If the Conservatives don't back McCain?

**enlosandes** · 02-08-2008, 09:29 AM

I don't understand. Isn't a non vote for McCain like a vote for Hillary or Obama? Do the conservatives have something up their sleeve? Maggots, please weigh in.

**snow_slider** · 02-08-2008, 09:57 AM

I believe they are thinking long term

4 shitty years of McCain as (their) guy could equal a BUNCH of years with Democrats in office as a backlash.

4 shitty years of Hillary or Obama in office would put the GOP in a much better position to win in 2012.

Edit to add: I'm not saying I think this way, just that some conservatives are.
While I'm party neutral, I can't recall the last time I voted for a GOP candidate.

**rideit** · 02-08-2008, 09:58 AM

Either way, we have 4 shitty years.

Do I read that right?

**Rush Limbaugh** · 02-08-2008, 09:59 AM

NaderBloombergPaulGingrich

**stupendous man** · 02-08-2008, 10:00 AM

that idea is complete nonsense, but maybe it is how conservatives are really thinking right now, assuming ss was being himself.

I think its a play. Make news about conservatives giving up, making a dem win, in order to scare the evangelicals into voting for McCain.

**Brock Landers** · 02-08-2008, 10:00 AM

Im with ya...everyone knows a real conservative couldnt get elected with the overall appeal of the GOP...so why dont they just back McCain? To them, McCain beats Hill and BO. I doubt theyd just throw away 4 years because thats 4 years their party cant get anything done- I dont think politicians individually would throw away 4 years of their careers to intentionally lose to a democrat.
Maybe theres just a dislike toward McCain personally? He is liberal for a Repub, and maybe many conservatives resent this?

**steve** · 02-08-2008, 10:01 AM

I don't give a lot of significance to pat robertson's incoherent ramblings. the only people who pay attention to him are people who live in solidly red states anyway. yeah maybe he'll swing a couple hundred votes in florida or ohio - but that's unlikely to make a difference. even in 2000 bush took florida by more than 200 votes.

**Rush Limbaugh** · 02-08-2008, 10:04 AM

Indy or Brokered

YourSupremeExcellency · 02-08-2008, 10:07 AM

Conservatives are not as powerful as they think they are or as they used to be. McCain can tell them all to go fuck themselves and he'll still be ok (possibly even better off). This election is going to be about a mad grab for the moderate and independent votes not who loves baby Jesus the most.

**Rush Limbaugh** · 02-08-2008, 10:07 AM

Originally Posted by Brock Landers

I dont think politicians individually would throw away 4 years of their careers to intentionally lose to a democrat.

Unless you are handing them a quagmire and collapsing economy.

**Tuckerman** · 02-08-2008, 10:14 AM

Originally Posted by rideit

Either way, we have 4 shitty years.

Do I read that right?

Spot on.

**stupendous man** · 02-08-2008, 10:17 AM

He is liberal for a Repub, and maybe many conservatives resent this?

Paging Danno. This is NOT TRUE. McCain has some moderate positions on campaign finance and cap and trade on global warming. Otherwise he is as raging a conservative as all the others.

**steve** · 02-08-2008, 10:21 AM

Originally Posted by YourSupremeExcellency

Conservatives are not as powerful as they think they are or as they used to be. McCain can tell them all to go fuck themselves and he'll still be ok (possibly even better off). This election is going to be about a mad grab for the moderate and independent votes not who loves baby Jesus the most.

... 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.

**timvwcom** · 02-08-2008, 10:56 AM

Media is taking Bush's comments today as support of McCain, if that's how the "33%" hear it, this could help McCain pull the Republicans together.

Originally Posted by Washington Post

Bush Signals Support for McCain

With the race to succeed him reaching a critical juncture, President Bush this morning began rallying the Republican base around its presumptive nominee, John McCain, and in the process tried to define his own legacy for the general election campaign to come.

In a speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, Bush offered an implicit endorsement of McCain's bona fides as a true conservative in the face of deep skepticism on the right. Although he did not mention McCain by name, the president said whoever ends up being the Republican nominee will represent conservative values.

...

**hutash** · 02-08-2008, 11:00 AM

The conservatives are just posturing. They have no choice but to back McCain eventually, but they are working to get as many concessions out of him in the mean time. They may not come out and vote in as large a number as usual, but unlike Dems, especially liberal ones, they do vote regularly. Some will stay home in protest, but none of them want Hillary in office. I don't think they can think ahead four whole years, so yeah, they will vote for McCain, but will only go to the polls pissing and moaning.

The true test will be of McCain. Will he bow to the cons pressure and roll over for them, or will he stand by what he says. If he does, he could make a descent prez.

Or, more likely, we are fucked for four more years.

**rideit** · 02-08-2008, 11:01 AM

Baby Jesus is dead.

No, really, he died a long time ago.

**timvwcom** · 02-08-2008, 11:08 AM

I still think there is a decent chance that once we are down to the final 2 in this race. A Republican and a Democrat... All the sentiment that shows up in National Polls now as a nearly tied race, will shift and turn into "not another 4 years of a Bushie" and the Democrat wins by 5 to 10% in the end.

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

Originally Posted by rideit

Baby Jesus is dead.

But what about baby Jeebus?

**fez** · 02-08-2008, 11:12 AM

Originally Posted by Rush Limbaugh

Originally Posted by Brock Landers

I dont think politicians individually would throw away 4 years of their careers to intentionally lose to a democrat.

Unless you are handing them a quagmire and collapsing economy.

Jimmy Carter anyone?

and what the hell has happened to the republican party? i was just reading Ronald Reagan's remarks from the 1976 GOP national convention and saw this:

Originally Posted by RR

And suddenly I thought to myself if I write of the problems, they will be the domestic problems the President spoke of here tonight; the challenges confronting us, the erosion of freedom that has taken place under Democratic rule in this country, the invasion of private rights, the controls and restrictions on the vitality of the great free economy that we enjoy. These are our challenges that we must meet.

And then again there is that challenge of which he spoke that we live in a world in which the great powers have poised and aimed at each other horrible missiles of destruction, nuclear weapons that can in a matter of minutes arrive at each other's country and destroy, virtually, the civilized world we live in.

And suddenly it dawned on me, those who would read this letter a hundred years from now will know whether those missiles were fired. They will know whether we met our challenge. Whether they have the freedoms that we have known up until now will depend on what we do here.

Will they look back with appreciation and say, "Thank God for those people in 1976 who headed off that loss of freedom, who kept us now 100 years later free, who kept our world from nuclear destruction"?

And if we failed, they probably won't get to read the letter at all because it spoke of individual freedom, and they won't be allowed to talk of that or read of it.

when did the democrats become the party of individual freedom and the republicans the ones seeking to restrict it?

**enlosandes** · 02-08-2008, 11:13 AM

Nice breakdown. Hard to believe I turn to a ski message board for such insightful views of the world. "TGR forums; we post, you decide."

**SunCuntry** · 02-08-2008, 11:29 AM

McCain won't have a problem winning without them. They're just making a big stink about it. GNAAAAA

**Tuckerman** · 02-08-2008, 11:31 AM

Originally Posted by timvwcom

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

So will this one.

And maybe this one.

And this one is just funny.

**PNWbrit** · 02-08-2008, 11:36 AM

Originally Posted by fez

when did the democrats become the party of individual freedom and the republicans the ones seeking to restrict it?

1/20/81 about 1.45 p.m. eastern time.

**Grange** · 02-08-2008, 11:37 AM

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.

Your listening talk radio too much. Hillary is not far left. Left of McCain yes, but certainly more moderate than "far left".

**timvwcom** · 02-08-2008, 11:44 AM

I'd agree, and state that I THINK that McCain and Clinton were the two most "centrist" mainstream candidates in the race...

**steve** · 02-08-2008, 12:02 PM

Originally Posted by Grange

Your listening talk radio too much. Hillary is not far left. Left of McCain yes, but certainly more moderate than "far left".

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