidate. He probably wouldnt have the Ice Maiden as his running mate, and hed have been a strong force of cross party unity. As it is, hes a transparent lying fraud who's toadying to "the base" . This is laughable. Hes got nothing to offer and hes joined by the hip, to his predesessor.
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Oct, 2008 06:18 pm
@ebrown p,
Not a lot of comment at this point, ebrown. If Sen Obama wins and the Dems win a veto-proof majority in Congress, there will be a lot of Republicans pointing fingers at each other in the blame game.
Sure, Sen McCain was dealt a bad hand by having to run in the shadow of 8 years of President Bush. But I certainly agree that McCain's advisors ran a terrible campaign. The idea of abandoning the middle in favor of pandering to the right hurt him politically and, sadly, I fear, may have sullied his reputation as a respected American hero.
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Oct, 2008 06:29 pm
@ebrown p,
I think if he had picked Ridge as VP and run to the middle he would have emerged as a much better candidate ... but lost. Prior to his pick of Palin, there were no volunteers at his campaign headquarters and no money in his coffers. He was in a no-win situation. An honorable campaign might have collected some independent voters, but the religious base would stay home and Obama's ground game would have crushed him. At least he could hold his head high in the Senate. Of course, Obama's ground game mauled him anyway, but for a week or two, the polls showed him competitive and he does have a ground team of Palin backers to make things a little interesting. I think that was the best he was going to get. But if he was going to lose anyway, losing honorably would have been infinitely more preferable.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 30 Oct, 2008 06:40 pm
@ebrown p,
I see that you are counting your chickens before they have hatched... that's bad Karma for Obama.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Oct, 2008 06:44 pm
@ebrown p,
I agree, right down the line.

What happened? Maybe his campaign got to paying too much attention to polls.
0 Replies
 
Eva
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Oct, 2008 08:31 pm
I agree, too.

Even though I've always supported Obama, I thought McCain was a very attractive candidate at first. I even told Hubby, "If we (Democrats) lose again, at least McCain would be a president I could support." He seemed centrist. And honorable. And independent.

<shakes head>

What a disappointment.
0 Replies
 
Green Witch
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Oct, 2008 08:57 pm
@ebrown p,
I agree McCain could have been a contender, but he allowed himself to manipulated by the dark side. He should have known better. The conservatives threw him under the bus in 2000 and it cost him the nomination. Now in 2008, they insisted he pick "Bible Spice" as his VP and it will cost him the election. He should see the conservative wing of the GOP as his albatross and not his friends.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Oct, 2008 09:07 pm
I see three basic groups in the Republican party: a country club/old money group including the Rockefellers and Bushes; the so-called religious right, and a populist group composed of people like Palin, George Allen, and the like and thats without counting libertarians who simply have no other place to go.

The only real pubbie in this race is Sarah Palin and she's basically a pubbie populist. John McCain, Joe Lieberman, Rudy Giuliani and others like them are 50s democrats and they're all saying the same thing, i.e. that the dem party has gone over the edge and gone rogue. The fact that anybody would talk about John McCain being too conservative is redundant evidence.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Oct, 2008 09:25 pm
@ebrown p,
Quote:
In this election, McCain was faced with a choice.

He could have chosen to be the centrist-- the maverick who stood independently in the middle, not liberal but not overly conservative either. A man of honor who was strong on issues but short on attacks.

With this strategy, McCain had a natural advantage-- his reputation. He could have been honorable (above attacks), independent and strong which fits into a narrative that the adoring media would have loved.


This wasn't even a might have been because the man McCain was never capable of exhibiting the qualities you're raised. He was always a self-centered piece of scum and he fell into the role he has played like it was made for him, which, obviously it was.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Oct, 2008 09:52 pm
http://tinyurl.com/5u8fle
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Oct, 2008 05:48 am
... and gunga represents the "reasonable and sane" followers of the "New" John McCain.
Why is it that gunga and his buds never post anything that Gramps stands FOR. Could it be that the McCain suit, recently emptied, has nothing in the pockets either.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Oct, 2008 06:06 am
It was evident very early that the fellow was going to go in the direction he's gone. Here's a thread I started in Feb of 2006... http://able2know.org/topic/69091-1

Quote:
McCain wants the Presidency in 2008. He'll be formidable, if he gets the nomination, and I suspect that if he does, he'll beat Hillary.

But to get that nomination, he'll have to mend a lot of fences and forge many counter-intuitive relationships. He'll have to compromise and that will mean compromises with the extreme elements so prevalent and powerful in the modern Republican/conservative system. Probably the prime attraction of McCain for the Republican machine will be his electibility and thus, the continued hold of American politics by the Republican party and the interests which gain so much from that continued dominance. Part of what he'll have to do to get them in his camp is to continue to demonstrate his electibility and that will entail putting his likely 2008 opponents in his sights, both generally (the Democrats) and specifically (Hillary and anyone else likely or dangerous).

What he does from here on out will suggest not only what his strategies for achieving the nomination will be, but also whether or not he will live up to his reputation as a fairly unique possessor of integrity. And we'll get an idea of who he and the Republicans that coalesce around him believe dangerous opponents in 2 and a half years.

And that seems to be precisely why, last week, McCain took on Obama in the inexplicable manner and circumstance in which he did.

Obama is, I think, the single Dem candidate who can beat McCain if he wins the nomination. If I'm correct in these assumptions, we will see a growing campaign out of McCain's camp to:
1) establish his social conservative bona fides
2) strenghten his hawk reputation (with complimentary attack on Dem "sissyness" re defence/terror)
3) throw negatives at Hillary
4) throw negatives at Obama


From this perspective now, I think much less of the fellow's integrity than I did back then.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » The McCain that might have been.
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 04/20/2019 at 06:08:16