0
   

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

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 May, 2007 02:27 pm
I also don't always agree with Cyclo, but it's good to see that he sees what I "see," and at least explains why.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 May, 2007 11:49 am
cicerone imposter wrote:
georgeob: She might know more about it than you do.


If she does, she sure doesn't show it. I also find it interesting that you make generalized statements about a a2k participant without showing us why.


My point was that she is likely to understand her own point of view better than either you or me. I try to avoid subjective judgements about individuals here. It is you who are indulging in such generalized statements, not me. We generally know each other only by what is written here. In the large scheme of things that isn't much.

Personal attacks and insults demean and impugn the judgement of those who make them far more than their object.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 May, 2007 11:51 am
Your insults are understood, but you're wrong on this issue.

An insult is still an insult, and that includes yours. It's better unsaid.
It's not even that subtle.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 May, 2007 05:50 pm
Re John McCain: One for the category "oops".

After the Congress vote on Iraq, the Republican presidential contenders collectively decided to go after Hillary and Obama for having voted against.

Quote:
The criticism from McCain, Romney and Giuliani served as red-meat rhetoric for the GOP base voters they are courting in their bids for the Republican nomination.

"What is Senator Obama and Senator Clinton's 'Plan B' if we withdraw?" McCain, who backed the measure, said in a telephone interview. "What are their options if the withdrawal fails and we have chaos and genocide?"

Yet, when pressed, McCain suggested he didn't have an alternative plan for success [either] should Bush's recent troop buildup, which he supports, fail. "We are examining many other plans and none of the options are good," he said.


(Kudos, by the way, to the AP story writer. Instead of just breathlessly typing McCain's rhetorical question into her laptop and making it her story, she did "press" on with a critical question that got a telling answer. Too often her counterparts limit their jobs to passing on the propaganda from one of the camps, then at most juxtaposing it with the propaganda from the other camp.)
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 May, 2007 06:58 pm
One of the many reasons I don't trust McCain. He knows how to make a challenge, but doesn't know the answer himself.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 May, 2007 09:07 pm
Hey, I can use the same intro for this post as I used for its counterpart in the Obama thread :wink:

What are the polls in Iowa saying? (I'm still going through some backlog.) Like with those in New Hampshire, there's a clear divergence from the picture of the national polls.

This is important for two reasons: one) the people in those states are already far more acquainted with the candidates than elsewhere, and two) no matter what the national polls say, if a candidate flops in both those two states, he's done with for the rest of the race.

On the other hand, its early days, and in Iowa there is the additional problem that the much narrower segment of caucus goers is especially difficult to poll.

All that said here's info about the last poll from the Des Moines Register, from a week ago (the info; the poll itself was done two weeks ago):



EDIT: Should add this graph of theirs on the candidates' favourability ratings:

http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/7435/iowarepsfavgs7.jpg
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 May, 2007 06:42 am
What do our conservative Republicns on A2K think about Ron Paul. He seems more conservative than the "conservatives" in the Republican Party.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=B9KWISuvZWs
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 May, 2007 06:48 am
Bill Maher on the French.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=1Ic4xgOERgk
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 May, 2007 10:02 am
nimh, What's your assessment on Romney?
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 May, 2007 06:09 pm
OK, so I'm not out to further impress Foxfyre with my memory, but I remembered that Sozobe asked a week or two ago about Fred Thompson.

sozobe wrote:
OK so this Thompson person, what does he THINK? Anyone know? He's thinking about running for office, yes, but has he stated his opinions about major issues? Is he a hardline conservative?

Still had this article from the beginning of the month in my queue. It's pretty in-depth. And it makes one wonder why all those McCain-haters are all sighingly longing for Thompson to step in:

Quote:
Thompson's Politics Much Like McCain's

Washington Post
Sunday, May 6, 2007
By Perry Bacon Jr.

First let me get the process stuff out of the way: is he running, isn't he?

Quote:
[C]omplaints [about the current frontrunners] have helped fuel the push for Thompson, who left the Senate in 2003 and returned to acting. He now plays District Attorney Arthur Branch on the NBC series "Law & Order."

With encouragement from top Republicans such as former Senate majority leaders Howard Baker and Bill Frist (both Tennesseans), Thompson is taking all the steps to ready for a presidential run, meeting with members of Congress, talking to former aides about how to organize a campaign and posting to conservative blogs.

Sources familiar with Thompson's plans said he will probably decide whether to run by next month, although he might delay an official announcement until as late as Labor Day. [..]

Now, as for Sozobe's question - what does Thompson stand for?

Quote:
Fred Thompson fervently backed the Iraq war, railed against an expanding federal government, took stands that occasionally annoyed his party and rarely spoke about his views on social issues during his tenure as a senator from Tennessee or in his writings and speeches since leaving office.

In short, the man some in the GOP are touting as a dream candidate has often sounded like the presidential hopeful many of them seem ready to dismiss: Sen. John McCain (Ariz.).

[..] 400 conservatives flocked to [..] hear the actor-turned-politician-turned-actor address the annual dinner of the Lincoln Club of Orange County [..]. Thompson delivered a vision of cutting taxes, reducing the size of government, overhauling Social Security and staying in Iraq until "there is some semblance of stability."

He also called for "reform-minded, change-minded leaders," a profile that McCain -- whom Thompson described as "a man of the highest integrity and courage" in 1999 when he co-chaired the Arizonan's presidential run -- has worked hard to lay claim to over the past decade. Thompson was one of only four GOP senators to back McCain's bid in 2000, and a former aide to the Tennessean said McCain "was far and away his best friend in the Senate." [..]

Both before and after his first presidential run, McCain battled with GOP leaders over his proposals to overhaul campaign finance laws. Thompson was perhaps McCain's strongest Republican supporter, even advocating an early version of McCain's bill that would have banned contributions from political action committees. (In recent interviews, he has complained that the enacted law has not had the effect that was intended.)

Like McCain, Thompson compiled a fairly conservative record in the Senate, earning a lifetime rating of 86 out of 100 from the American Conservative Union, putting him slightly ahead of McCain (82), but behind Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), another 2008 hopeful, who scored a 94.

Thompson not only voted for the Iraq war in 2002 but also has strongly defended Bush's decision-making, even though he, like McCain, has said the administration should have sent more troops in originally. In a 2004 speech to the American Enterprise Institute, Thompson said that "every politician that describes Iraq as another Vietnam gives our enemies hope for success."

"If someone says, 'This is Vietnam,' they're predicting defeat," Thompson said. "They're predicting an early pullout. I think that is irresponsible."

He called for "regime change" in Iran in a recent interview with the Weekly Standard, although he did not detail how that would happen.

Like the Arizona senator, Thompson is passionate about national security issues. In 2000, he infuriated business groups, a rock-solid GOP constituency, by insisting that a trade bill with China include provisions that would allow sanctions on Chinese companies that sent weapons to rogue nations. He was unsuccessful. [..]

Although in the Senate Thompson voted for bills to ban late-term abortions and garnered high ratings from abortion opponents, he was not a leader on social issues. Operatives aligned with some of Thompson's would-be opponents are circulating a clip from a Senate debate in which Thompson said he did not support banning abortions.

"Should the government come in and criminalize, let's say, a young girl and her parents and her doctors as aiders and abettors? . . . I think not," Thompson said.

And in 1996, he said the GOP should not make limiting abortion a major issue at the party's nominating convention, arguing that Republicans should focus on less divisive issues.

Thompson, while he was in Congress, earned a reputation as a maverick. "He's not predictable," said Tom Ingram, who was a top adviser in Thompson's 1994 campaign and now serves as chief of staff for Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.).

Conservatives may be drawn to Thompson's lonely effort in the Senate to reduce the role of the federal government. He opposed bills providing funding for local police departments to buy bulletproof vests and was the only vote in the Senate against a 1997 bill that would have shielded volunteers from liability suits; he argued that both were instances of the federal government reaching into areas that should be restricted to states.

In a recent column on the National Review's Web site, he bragged about occasionally losing 99 to 1 on votes because of his federalist views.

Thompson's small-government stances sometimes went even further. In his first Senate race in 1994, when he ran for the last two years of Gore's term after the Democrat was elected vice president in 1992, Thompson rode around Tennessee in a leased red Chevy pickup truck and campaigned on a "cut their pay and send them home" platform: advocating term limits in the House and the Senate and lower congressional pay, and even suggesting that Congress meet only half the year.

Democrats slammed Thompson for hypocrisy, noting he had worked for almost two decades as a lobbyist, spending much of his time in Washington. His clients included, according to published reports, General Electric, the pension fund for the Teamsters and Westinghouse. He lobbied for laws that critics say helped lead to the savings-and-loan crises of the 1980s.

In 1997, GOP leaders fumed after they put Thompson in a plum spot as the head of the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, which was investigating fundraising practices of the 1996 Clinton campaign, and he expanded the probe to cover allegations against both parties. Thompson voted against one of the two impeachment articles against President Bill Clinton in 1999, arguing that the perjury charge was not grounds for impeachment.

But Thompson was generally a reliable vote for his party, and unlike McCain, did not seem to revel in challenging his party's leaders. "McCain was more gruff, and the perception was he was doing these things for his presidential ambitions," said Alex Vogel, formerly a top aide to Frist. "Fred wasn't running for anything."

Since leaving the Senate, Thompson has remained a GOP activist, advising then-Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr. when he met with senators during the confirmation process and serving on an advisory panel of the legal defense fund for I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the former top aide to Vice President Cheney who was convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice. Thompson said if he were president he would pardon Libby immediately, telling FOX News that the conviction was a "miscarriage of justice."

To be sure, Thompson and McCain have some significant differences on policy. McCain, for example, opposed Bush's income-tax cut proposals in 2001, infuriating the party's base. Thompson backed them. The Tennessee senator did not join some of McCain's bills with Democrats, such as his effort to create a "patients bill of rights."

And if McCain is acknowledged to be an energetic legislator, Thompson had few signature accomplishments. At times, he seemed not to enjoy politics and sometimes griped about the long hours in the Senate. When he decided against running for reelection in 2002, he told the Tennessean newspaper, "All kinds of opportunities are out there . . . without having someone else determine your schedule every day, and not have to sit around at 10 o'clock at night over some Senate resolution that shouldn't be on the floor anyway."

Those kinds of complaints have led some to quietly question whether Thompson has the drive to run for president. [..] His supporters brush aside such concerns, noting Thompson's victories in two Senate campaigns and his years as chairman of the Governmental Affairs Committee. "Fred Thompson is a slow-talking, slow-moving Southern guy," said Burson Snyder, who served as Thompson's spokeswoman. But "there were a lot of nights where he was burning the midnight oil."

Now, Thompson appears to be moving gradually toward answering the question he posed when he was mentioned as a potential 2000 White House contender.

"Why would one want to run for president? That's the real question," he said. "Not, why does one not run for president?"

Political researcher Zachary A. Goldfarb, staff writer Michael D. Shear and washingtonpost.com researcher Derek Willis contributed to this report.

Pretty good article. For a conservative Republican, he doesnt sound too bad a sort. Dont think I'd agree with a single point he'd put in his platform, but he's not an outright religious fundie, or an outright lockstep, no-scruples, machine politician. Thats something I guess. Then again it's pretty sad to be formulating thresholds that low. That's the state the Republican Party's gotten today - where it means something to be "Better than Tom DeLay".
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 May, 2007 06:11 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
nimh, What's your assessment on Romney?

A creep. A man without convictions, and without scruples.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 May, 2007 06:16 pm
nimh, Thanks. I needed to hear your opinion, because most of what I've seen have only created questions.
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 May, 2007 06:24 pm
nimh wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:
nimh, What's your assessment on Romney?

A creep. A man without convictions, and without scruples.


Ha! In the light of this....

I stumbled upon this earlier, but didn't see it posted here. Now, regardless of the relevance of such a poll (as it obviously only included the FOX audience, and only those willing to text in for their poll) - what do you think about the results:

Quote:
FOX News asked you to tell us who you thought won Tuesday night's First-in-the-South Republican Presidential Candidates Primary Debate. With more than 40,000 votes submitted via text message, 29 percent said former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney made the best showing of all 10 GOP presidential hopefuls who made their cases to the American people at the University of South Carolina's Koger Center for the Arts in Columbia, S.C.

[...]

GOP Debate Text-Vote Results



So, uhm... does this tell us more about the FOX audience than about the candidates? I mean... uh... what does this tell us?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 May, 2007 06:29 pm
old europe, That's one of many "conflicting" information I've seen.

I see nimh as a good person to bounce ideas off of on American politics, because he understands more than most Americans, and I trust his judgement.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 May, 2007 06:36 pm
Talking about Romney - wow, this Mormonism is quite freaked out a religion.

Never knew much, hardly anything, about Mormonism. But I was reading this article in Time, from 10 May:

Romney's Mormon Question

I mean, damn!

Quote:
Mitt Romney's candidacy raises a broader issue: Is the substance of private beliefs off-limits? You can ask if a candidate believes in school vouchers and vote for someone else if you disagree with the answer. But can you ask if he believes that the Garden of Eden was located in Jackson County, Mo., as the Mormon founder taught, and vote against him on the grounds of that answer? [..]

Compared with the Roman Catholic Church [..] in 1960 [when JFK was elected the first Catholic President], the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS) is newer and less familiar, its rituals more private. Romney supporters are offering Mormonism 101, emphasizing hard work, clean living and shared family values, to address the concerns of the 29% of Americans who say they would not vote for an LDS member for President. But when it comes to religiously conservative voters, the more people learn, the greater Romney's problem may become. And he will have to decide whether he's willing to provide the kind of public theology lesson that no other candidate has been asked to deliver.

Many Evangelicals have been taught that Mormonism is a cult with a heretical understanding of Scripture and doctrine. Mormons reject the unified Trinity and teach that God has a body of flesh and blood. Though Mormons revere Christ as Saviour and certainly call themselves Christians, the church is rooted in a rebuke to traditional Christianity. Joseph Smith presented himself as a prophet whom God had instructed to restore his true church, since "all their creeds were an abomination in his sight." He described how an angel named Moroni provided him with golden tablets that told the story (written in what Smith called "reformed Egyptian" hieroglyphics, never seen before) of an ancient civilization of Israelites sent by God to America. The tablets included lessons Jesus taught during a visit to America after his Resurrection. Smith was able to read and translate the tablets with the help of special transparent stones he used as spectacles. He published them as the Book of Mormon in 1830.

Twelve years later, Smith explained to a Chicago newspaper that "ignorant translators, careless transcribers or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors" in the Bible, which he revised according to God's revelations. Mormons were subject to persecutions, and in 1844, as he was running for President, Smith was murdered by an angry mob. His successor, Brigham Young, led followers to Utah, the church proceeded to grow rapidly, and Mormon leaders were identified by the church as God's prophets on earth.

At all but the top level, the church is sustained by Mormon men volunteering as lay leaders. Romney was bishop of a ward, or congregation, and eventually president of a stake in Boston, meaning he was responsible for 14 wards with a total of some 3,000 members. Women cannot serve in priestly roles, nor could African Americans until a new revelation brought a change of policy in 1978. Should Romney have to account for such church practices? When he married Ann, a Mormon convert, in 1969 in the temple in Salt Lake City, her family could not attend the ceremony since only Mormons are allowed inside. A separate ceremony was held for "gentiles," as non- Mormons are called.

Conservative Christians don't much like the idea that the Bible is corrupted or that its truths could be updated. The conflicts run deep enough that in 2001 the Vatican ruled Mormon baptisms invalid, and even the more liberal Presbyterians and United Methodists require that Mormons looking to convert be rebaptized. Southern Baptists have called Utah "a stronghold of Satan," and there are many bookshelves' worth of anti-Mormon literature in circulation.


Mind you, not that any of this necessarily means that Romney couldnt be elected. Page 2 of the article lays out how evangelical leaders like Pat Robertson are doing their best to help Romney along, as he tries, apparently successfully, to win over conservative Christian voters at many quiet meetings.

As for the general election (and electorate), the article might have a point when it concludes:

Quote:
Romney's inspiration going forward may come less from Kennedy than from Dwight Eisenhower, whom Romney reveres [..]. It was Eisenhower who [..] declared that "our form of government has no sense unless it is founded in a deeply felt religious faith, and I don't care what it is." There has always been a certain virtue in vagueness when it comes to presidential piety, and Eisenhower, a Presbyterian convert raised by Jehovah's Witnesses, benefited from discussing spirituality in the most general terms. Romney has repeatedly said that "I think the American people want a person of faith to lead the country. I don't think Americans care what brand of faith someone has."
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 May, 2007 06:42 pm
Quote:
an angel named Moroni


No!?

Shocked

Really?
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 May, 2007 06:45 pm
old europe wrote:
I stumbled upon this earlier, but didn't see it posted here. Now, regardless of the relevance of such a poll (as it obviously only included the FOX audience, and only those willing to text in for their poll) - what do you think about the results [..] does this tell us more about the FOX audience than about the candidates? I mean... uh... what does this tell us?

Nothing.. :wink:

Voluntary polls - I mean, I dont know what the technical term is ... you know, website polls, text polls - any poll of a self-selected audience rather than a random population sample - they dont mean anything. Polls that depend on who bothers to send in their vote (or multiple votes..). Only thing they tell you is who has the most fanatic supporters. Look at Ron Paul doing magnificently in all and sundry website polls, this text poll too. Among randomly sampled households, he's never over 1%.

Though its true that Romney was judged to have done pretty well in both debates. I mean, in appealing to Republican core voters. So its not surprising he came out on top in this poll of Fox viewers - many of whom dislike McCain and will not have been pleased with Giuliani's self-outing on abortion.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 May, 2007 06:47 pm
old europe wrote:
Quote:
an angel named Moroni


No!?

Shocked

Really?

<giggles>

Yeah they considered calling themselves Morons, but, well..
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 May, 2007 06:56 pm
Talking about whacked out religion in the Republican race..

As of 20 May, Newt Gingrich was still preparing to ride in as the intellectually superior saviour of the party at the last moment:

Quote:
Gingrich told reporters later that he has not decided whether he will [..] run for president, becoming what he called a "citizen candidate." The former Georgia lawmaker has said that he will make his decision in September after he hosts a series of "ideas" workshops.

In a brief news conference [..], Gingrich derided the process by which Americans pick presidential nominees, saying that he will never participate in "game-show, 30-second-answer, so-called pseudo debates in both parties. . . . I am totally uninterested in applying for a game show as if this were 'Bachelor' or 'American Idol.' "

Gingrich vowed not to "pay any attention" to the presidential campaign between now and September. He said the odds that he will decide later this year to run are "better than not." He even offered a potential date for an announcement: Nov. 6.

"One year before the election. Somehow that strikes me as good a time as any," he said, after promising: "If I do decide to announce, it will not be on Leno or Letterman or Comedy Central. The whole point of running would be to have dignity. To have seriousness."


And he's gunning for the Falwell fundie vote:

Quote:
Gingrich Assails 'Radical Secularism'

Washington Post
Sunday, May 20, 2007

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich decried a "growing culture of radical secularism" Saturday morning as he hailed the life of Liberty University's late founder, the Rev. Jerry Falwell, in an address to the school's 2007 graduating class.

In a speech heavy with religious allusions but devoid of hints about his presidential ambitions, Gingrich drew applause from the graduates and their families in the school's 12,000-seat football stadium when he demanded: "This anti-religious bias must end."

"In hostility to American history, the radical secularists insist that religious belief is inherently divisive," Gingrich said, deriding what he called the "contorted logic" and "false principles" of advocates of secularism in American society.

"Basic fairness demands that religious beliefs deserve a chance to be heard," he said during his 26-minute speech. "It is wrong to single out those who believe in God for discrimination. Yet, today, it is impossible to miss the discrimination against religious believers."

Gingrich was invited to be the school's commencement speaker before Falwell's unexpected death last week. [..]

A politician known more for his focus on economic and cultural policies than on theology, Gingrich spent much of his speech on Saturday extolling the teachings of the Bible. He cited the book of Matthew, the book of Revelation and the Sermon on the Mount, and his own 2006 book, "Rediscovering God in America." [..]

[He] devoted much of his speech to recalling the virtues of the school's founder, whose death cast a pall over the 34th graduation ceremonies. [..] "Jerry Falwell put his trust in the Lord. Despite all obstacles, he persevered and was not discouraged," Gingrich said. "If you seek a monument to that perseverance, look around you."

And Gingrich hailed the connection Falwell made between religion and politics, becoming for decades a new kind of evangelist in the political arena as much as in the Christian one.

"Anybody on the left who hopes that when people like Reverend Falwell disappear, that the opportunity to convert all of America has gone with him fundamentally misunderstands why institutions like this were created," Gingrich told reporters.

[..] Gingrich noted that Liberty University has graduated 120,000 students. "Jerry Falwell has spread 120,000 seeds of Christianity across the country to go out and take up the life of the Lord," Gingrich said. "I have every reason to believe that many of those . . . are going to provide the kind of leadership we want."
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 May, 2007 07:07 pm
Any balance from the right is welcome news.
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 0.06 seconds on 08/21/2025 at 12:29:56