0
   

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

 
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Feb, 2008 07:49 am
Ticomaya wrote:
Super Tuesday here in Arizona. I'll vote for McCain this morning, and I'll be attending his election night party tonight.


Does McCain really need your vote in Arizona?

Where I live, Independants can vote in either Primary (only one). Given that Romney has a big lead where I am, my vote for McCain will not help.

However, Obama is Neck and Neck with Hillary. Therefore, I will vote for Obama in the Dem Primary.

We need Billery humiliated. Agree?
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Feb, 2008 08:59 am
Great line from McCain here...
Quote:
McCain, for his part, has refused to engage with Limbaugh, telling reporters: "I don't listen to him. There's a certain trace of masochism in my family, but not that deep."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/04/AR2008020402798_2.html?hpid=features1&hpv=national&sid=ST2008020403086
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Feb, 2008 09:17 am
okie wrote:
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
dyslexia wrote:
Quote:
Many people would just as soon let the Democrat win, sit back, and watch them run the country into the ground.
Certainly an interesting take on conservative patriotism.


No patriotism at all, which is precisely what you are implying.

Your right on this one Dys.

Assuming McCain wins the nomination, any conservative who stays home on Election Day or, worse yet, votes for Clinton or Obama in the hope that McCain will lose, is a petty fool.

Anyone who does it because they are convinced the Democrat will run the country into the ground and thereby set the stage for a reemergence of a "True Conservative" candidate in 2012 is something far removed from a patriot

You are being less than fair about that. You imply that at the margins, some people don't stay home because they simply aren't that engaged in supporting either of the candidates. I have already said I may vote for McCain, but I won't be that enthusiastic, and why should I be if I am not that impressed with the man?

Why should I be a party to something that I don't agree with, if I decide not to vote? If neither option is a positive one, just one being not as good as the other, I may not feel like voting for it. A non-vote is also a vote for neither one.

It all depends upon my observation of what happens between now and November. If I don't care much for either one, I won't vote for either one, and not voting does not imply a lack of patriotism, I think you owe an apology.


In one of the few areas in which I disagree with friend Okie, I do have to disagree here.

My favorites are also out of the race now and I am left with less than first choices. But much more is riding on the election than four or eight years of a presidency. I look at what a President McCain or President Romney is likely to support and also likely to veto as opposed to a President Obama and President Clinton. And most importantly I look at the kinds of federal judges a President Obama or Clinton are likely to appoint versus a president Romney or McCain and it is here where the longest ranging implications are and where the most far reaching and difficult to reverse damage can be done.

I don't think staying home because we can't be joyously enthusiastic is an option a patriot can endorse.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Feb, 2008 09:30 am
Drudge has this photo of McCain up on his site

http://images.salon.com/politics/war_room/2008/02/04/mccain/story.jpg
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Feb, 2008 09:34 am
Quote:
"Unfettered capitalism is not something that I said I support," Mr. McCain said. "I support capitalism and the free-enterprise system, and that's why we have various agencies of government to bring these things under control. And from time to time throughout our history, there are excesses, and we have to fix them."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120218031379543249.html?mod=special_page_campaign2008_leftbox

How could any of you support this socialist bastard?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Feb, 2008 09:35 am
Yeah, Drudge has posted these too:

http://www.zombietime.com/really_truly_hillary_gallery/Hillarysmall2.jpg

http://www.zombietime.com/really_truly_hillary_gallery/Hillary76.jpg

Who among us has never had an unflattering photo taken or one that can be interpreted incorrectly?
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Feb, 2008 09:43 am
Shake your head a bit. I know it's early. The significance isn't the photo but rather that it's up on Drudge.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Feb, 2008 09:48 am
Drudge is an equal opportunity advocate and basher. He is more ideologically conservative than liberal, yes, but for your information, at least based on his radio show Sunday night, he is pretty pro McCain. That does not mean he won't show the pros and cons just the same. The most unflattering Hillary photo for instance, was his take on the tolls of a campaign and the investment of energy necessary to run one and it leaves the candidates exhausted. It in no way was bashing Hillary. At least overtly. He is not a Hillary person.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Feb, 2008 10:10 am
Mass emailing just sent out by Richard Viguerie

Quote:
Open up the GOP Race

By Richard A. Viguerie

Open it up!

The discombobulated state of the Republican presidential campaign means that it is still possible for someone to jump into the race. Such a candidate could serve as a kingmaker at the Republican convention in September, or even - yes, it's possible - could become the party's nominee.

Currently, Republicans are split among the various candidates; most conservatives are undecided, or ambivalent, or support one candidate or another because the alternatives are worse. Having been betrayed by a Republican establishment - by a president and members of Congress who pretended to be conservatives in order to get elected - grassroots conservatives are justifiably wary of the present contenders for leadership. All the remaining GOP presidential candidates have good qualities; all are flawed.

McCain has Reagan's toughness, is a Vietnam War hero, supports a strong military, and opposes pork-barrel spending, but sides with liberals on immigration, freedom of speech, taxes, environmental extremism, and other important issues.
Huckabee is a Reagan-style populist and a conservative on social issues, but is sympathetic to Goreism, and he fought conservatives on taxes, spending, immigration, and other issues when he was governor.
Romney has adopted a mostly-Reaganite platform, but he is suspect because he converted to conservatism only after serving as governor, and, besides, many conservatives see him as a probable loser in November.
Ron Paul is the real straight-talker in the race, the one who stays truest to the libertarian beliefs that are, as Reagan said, "the heart of conservatism." He is the one candidate who doesn't confuse a strong defense with the failed policy of nation-building. But most conservatives want a powerful U.S. presence in world affairs and will never support Paul's defense and foreign policy. In any event, Paul's chance of getting elected, or even nominated, is infinitesimal.

No one stands credibly on the three-legged stool that makes up the conservative movement and the heart of a successful Republican campaign - the coalition of economic conservatives, national security conservatives, and social conservatives.

Even Rush Limbaugh has raised the possibility that he may not support the Republican nominee this year. The nomination of McCain or Huckabee, he said, would destroy the party as we know it.

But what if the Republicans end up with an open convention?

It's true that open conventions, common in times past, are rare nowadays. The last major-party conventions at which more than two candidates had sizeable blocs of delegates were 1952 for the Democrats and 1948 for the Republicans, and the 1976 GOP convention was the last time that either party's nominee was not determined in advance. But with four candidates and with none of them acceptable to a strong majority of Republicans or conservatives, it's possible that no one will have sown up the nomination before the convention. If that happens, anyone could theoretically win - or, failing an outright win, he or she could exert great influence.

But who?

Former Virginia Governor and Senator George Allen was considered a frontrunner for this year's GOP nomination before he lost his reelection campaign in 2006. But his loss can be chalked up to his mishandling of charges of racism and to voter resentment toward the Iraq War, and to the fact that Democrats, desperate to win the Senate, swallowed hard and nominated a former Reagan Administration official to run against him. If losing one's previous statewide campaign disqualified a person from being president, neither Lincoln nor Nixon nor the elder Bush would have won.

Or, if the goal of a last-minute conservative candidacy is to rally the movement and build for the future, Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma could get into the race. Coburn could be the Barry Goldwater of his generation - someone who plants the seeds for a future flowering of conservatism, as Goldwater planted the seeds of the Reagan Revolution.

Other possibilities for a serious conservative candidate include Senator Jim DeMint or Governor Mark Sanford of South Carolina.

I'm urging conservatives across this country to start a national discussion, and to e-mail me at [email protected]
with their thoughts on these questions: Do you think opening up the race is a good idea? Do you have any other suggestions for candidates? Could someone come in off the sidelines, change the direction of the momentum, get the fans back into game, and lead us to victory?

If enough conservatives think and talk about an open convention and a new candidate, perhaps someone will seize the opportunity, unprecedented in modern times, that is presented by the current chaos - the opportunity to help rebuild the conservative movement and change the course of history.

Who could come in off the sidelines and save the day? Let me know what YOU think.
http://www.conservativesbetrayed.com/gw3/articles-latestnews/articles.php?CMSArticleID=3800&CMSCategoryID=19
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Feb, 2008 10:18 am
I am amused at how many fall for the pundits spoofs on elections. This year it was Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh, both threatening to vote for Hillary. In 1996, Rush spent most of a half hour on his radio show giving a long, morose, and heart wrenching spiel as to why he was going to have to vote for Bill Clinton. The phone lines melted. He spent some time extolling the virtues of Al Gore and in 2004, John Kerry. And some fall for it every time. Michael Savage did the same thing a few weeks ago with the same results.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Feb, 2008 10:24 am
I gave you five minutes to erase that post.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Feb, 2008 11:54 am
Republicans out there, you might be interested: I (finally) just posted some state updates on the Republican race again in the Polls etc thread: there's Alabama, Georgia, Missouri, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Arizona and Utah. Plus some bad procedural news for Romney from California.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Feb, 2008 01:23 pm
okie wrote:
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
dyslexia wrote:
Quote:
Many people would just as soon let the Democrat win, sit back, and watch them run the country into the ground.
Certainly an interesting take on conservative patriotism.


No patriotism at all, which is precisely what you are implying.

Your right on this one Dys.

Assuming McCain wins the nomination, any conservative who stays home on Election Day or, worse yet, votes for Clinton or Obama in the hope that McCain will lose, is a petty fool.

Anyone who does it because they are convinced the Democrat will run the country into the ground and thereby set the stage for a reemergence of a "True Conservative" candidate in 2012 is something far removed from a patriot

You are being less than fair about that. You imply that at the margins, some people don't stay home because they simply aren't that engaged in supporting either of the candidates. I have already said I may vote for McCain, but I won't be that enthusiastic, and why should I be if I am not that impressed with the man?

Why should I be a party to something that I don't agree with, if I decide not to vote? If neither option is a positive one, just one being not as good as the other, I may not feel like voting for it. A non-vote is also a vote for neither one.

It all depends upon my observation of what happens between now and November. If I don't care much for either one, I won't vote for either one, and not voting does not imply a lack of patriotism, I think you owe an apology.


I support McCain over Romney for what I believe are two important reasons:

1) I think he has more character and political courage than Romney. Romney is, by all accounts, a very decent man and not only would I be fine with him being president, I support some of his positions over those of McCain, but he has never demonstrated the willingness to advance an idea he thought was best for the American people, even if by doing so he sustained political attacks and harm. In fact he did the opposite. I suppose his various conversions on key issues could be genuine, but he is a politician running for the most powerful office in the world. I'm afraid I'm just not going to give him the benefit of the doubt on his sincerity, when there is another candidate out there who, while by no means perfect, has demonstrated an ability and willingness to stand up for what he believes is right.

2) He has a chance to beat Obama or Clinton and Romney does not.

If you don't find him to be a better choice than Romney, by all means support Romney, Huckabee, Paul or a write-in. If you don't like any of the Republican candidates and don't wish to participate in the primary, then by all means don't. We can all agree however than the nominee will be either Romney or McCain. No one else has even a remote chance.

Both Romney or McCain will make better presidents than Clinton or Obama, and you only need to describe yourself as conservative for me to know that you are aware that this is true.

Knowing this, and knowing that this is going to be a close race whomever are the nominees, a decision to stay home and not vote for McCain, aside from expressing nothing more than petulance, will be a vote for Obama or Clinton.

I certainly hope that the whatever bad blood exists between Clinton and Obama and by extension Clinton Supporters and Obama Supporters lasts through the convention and into the general election. Clintonistas who will sit home rather than vote for Obama, and Obamaniacs who will prefer not to vote than vote for Clinton will, in effect, be voting for the Republican candidate.

You can be sure that Democratic strategists and supporters are hoping that you and people who think like you will stay home rather than cast a vote for McCain, because they know those are votes for their candidate. You will be doing precisely what they hope you do.

I certainly don't expect you and others who have serious concerns about McCain to flip a switch after the convention and become enthusiastic supporters. That would be nice, but not necessary, but I do expect you and people like you who believe that conservative values and positions offer the best future for Americans, and that the professed policies and positions of Clinton and Obama would be detrimental to the nation, to mutter a few choice swear words, hold your nose and vote for McCain.

He has an 81% rating as a conservative legislator. I have no doubt that somewhere in the 19 percentage points he didn't get are issues that you think are important. Understood, but there is no candidate who is running or who can win in November that gets a 100% rating. I wonder what Clinton's and Obama's conservative ratings are.

I think you misread what I wrote about what refusing to vote for McCain in the general election means for conservatives.

If you stay home and don't vote for McCain or, worse yet, vote for Obama or Clinton because you want McCain to lose, then I would say you are being petty and foolish and I will not apologize for that opinion.

If you stay home and don't vote for McCain or, worse yet, vote for Clinton or Obama because you want a Democrat to win, on the theory that they will run the country into the ground and set the stage for that 100% conservative candidate in 2012, then I will contend you are not a patriot and will not apologize for that opinion either.

The people who fall into the second category of McCain-Haters are not ideological purists they are self-absorbed charlatans. They are raising the possibility of this sort of perverted action to stir up controversy and improve their marketability - it's not a coincidence that this is only coming from Radio and TV pundits who like to feel they are the personifications of true conservatism.

The fact is that if McCain is elected president, the party will turn to the center, and hard conservatives will lose some of their power and influence. We can argue all day about whether or not this is a good thing, but don't kid yourself into thinking these people care about the purity of conservative ideals. It is the preservation of power and influence with which they are concerned.

I am not about to help the Democrats take control of the government when I truly believe they will screw things up in the next four years, just so I can see a 100% conservative positioned to occupy the oval office four or eight years from now. Especially not when I can get a 81% conservative whom I personally admire in there in 2009.

You make whatever decision you feel is right, but I do not disavow any of the opinions I've expressed here.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Feb, 2008 01:40 pm
Huckabee's won W.Virginia's GOP convention.

*****

James Dobson (of Focus on Family) on McCain:

Quote:
"But what a sad and melancholy decision this is for me and many other conservatives. Should John McCain capture the nomination as many assume, I believe this general election will offer the worst choices for president in my lifetime. I certainly can't vote for Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama based on their virulently anti-family policy positions. If these are the nominees in November, I simply will not cast a ballot for president for the first time in my life. These decisions are my personal views and do not represent the organization with which I'm affiliated. They do reflect, however, my deeply held convictions about the institution of the family, about moral and spiritual beliefs, and about the welfare of our country."


http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/02/dobson_ill_be_sitting_this_one.html

*****

Meanwhile, Romney on Bob Dole:

Quote:
Romney, struggling against a surge of party support for McCain, said this morning in an appearance on Fox and Friends that his party is treating McCain like it did Bob Dole in 1996, as someone simply "next in line'' for the nomination.

This prompted a sharp McCain demand of an apology for disparaging the name of one the party's true old warriors.

"I think there a lot of folks who tend to think that maybe John McCain's race is a bit like Bob Dole's race - that it's the guy who's next in line, the inevitable choice,'' Romney said in his TV appearance. Alluding to a letter which Dole had written to radio host Rush Limbaugh in support of McCain disputing Limbaugh's contention that conservatives cannot not rally around the senator, Romney said: "It's probably the last person I would have wanted write a letter for me.''


http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/02/super_tuesday_war_of_words_sta.html
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Feb, 2008 01:52 pm
Finn dAbuzz, I have listened to these candidates very closely throughout this process and I highly disagree about your character judgement. I think he has you fooled, as he has done lots of people with his "straight talk". McCain has irritated me numerous times, and basically he strikes me as an arrogant man. Granted, I don't know him personally, so some of this is personal impression, and I could be wrong. I am convinced he will tell us what we want to hear and then he will do whatever he pleases in regard to a few things, such as campaign finance, immigration, the environment, energy, etc. I also do not trust him to make foreign policy decisions. I know this is rather different than many conservatives here on this forum, but he basically has the wrong solutions to the problems we have. Romney strikes me as far more intelligent and better understands the problems plus the correct solutions. I think McCain will continue to sell us down the river on lots of issues, although probably not as many as the Democrats would.

I will likely end up voting for McCain if he is nominated, but I would never select a nominee based on what their percieved chances are in the general, as that is simply too far into the future to accurately know for sure.

I hope you are right about McCain. I remain very unconvinced. Regardless of his ratings, he has been dead wrong on some important ones. And his conduct in the primaries was not the best in my opinion, but this is what I have come to expect out of McCain, and it is a big reason why I find it very difficult to support him. And I am also disppointed in Huckabee, I thought he was better than he turned out to be. Thompson, an admirable man, but got no traction. Even Ron Paul, I came to appreciate the guy's honesty and conduct, but he simply is too far wrong on a couple of issues.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Feb, 2008 05:04 pm
James Dobson, Laura Ingraham, Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Rick Santorum, et al

We love you!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RVZcZ3b9RI&eurl=http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/dobson_i_will_never_support_mc.php
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Feb, 2008 05:53 pm
sozobe wrote:
Meanwhile, Romney on Bob Dole:

Quote:
Romney, struggling against a surge of party support for McCain, said this morning in an appearance on Fox and Friends that his party is treating McCain like it did Bob Dole in 1996, as someone simply "next in line'' for the nomination.

This prompted a sharp McCain demand of an apology for disparaging the name of one the party's true old warriors.

"I think there a lot of folks who tend to think that maybe John McCain's race is a bit like Bob Dole's race - that it's the guy who's next in line, the inevitable choice,'' Romney said in his TV appearance. Alluding to a letter which Dole had written to radio host Rush Limbaugh in support of McCain disputing Limbaugh's contention that conservatives cannot not rally around the senator, Romney said: "It's probably the last person I would have wanted write a letter for me.''


Wow, dude, look at this write-up of the whole clusterf*ck below. Those people are really going at each other hammers and nails! It's as bad as the Hillary vs Obama camp fights post-SC..

Quote:
Limbaugh Weighs In

By Howard Kurtz

Rush Limbaugh denounced John McCain today over a letter written on his behalf by Bob Dole, accusing McCain's presidential campaign of "a dirty little trick."

"Senator McCain, I think what you are doing here is disgraceful," Limbaugh said shortly after noon on his nationally syndicated radio show.

In a letter to the talk show host yesterday, released by the McCain camp, Dole wrote that "I know that you have serious reservations about Senator McCain. McCain is a friend and I proudly wore his P.O.W. bracelet bearing his name while he was still a guest at the 'Hanoi Hilton.'" The former Senate majority leader and 1996 GOP presidential nominee wrote that McCain was a mainstream conservative on numerous issues and that "whoever wins the Republican nomination will need your enthusiastic support. Two terms for the Clintons are enough."

The Dole note intensified the sparring between the Arizona senator and his chief rival. Mitt Romney said this morning on "Fox and Friends": "It's probably the last person I'd would have wanted write a letter for me...I think there's a lot of folks who tend to think that maybe John McCain's race is a bit like Bob Dole's race."

McCain responded on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" by accusing the former Massachusetts governor of the "disgraceful" slandering a World War II hero and demanding that he apologize to Dole.

On the radio show, Limbaugh accused McCain of "manipulating" Dole...Senator McCain is resorting to the same kind of politics as Hillary Clinton." Criticizing a Politico.com headline that "Dole Scolds Limbaugh," the conservative commentator noted the friendly tone of the letter and said:

"This shows how willing the media are to be manipulated by Senator McCain."

Limbaugh accused the McCain campaign of leaking a private letter. But Dole made clear, in an appearance on "Hannity & Colmes" last night, that he expected the note to Limbaugh to be made public.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Feb, 2008 06:10 pm
What about the backroom deal the McCain folks and Huckabee pulled in West Virginia. Not exactly anything new in politics, but I thought these guys denied being in cahoots? Where is the straight talk express on this stuff? McCain is good at backroom deals in Washington, so why not pull the same stuff now?
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Feb, 2008 06:43 pm
okie wrote:
What about the backroom deal the McCain folks and Huckabee pulled in West Virginia. Not exactly anything new in politics, but I thought these guys denied being in cahoots? Where is the straight talk express on this stuff? McCain is good at backroom deals in Washington, so why not pull the same stuff now?


Told ya the other day - the Straight Talk express runs on a circular track.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Feb, 2008 06:56 pm
blatham wrote:
James Dobson, Laura Ingraham, Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Rick Santorum, et al

We love you!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RVZcZ3b9RI&eurl=http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/dobson_i_will_never_support_mc.php


Bernie, the pique and irratability of right wing Republicans with respect to McCain is no worse than that of left wing Democrats with respect to Hillary Clinton. You yourself have complained about the close-minded fervor of some Obama supporters, and , frankly, I think you are correct in that. The zealots (and the merely naive enthusiasts) of both sides exhibit the same qualities.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

My Fellow Prisoners... - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Afred E. Smith Dinner - Discussion by cjhsa
mccain begs off - Discussion by dyslexia
If Biden And Obama Aren't Qualified - Discussion by Bi-Polar Bear
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain lies - Discussion by nimh
The Case Against John McCain - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 07/21/2025 at 12:32:09