Posted on 09/27/2005 8:33:38 AM PDT by Aetius
"I like George Allen, and though I need to read up more on him, my gut reaction to the early stable of possible contenders is to favor him over the rest."
This is my guy, and I think during the primaries, Allen will present very well in the debates. He's good, he's a founding fathers type philosophically, and I have high hopes for him. He also has been storing up a large campaign chest, and should be well positioned to run for Prez. He may not have McCain's name recognition, but he's younger, energetic, tall and reasonably nice looking, his father was the famous football coach, so men will bond with that, and he debates well. Hard to trip him up. Plus he's conservative, including on the social issues as well as fiscally. Hope he runs, pretty sure he will.
Fine. Let's draft Mike Pence already.
McCain wanted 600,000 boots on the ground to do the job initially, instead of the paltry 50,000 we invaded with--the result would have been better C4I, no looting of museums, and (possibly) the capture of some WMDs (along with the terrorists) before they were carted off to Syria
2) Incompetents are appointed to federal positions of responsibility all the time, either as a pattern of corruption and nepotism (Harding) or because the President is a poor judge of character and ability (Grant, Carter). Besides, FEMA is no more poorly run than most federal bureaucracies. The greater fault in lackadaisical hurricane response was carried by the state and local governments in Louisiana.
Brown was a Bush party hack, pure and simple. He was rewarded with a job that proved way above his head (despite it being one of the most important in government). McCain has demonstrated time and again that he doesn't care about being popular with his party; he only wants people that can do the job--even if they happen to be Democrats.
3) McCain loves taxes. He hates tax cuts. You fight deficits by creating wealth, not by taxing the daylights out of the most capable and productive citizens.
Rig-g-g-ht...that's why he supported tax cuts during the Reagan administration and railed against Poppy Bush's "Read My Lips" flip flop. (Personally, like McCain, I have never understood tax cuts when we're in the middle of a WAR...where's the logic in that?)
4) Veto-proof Senate? Not sure I understand the statement. Do you mean McCain, because of his supposed moderation, would not have to employ the veto because of his celebrated rapport with the Democrats? Think again. The Dems would turn on him in a heartbeat the moment a President McCain does something even remotely Republican. So would the press.
My thinking is that 30 percent of the public is always going to vote for the RATs, 30 percent is always going to vote for the Right, BUT the other 40 percent (which each party strives for) would be so upbeat by the establishment of democracy in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the capture of OBL that they would flock to the GOP like a hound to a steakbone leaving the RATs stranded on an abandoned ship.
5) Wishful thinking. The moderate Dems have already migrated to the sunny side. The next general election will be even more polarized than the last
This is where we agree...thanks to Bush.
I didn't know that. So he's a gun rights liberal.
Now I don't know who I'll vote for in the general election if he's the Repub nominee.
Guess I'd sit it out. No other party I'm interested in.
Rudman may be fiscally conservative, but I feel confident in labling Rudman as an extreme social liberal.
Sen. McCain would be a problematic candidate, at best, as this thread shows. I'd be willing to hold my nose and vote for him, but I doubt that all that many social conservatives would come along for the ride.
However, Sen. McCain would likely fare much better than Mr. Giuliani in that regard.
The Republicans should nominate an actual conservative, rather than mavericks or liberals.
That would be a tough one. I think voting for McCain would require a Scuba mask and a couple of full tanks of oxygen.
If you just looked at his voting record, you would think well this McCain guy is not so bad. But McCain is obviously a guy who does whatever it takes to get elected. How can anyone trust him, even without his insane temperament?
Dear Always Right,
I think it would be a big mistake to nominate Sen. McCain, as I don't think he could get enough support from the base of the party to win the general election. And I couldn't blame any Republican or conservative who wouldn't vote for him.
But, between him and Mr. Giuliani there lies an invisible line. On the one side is Sen. McCain, for whom I could (barely) vote. On the other side is Mr. Giuliani, who is, for me, beyond the Pale.
sitetest
I must say that this is the first time I've ever heard Rudman described as very conservative. He is a social and cultural liberal. Its one thing to disagree with the 'religious right', its another to engage in typical leftist demagogery of them as Rudman does. To the extent that social conservatives have their agenda implemented as policy, they have to first go through the pesky process of winning votes, whereas the process favored by Rudman is to have the Courts absuse the power they have given themselves and impose liberal solutions that can't pass muster in the proper democratic channels.
You are right of course that the buck stopped with Bush the Elder as it relates to Souter. H Bush does bear the ultimate blame for that disaster, but Rudman played a key part in pulling the wool over H's eyes by apparently deceiving John Sununu.
McCain's association with Rudman lended further credence to the belief that he would govern as a social liberal, despite a career voting record that is probably slightly to the right.
...I was speaking of his fiscal policies. I suppose, because I'm more libertarian than hard right social conservative, I overlooked some of the "Christian" factors. Incidentally, it is my belief that Christ would not be proud of extremists of either (left/right) ilk.
see #54
He's not mentally healthy enough either....The guy goes looney when a camera or microphone is shoved in his face.
McLoon is just another poster boy for "TERM LIMITS"...imo.
I would not disagree. Christ was not tolerant of sin as those on the far-left, but Christ had a lot more grace than many on the far-right. The problem is, those on the far-right should know better. But I think the far-right is making progress.
ROFLOL!!
you cant be serious. a staunchly pro abortion, anti second amendment, power hungry B***H over a Mccain. I dont agree with everything he says either. your statement borders on insanity.
you cant be serious. a staunchly pro abortion, anti second amendment, power hungry B***H over a Mccain. I dont agree with everything he says either. your statement borders on insanity.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.