If the Conservatives don't back McCain?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steve

... which is why I cannot understand the mentality of the democrats by choosing between two people who are known to be far left, and it'll be difficult for either to portray themselves as moderate.

---

Clinton and Obama are the most moderate candidates from the Democratic field. Kucinich is actually liberal, by which I mean his platform is basically indistinguishable from FDR's (which, these days, gets you called an extremist). Edwards was a recent liberal convert (just like Romney was a recent conservative convert). Dodd? Liberal. Gravel? Liberal. Richardson was the only other quasi-moderate.

Clinton and Obama only look liberal because the neo-cons have dragged political discourse so far to the right over the last 25 years.

^^^^ding ding^^^^
There are no 'far left' candidates anymore, at least none that have made it into office.

i understand that obama has the single most liberal voting record in the senate.

according to some metric, anyway.

a metric that i'll guarantee you'll be hearing about if he gets the nomination.

Could that mean that he is the least corrupted out of the bunch?

(or Naive/idealistic, but those go hand in hand)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rideit

Could that mean that he is the least corrupted out of the bunch?

(or Naive/idealistic, but those go hand in hand)

---

perhaps, but as much as I like that idea, non-corruption does not equal good, much less invulnerability to corruption.
i'd take a machine neo-con before an honest communist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvwcom

This pic will be seen OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and over...

http://www.timvw.com/whooohooo/bush_mccain.jpg

---

Where's his other hand!?!? :eek:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steve

i understand that obama has the single most liberal voting record in the senate.

according to some metric, anyway.

a metric that i'll guarantee you'll be hearing about if he gets the nomination.

---

If you get to pick what criteria to use, and how to weight them... you could get just about any result you want in things like this. When I saw that reported in the news, I figured the right wing was just setting up a talking point for the general election contest, like usual. :rolleyes2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy

Where's his other hand!?!? :eek:

---

Just getting a little ass grab in, but hey they are Republicans... that doesn't make you Gheigh then. :D

Liberalism is the basic manifestation of our constitution, and does in no way equal communism.

i wasn't making the comparison. i was just making a point that honestly is not necessarily good.

I think the conservatives are just pouting right now. When it comes down to it they will vote for the GOP candidate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steve

I haven't listened to talk radio in 9 years. If you read my post, you'll see that I said Hillary is known (perceived) as far left, and it'll be hard for her to overcome that.

-steve

---

Your comment was "known to be". Known to be does not translate to "perceived". Hillary is only known to be liberal by talk show radio hosts and other ultra conservatives. To just about everyone else she is known to be more moderate. Hell by some liberals she's often perceived as conservative.

ok fine. i meant perceived.


for christ's sake. or obama's. whatever you want.

-steve

Re: McCain - the Republican base will vote for him because ultimately they will be pragmatic about the reality being McCain or Democrat.

In my view McCain is actually the strongest candidate the R's could put forth precisely because he appeals more to Independents and less to the far right end of the R party. In fact he is the only R candidate I as independent would even consider voting for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steve

i understand that obama has the single most liberal voting record in the senate.

according to some metric, anyway.

a metric that i'll guarantee you'll be hearing about if he gets the nomination.

---

There is deep insight into the average Joe Conservatives' knowledge and perception to be found in your posts. Just because someone said it, does it make it true?

Where DO you get your understanding if not from Talk Radio?

i get my understanding by talking to lots of average joe conservatives.

you're welcome.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steve

i get my understanding by talking to lots of average joe conservatives.

---

Careful - avg joe conservatives dont know shit, just like the avg joe lib doesnt know shit. We should all do our own research and draw conclusions rather than from others' uniformed conclusions.



On Conservatives not voting for McCain
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/arc...gainst_mccain/

On Obama being the most liberal senator:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/arc..._01/013024.php

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/arc..._than_hillary/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smitchell333

Careful - avg joe conservatives dont know shit, just like the avg joe lib doesnt know shit. We should all do our own research and draw conclusions rather than from others' uniformed conclusions.

---

True, but the average joe conservative's vote counts just as much as yours. Probably even more so, if he's in a swing state and you're not.

What's scary is the thought of a McCain/Huckabee ticket. McCain is old, in case you hadn't noticed. there is a real chance of him dying in office. Step in Huckabee in that situation and you'd have a president who believes in creationism, thinks gay people just have mental problems and who would like to build a four lane highway from Maine to Florida because in his estimation it would help the economy. I think there are a lot of dumb people out there but anyone that supports that ticket would take the cake.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adolf Allerbush

McCain is old, in case you hadn't noticed. there is a real chance of him dying in office.

---

His mother is 95 and looks like she's 65, I think he'll be ok.

mccain huckabee doesn't make much sense to me, but you never know. the RP has done stupider things.

strategically speaking, mccain giuliani would be very good. strategically speaking.

BTW how the hell could pat robertson endorse giuliani but be vocally opposed to mccain?? fuck if i know.. even average joe conservative can see through that piece of shit. anyway, it will be funny to see him squirm out of that situation - what would he do if the guy he endorsed was on the ticket of the guy he said "don't bother" for?

McCain/Huckabee won't happen. Neither will McCain/Giuliani.

McCain needs to bolster his cred with the conservative base of his party, and neither of those running mates would do it. (For some reason -- perhaps his perceived economic liberalism -- they don't trust Huckabee much more than they do McCain.)

it's all about principles. i used to be a huge woody allen fan until he became a pederast. now i wouldn't spend money to see one of his movies. same with the gop, who i believe stick to their principles more than demos. they simply cannot vote for a guy who they believe betrayed their core party principles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parvo

i used to be a huge woody allen fan until he became a pederast.

---

I guess that's why the French still love him.

Or they've become complacent after holding the White House for 20 of the past 28 years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steve

i understand that obama has the single most liberal voting record in the senate.

according to some metric, anyway.

a metric that i'll guarantee you'll be hearing about if he gets the nomination.

---

More liberal than Russ Feingold, Bernie Sanders, or Ted Kennedy?

Just like John Kerry was suddenly the most liberal senator, versus the same competition plus Paul Wellstone, according to the right wing back in 2004...no, this doesn't pass the common sense test.

It's well known that Clinton and Obama are both useless Wall Street stooges compared to Ron Paul and that I'll only vote for either as an alternative to John "100 years in Iraq" McCain. However, at least I get a big laugh at the expense of Rush Limbaugh and the rest of the neo-con talk radio hate machine, because they hate John McCain nearly as much as they hate Hilary Clinton, and this has to be driving them into an absolute rage. The one time I actually listened to Rush, he played some incredibly unfunny and vicious song about how John McCain was a traitor to the USA before spending half an hour taking fawning phone calls and congratulating himself. We can only hope that this raises his blood pressure so high that he pulls an Elvis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brock Landers

I doubt theyd just throw away 4 years because thats 4 years their party cant get anything done- I don't think politicians individually would throw away 4 years of their careers to intentionally lose to a democrat.

---

Why not? There's a theory (an out-there theory, but a theory nonetheless) that the Clintons ensured four more years of Bush to give her a better shot at the job in '08. How sad do you think they were that Kerry lost last time around? Do you think she wanted to follow 8 years of Kerry or (even worse for her) 4 years of Kerry and 4-8 years of somebody else? While saying that they even passively undermined Kerry is tinfoil hat brigade material, I find it hard to believe that the Clinton camp was heartbroken when Kerry lost.

And I don't think it's tinfoil hattish to say that the Repubs could deal with 4 years of Hillary or Obama if they believed it was going to get them 8 more years of Bush starting in 2012. Remember, Jeb was the chosen one when it came to the presidency; George just happened to be in the right place at the right time.