A first(?) thread on 2008: McCain,Giuliani & the Republicans

<Lovin the Cyclo>

I think what I find so scary about Hillary is that she hides who she is more thoroughly than most of the other candidates.

0 Replies

I certainly don't disagree. She's cold and calculating. Hope I don't have to choose between her and one of the Republicans who isn't McCain.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

My sentiments, exactly!

0 Replies

snood wrote:

This is the latest cover of The American Conservative magazine. I hear that the article talks about how Rudy has surrounded himself with advisors who don't think the Bush policy on preemptive war doesn't go far enough.

...some scary sheeit, mang.

Holy crap!

I stand corrected for the second time in as many days. Looks like the Right would rather lose than compromise. Fools.

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

I certainly don't disagree. She's cold and calculating. Hope I don't have to choose between her and one of the Republicans who isn't McCain.

Cycloptichorn

Well, get prepared cyclo and CI because it's still likely that you are going to have to vote for her or for another Republican president.
http://specials.slate.com/futures/2008/democratic-presidential-nominee/

0 Replies

The republican race is the who-the-hell-knows one
http://specials.slate.com/futures/2008/republican-presidential-nominee/

0 Replies

And overall
http://specials.slate.com/futures/2008/presidential/
http://specials.slate.com/futures/2008/control-of-presidency/

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
I certainly don't disagree. She's cold and calculating. Hope I don't have to choose between her and one of the Republicans who isn't McCain.

Cycloptichorn

Well, get prepared cyclo and CI because it's still likely that you are going to have to vote for her or for another Republican president.
http://specials.slate.com/futures/2008/democratic-presidential-nominee/

Well, I think 'likely' is stretching things a bit. History clearly shows that the winners of the early states most often go on to win later on. So I don't put much credence in national polls which place her way ahead. As for the 'futures markets,' as Nimh pointed out to me earlier, they aren't polls; look at the Iowa Electronic market for '04 and you'll see that Kerry was cheaper to buy at this time during the '04 election the Edwards is today. These markets are close to useless for predicition purposes.

I've never heard a Hillary! supporter clearly and concisely explain what it is that she has done which has shown that she is 'ready to be president on day one,' as she is fond of saying. I strongly suspect that there are those within the Dem party who merely seek to continue the Clinton era DLC domination of the Dem party. I specifically seek to end this domination, as Republican-lite is no way to go through life.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
I certainly don't disagree. She's cold and calculating. Hope I don't have to choose between her and one of the Republicans who isn't McCain.

Cycloptichorn

Well, get prepared cyclo and CI because it's still likely that you are going to have to vote for her or for another Republican president.
http://specials.slate.com/futures/2008/democratic-presidential-nominee/

I'm not totally writing off all the GOP runners.

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

blatham wrote:
Well, get prepared cyclo and CI because it's still likely that you are going to have to vote for her or for another Republican president.
http://specials.slate.com/futures/2008/democratic-presidential-nominee/

Well, I think 'likely' is stretching things a bit. History clearly shows that the winners of the early states most often go on to win later on. So I don't put much credence in national polls which place her way ahead.

Yep, Cyclo is right. The national horserace polls at this point in time are mostly entertainment, and they offer some idea of whose message is coming through overall at the moment. But they say nothing about what the situation will be in one month's time - and these political stock markets in turn mostly reflect which direction the polling trends are heading.

As ever, the winners of IA and NH will surge and the losers will cave in as the rest of the country only then actually tunes in. So it makes a lot more sense to focus on those races. And as you know, Blatham, Hillary is very vulnerable there right now.

0 Replies

argh

"Likely" is not an inappropriate word here. It ain't as if the betting markets are the only voice or indicator putting her as the more likely candidate to gain the nomination. Of course it is uncertain.

The point is...get real. Whatever your or my druthers are for the nomination, if it is her, then it is her or it is another four or eight or twelve years of Republican control and if you have some trouble imagining what the US is going to look like after that....

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

argh

"Likely" is not an inappropriate word here. It ain't as if the betting markets are the only voice or indicator putting her as the more likely candidate to gain the nomination. Of course it is uncertain.

The point is...get real. Whatever your or my druthers are for the nomination, if it is her, then it is her or it is another four or eight or twelve years of Republican control and if you have some trouble imagining what the US is going to look like after that....

Oh, I agree. I will vote for Hillary if anyone 'cept McCain comes up against her.

You should realize that there isn't much of a difference between the two of them on many important issues. As a Progressive, she doesn't offer me much.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

"Likely" is not an inappropriate word here. It ain't as if the betting markets are the only voice or indicator putting her as the more likely candidate to gain the nomination. Of course it is uncertain.

OK, fair enough. I think its about 60/40 chances now, that it'll be Hillary or Obama. Well, 55/40/5, if you throw in Edwards, who's pretty much been stiffed by the media. Thats just me sticking my finger in the air tho.

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

blatham wrote:
argh

"Likely" is not an inappropriate word here. It ain't as if the betting markets are the only voice or indicator putting her as the more likely candidate to gain the nomination. Of course it is uncertain.

The point is...get real. Whatever your or my druthers are for the nomination, if it is her, then it is her or it is another four or eight or twelve years of Republican control and if you have some trouble imagining what the US is going to look like after that....

Oh, I agree. I will vote for Hillary if anyone 'cept McCain comes up against her.

You should realize that there isn't much of a difference between the two of them on many important issues. As a Progressive, she doesn't offer me much.

Cycloptichorn

McCain offers you more progressive policies? You might consider Hillary too militarist (I think of her that way) but McCain is clearly worse. Do you suppose McCain will have the will or the institutional capacity within his party to bring more equity to the tax codes? Do you expect McCain to be more willing or more able to bring substantial reform to the delivery of medical help to Americans? Do you think he'll be more progressive on internal intelligence gathering?

I'm a bit confused on where you see some progressive advantage.

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

blatham wrote:
"Likely" is not an inappropriate word here. It ain't as if the betting markets are the only voice or indicator putting her as the more likely candidate to gain the nomination. Of course it is uncertain.

OK, fair enough. I think its about 60/40 chances now, that it'll be Hillary or Obama. Well, 55/40/5, if you throw in Edwards, who's pretty much been stiffed by the media. Thats just me sticking my finger in the air tho.

Thanks. I wasn't suggesting more.

0 Replies

Lash wrote:

I think what I find so scary about Hillary is that she hides who she is more thoroughly than most of the other candidates.

Have you been reading the hometown (New York Mag etc) articles on Mr. Giuliani? He thought he knew how to hide himself - and was doing reasonably well at it for a while. New York media's gunning for him - from the right and what's remaining of the left.

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
blatham wrote:
argh

"Likely" is not an inappropriate word here. It ain't as if the betting markets are the only voice or indicator putting her as the more likely candidate to gain the nomination. Of course it is uncertain.

The point is...get real. Whatever your or my druthers are for the nomination, if it is her, then it is her or it is another four or eight or twelve years of Republican control and if you have some trouble imagining what the US is going to look like after that....

Oh, I agree. I will vote for Hillary if anyone 'cept McCain comes up against her.

You should realize that there isn't much of a difference between the two of them on many important issues. As a Progressive, she doesn't offer me much.

Cycloptichorn

McCain offers you more progressive policies? You might consider Hillary too militarist (I think of her that way) but McCain is clearly worse. Do you suppose McCain will have the will or the institutional capacity within his party to bring more equity to the tax codes? Do you expect McCain to be more willing or more able to bring substantial reform to the delivery of medical help to Americans? Do you think he'll be more progressive on internal intelligence gathering?

I'm a bit confused on where you see some progressive advantage.

I don't expect Hillary to be able to do the things you mentioned, either. I have no idea why you do, 'cept for the healthcare issue.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

I'm not shilling for the woman. Go ahead. Vote in another Republican.

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

I don't expect Hillary to be able to do the things you mentioned, either. I have no idea why you do, 'cept for the healthcare issue.

Well, since that is arguably the most important domestic issue of the moment, that's something..

Plus, Iraq, at the very least. Hillary might be clearly to the right of Obama and Edwards on Iraq, both in sensibility and actual plans, but I mean, we're talking McCain here. He may be a lot more sensible than Bush about how to operate in Iraq, sure. But he's pretty much the most hawkish Republican available when it comes to staying in Iraq and fighting on, for as many more years as it takes (whatever "it" is), in itself.

And what about the cultural issues? Abortion and the like? McCain is a reliable conservative on those, even if he is so in a for these times unusual principled, non-hateful way. He may rightly despise the likes of Falwell, but pro-choice he's not. And what about socio-economic policy? McCain is no conservative hawk on economics, but instead it just seems to not be much of a priority for him at all. What he really cares about is foreign policy, so he'd be easily willing to let the Reagan/Bush economists have their way at home if in return he gets the conservative wing's support on whatever he deems necessary abroad.

You're right, Hillary most probably wouldnt be a particularly progressive President, and I dont particularly trust her either -- but she can be relied on at least to do a Bill Clinton kind of "four more years / of things not getting worse" thing. Which isnt much, but not something you can say of McCain, whether it's about Iraq, socio-economic policies (including health care, Social Security, etc), or cultural policies, Supreme Court appointments etc. Sure McCain would be better than Bush, which means that things would be getting worse at a slower pace, and in a couple of very specific instances (torture, Guantanamo) better. But there's still a big difference in the results you get between a conservative, however principled, or a Democrat in office.

0 Replies

Good summation, nimh. I hope our choices will be other than those two. More of the same just doesn't cut it for our country, and I'm sure all those outside of our country are also "sick and tired" of Bushism. We need a change in direction for our country. I'm not sure who best meets that challenge.

0 Replies

A first(?) thread on 2008: McCain,Giuliani & the Republicans

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know