0
   

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

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Mar, 2007 04:07 pm
Happy to see that McCain has now lost his chances; a turnaround is highly unlikely.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Mar, 2007 04:22 pm
I dunno. Seems awfully early for that.

Giuliani has some serious weaknesses, and if those turn out to be crippling, who will the Republicans turn to?

McCain has his own weaknesses to be sure, but if Giuliani fades from his current high-flying position, are they going to give Romney the nod? Brownback? Tancredo?

If there were some obvious front-runner I'd agree that McCain is done for, but given the field, he may still emerge as the favorite.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Mar, 2007 04:30 pm
The downfall of McCin in the polls will not change for the better from now till November of 2008. This is a different kind of loss from the voting public, because most people have known McCain for too many years as a politician.

Giuliani's popularity is based on how he handled the 9-11 crisis, and not on other matters that most voters know about at this point in time. Rudy's situation is much different than John's going forward - IMHO.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Mar, 2007 04:44 pm
That's pretty much my point. Rudy's popularity is based on 9/11 -- other than that he's been a blank slate for a lot of people. There was a poll posted by Lash somewhere recently (can find it if need be) that asked those who were for him if their support would be affected negatively by the info that Rudy supports Roe vs. Wade -- 40% of the conservatives said yes, that would bother them.

There are a lot of people who don't know that he's pro-choice, that he was against the "Defense of marriage" amendment and is for civil unions, that he's for gun control, all kinds of things. When they find out, it's very likely that his support will be eroded from where it is now.

So McCain now vs. Rudy now is not really a fair fight. McCain's already been through this. McCain has, arguably -- and this is the rub, probably -- more conservative cred than Rudy. So what will happen in a few months when Rudy's positions are more widely known? (Positions, plus the three marriages, and cheating on his wife, and marrying his cousin, and living with a gay couple after he left his wife, and all that kind of stuff that shouldn't matter but nonetheless often does.)

Note, I'm not saying McCain WILL emerge victorious, I just think it's really early to sound the death knell.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Mar, 2007 05:00 pm
sozobe wrote:
Note, I'm not saying McCain WILL emerge victorious, I just think it's really early to sound the death knell.

I agree. Remember when Dean was the king of the polls, and interviewers asked Kerry why he hadn't dropped out already?
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Mar, 2007 08:50 am
I agree with the analysis on McCain. He's really a "looser cannon" than he has been--and that's pretty bad. Also, soz, you may not have noticed in that poll I brought the only thing that scored worse than a multiple divorcer was a guy over 70---McCain.

He should bow out. He's can still get out with his dignity---now.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Mar, 2007 09:07 am
An interesting (and admittedly quite liberal) take on the three leading Republican contenders can be found here. One particularly piquant excerpt:
    Then there's McCain. To the kind of liberal who spent 2002 fantasizing about McCain beating Bush in '04 on the Democratic ticket, his pathetic decline is probably a sad story. To me, it's more like a funny one -- like when that guy slipped and fell down a flight of stairs and it all looked very painful but he was a huge jerk anyway. McCain is [i]old[/i]. And sick. And obviously so. He has the misfortune of being both the most conservative candidate in the race and the one most hated by conservatives. His website makes it look like he's campaigning for [i]Führer[/i]. Worst of all, George W. Bush's Iraq policy is so crazy that it's managed to ruin McCain's devilishly clever positioning on Iraq. What clever positioning am I talking about? A little while back, McCain faced an apparent problem -- his demented, run-amok militarism clashes with the national mood at a moment when Iraq is becoming a horrible millstone around Republican necks. McCain, however, had a way around this -- simply advocate the one policy [i]so crazy nobody would ever possibly do it[/i], namely throwing [i]more[/i] troops into the war. That way, things would continue to go downhill, congressional Democrats would surely force some kind of de-escalation, and McCain could campaign not on an unpopular pledge to actually send more troops, but simply on an in-retrospect observation that more troops should have been sent. But then -- because sometimes the strangest things happen -- Bush decided that he agreed with McCain and was going to implement a "surge." And with that, the once promising Cult of John McCain began to fall apart.

I think that is about right, and it highlights how Bush has completely destroyed McCain as a presidential contender, first as a rival and then as a friend.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Mar, 2007 09:30 am
Actually I don't think it is support of the President or lack of support for the President (which is the flip side of McCain) that has eroded his base of support. I think it is the fact that he is seen as one who panders to what he believes is the popular consensus of the day. He isn't consistent in either his rhetoric or his votes and it's hard to take seriously the conservative credentials of somebody who teams up with Ted Kennedy in radio commentary and/or joint sponsorship of bills on a regular basis.

In other words, I think McCain has shot himself in the foot by portraying a lack of personal conviction on much of anything. Republicans appreciate that far less than somebody simply holding a more liberal point of view on an issue or two.

I wonder too if all this flurry of media coverage, activity on the boards, focus of talk shows, etc. etc. etc. isn't going to burn EVERYBODY out by the time the real campaign begins. We could be so sick of all these people by then that a couple of fresh new faces that are at all appealing could snag the nominations.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Mar, 2007 01:02 pm
I think joe and Fox both have the right analysis on McCain. He's lost because of the lock-step with Bush on the surge, and also the "lack of personal conviction" that is so obvious to any observer. Once trust is lost, there is no way to recoup it. He can't be trusted.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Mar, 2007 01:05 pm
I think McCain's wounded, to be sure. Possibly mortally. It's just that I don't see any other knight in shining armor who will come along and rescue the Republican party. Giuliani is doing well for now -- I don't think the popularity he is currently enjoying will last. And once he's been humbled (which I think will happen to at least some extent), I'm not sure that McCain won't suddenly look better by comparison.

As I've said before though, I do agree with Fox's observation that there might be someone who isn't even currently on the radar who will come out of nowehere and take the lead. Can't think of who it would be, but can see it happening.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Mar, 2007 01:10 pm
Maybe people will decide that the "macaca" thing wasn't so bad and resuscitate George Allen...
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Mar, 2007 02:03 pm
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Mar, 2007 07:40 pm
Note from this voter: Please continue holding Allen's head underwater.
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Mar, 2007 09:09 pm
realjohnboy wrote:
Indeed, Mr McCain can't get his message straight. He wants to be a conservative Repub. He wants to be a more liberal Repub. He is toast.
The money trail. where the money is going to go in this, will come out in March. McCain, in my guess, will end up with little support. He will be gone by the end of March as a viable candidate.


I am sticking with that post from mid-Feb. Rudi and Romney look pretty much okay right now but both have baggage that could make them un-electable. I suspect that the big money donors are giving token support, but are waiting, perhaps hoping for some one new to appear.
George Allen, my ex-senator from Virginia, has disappeared from sight. And that is good.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Mar, 2007 09:19 pm
joefromchicago wrote:
An interesting (and admittedly quite liberal) take on the three leading Republican contenders can be found here. One particularly piquant excerpt:
    Then there's McCain. To the kind of liberal who spent 2002 fantasizing about McCain beating Bush in '04 on the Democratic ticket, his pathetic decline is probably a sad story. To me, it's more like a funny one -- like when that guy slipped and fell down a flight of stairs and it all looked very painful but he was a huge jerk anyway. McCain is [i]old[/i]. And sick. And obviously so. He has the misfortune of being both the most conservative candidate in the race and the one most hated by conservatives. His website makes it look like he's campaigning for [i]Führer[/i]. Worst of all, George W. Bush's Iraq policy is so crazy that it's managed to ruin McCain's devilishly clever positioning on Iraq. What clever positioning am I talking about? A little while back, McCain faced an apparent problem -- his demented, run-amok militarism clashes with the national mood at a moment when Iraq is becoming a horrible millstone around Republican necks. McCain, however, had a way around this -- simply advocate the one policy [i]so crazy nobody would ever possibly do it[/i], namely throwing [i]more[/i] troops into the war. That way, things would continue to go downhill, congressional Democrats would surely force some kind of de-escalation, and McCain could campaign not on an unpopular pledge to actually send more troops, but simply on an in-retrospect observation that more troops should have been sent. But then -- because sometimes the strangest things happen -- Bush decided that he agreed with McCain and was going to implement a "surge." And with that, the once promising Cult of John McCain began to fall apart.

I think that is about right, and it highlights how Bush has completely destroyed McCain as a presidential contender, first as a rival and then as a friend.


Admittedly quite liberal...

Oh no! Liberals who hoped McCain might beat Bush for the Republican nomination are now unable to throw their support to him in '08!

Like they ever would have.

If McCain gets 3 liberal votes in '08 that's 3 more than any other Republican candidate might expect.

News Flash - McCain is not seeking liberal votes. He doesn't really care if you no longer think of him as the least degenerate conservative.

Every four years political junkies blather about whether or not a candidate might hurt his chances in the general elections by pandering to the extremes of his party in the primaries. The fact, sad or otherwise, is that only political junkies follow the primaries and their minds were made up well before then. Democratic candidates can pander to the Left and then make the shift to the center in the general election without much fallout at all. Ditto Republican candidates.

Primary candidates have to get through the primaries. The more extreme base of the parties vote in the primaries. Candidates who want to get to the general election need to appeal to the more extreme base of their parties.

The simple fact of the matter is that it is fairly easy to appeal to the extreme base of one's party in a way that will not hurt one in the general election. It is done every four years!

McCain must have conservative voters to win, just as Clinton, Obama, or Edwards must have liberal voters to win. The contest then comes down to the swing vote in the middle. This swing vote is not, necessarily, appalled by ideological positions of the right or the left. If they were, they would not be swing votes.

It is utterly ridiculous to count any candidate out at this stage, and even more so because they have voiced a position that is ideologically 180 degrees from one's own.

The swing voters are not paying attention to what is happening now. Unless a candidate makes a major screw-up (a la Gary Hart) they will not be influenced by the soundbites of 24 hr cable news Election 2008!

The would-be Republican nominee doesn't give a rat's ass what liberals think of him, just as the would-be Democratic nominee couldn't care less what conservatives think about him or her.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Mar, 2007 05:29 am
Today's Wall Street Journal sees McCain slipping further behind Giuliani.
    [img]http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/images/P1-AH337A_POLL_20070307205627.gif[/img]

Source (subscription required)
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Mar, 2007 04:13 pm
Quote:
Baptist: Evangelicals doubt Giuliani

Boston Globe
March 6, 2007

A Southern Baptist leader said Tuesday that evangelical voters might tolerate a divorced presidential candidate, but they have deep doubts about GOP hopeful Rudy Giuliani, who has been married three times.

Richard Land, head of public policy for the Southern Baptist Convention, told The Associated Press that evangelicals believe the former New York City mayor showed a lack of character during his divorce from second wife, television personality Donna Hanover.

"I mean, this is divorce on steroids," Land said. "To publicly humiliate your wife in that way, and your children. That's rough. I think that's going to be an awfully hard sell, even if he weren't pro-choice and pro-gun control."

Giuliani married his longtime companion, Judith Nathan, in 2003. They had dated publicly while Giuliani was married to Hanover. [..]

Land noted that Republican presidential candidate John McCain has been married twice, but said the Arizona senator has acknowledged his part in the failure of his first marriage.

"It's a molehill compared to Giuliani's mountain," Land said. "When you're a war hero (like McCain), you have less to prove on the character front."
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Mar, 2007 04:27 pm
Somehow I think that, when confronted with the alternatives of Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, or Barack Obama, they will find a way to overcome their reservations.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Mar, 2007 04:32 pm
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
The swing voters are not paying attention to what is happening now.

Not true. As a swing voter, I'm paying a lot of attention to what is happening now. There are others here I would also consider swing voters and, based on their active discussions on these threads, I think they're paying attention too.

Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Unless a candidate makes a major screw-up (a la Gary Hart) they will not be influenced by the soundbites of 24 hr cable news Election 2008!

True, but that doesn't mean we aren't paying attention.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Mar, 2007 04:34 pm
georgeob wrote: Somehow I think that, when confronted with the alternatives of Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, or Barack Obama, they will find a way to overcome their reservations.


Anything similar to what the Bush gang did to McCain?
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 © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 11/18/2024 at 04:43:23