Posted on 03/31/2008 11:21:45 AM PDT by kingattax
Here's a prediction: Republican John McCain will be the next U.S. president.
Of course, a lot can happen between now and then that could make the above statement ridiculous, but assuming there's no momentous disaster in Iraq, it's hard to see Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama beating McCain.
Put another way, I can't see McCain losing.
So uniting the party, once seen as almost impossible for McCain, is now duck soup. Fractious conservatives are already on side.
The main problem for Democrats is their candidates, Hillary and Obama, both with flaws and potential weaknesses.
First, Hillary. As of this writing, she seems hell-bent on taking her campaign to the floor of the convention in August, risking a fatal split in the party if she can't get her way. As it stands now, whichever side loses a convention fight, a lot of the loser's supporters will likely opt for McCain.
This time last year Hillary and America were persuaded that her nomination would be a coronation. Today that certainty has not only vanished, but shifted to where Obama is now almost a sure thing, even if he doesn't quite have the delegates to give him the majority that even the Clintons would have to accept.
I'd argue that what's likely to sink Hillary is her lying about herself and her record.
Dick Morris, the political guru who helped the Clintons win the U.S. presidency and before that the Arkansas governorship, has compiled a scorecard showing that "Hillary simply cannot tell the truth."
When it comes to the actual presidential campaign, her record of lying would damage her even more than it is hurting her now.
The lie (and no euphemism can disguise it as anything else) that will damage her more than any other is her claim on at least two occasions in 1996 when as First Lady she visited Bosnia, she "landed under sniper fire" and had to "run with our heads down to waiting cars."
Video shows an 8-year-old greeting her and daughter Chelsea with flowers, and no sign of danger. She also claimed Bosnia was too dangerous for the president, so he sent wife and daughter instead. You figure out that whopper.
When caught out, Hillary said she had "misspoke" the truth (whatever that means), forgetting that never in her life has she faced gunfire and that people rarely forget being under sniper fire.
Other "lies" on her resume include claiming she was named after Sir Edmund Hillary for his conquest of Everest in 1953, apparently forgetting she was born, and named, in 1947.
Her lexicon of lies, compiled by Morris, include such as claiming daughter Chelsea was jogging around the World Trade Centre and heard the planes coming in on 9/11 -- a claim refuted by Chelsea, who said she saw it on TV.
In Bill's first run for the White House, Hillary explained she made a killing in the futures market ($100,000 from a $1,000 investment) by reading the Wall Street Journal, which didn't cover the market back then!
She now claims she always opposed NAFTA, when the record shows she enthusiastically supported it. She has said she urged Bill to intervene in Rwanda, which she didn't, and has even claimed to be a life-long Yankees fan.
So it goes. Big, small or in between, Hillary adjusts truth to the needs of the moment. As a consequence, polls show her trustworthiness at about half of McCain's or Obama's.
As for Obama vs. McCain, apart from his dubious handling of the "Pastor Disaster" -- Rev. Jeremiah Wright's anti-Americanism and blatant racism -- there are unknown aspects of Obama still to be revealed. He has answered the racist issue in Pastor Wright's rantings, but has yet to deal with the "patriotism" factor.
When Obama declared he can no more abandon Pastor Wright than he can repudiate his white grandmother, he is not being fair. Or honest. Obama had no choice in his grandmother; Pastor Wright was his personal choice.
McCain has been around so long that he is who he is, and there are few surprises left. He admits to being an "imperfect" human being, who all his life has sought to serve his country -- a claim that few deny.
Even Obama calls him "a hero." And he is prepared to co-operate with Democrats, if he feels it'll benefit his country. (Pity we in Canada have few politicians like that).
Most significant, perhaps, is that McCain is personally liked by many Democrats, many independents, blacks and Latinos. Polls show that 22% of Hillary's or Obama's declared supporters intend to vote for McCain if their candidate isn't the Democratic nominee.
As yet, the public knows little about what Obama believes, or what he would do. While, as he says, "Words are important," so are policies - which he hasn't yet outlined, and which will be analyzed when he does.
What happens in Iraq could derail the McCain campaign, which right now looks solid. McCain even looks more presidential and certainly fits the commander-in-chief role better than any rival.
If Obama were president, it's likely that certain nasty regimes would "test" American and Obama's resolve - as the Soviet Union tested Jimmy Carter in Africa, Latin America and South America. (Carter failed the test).
Before that, Khrushchev tested the young Jack Kennedy in Vienna and Cuba. (Khrushchev failed.)
No one risked testing Ronald Reagan. But Clinton was tested -- and failed to recognize Osama bin Laden as a terrorist, or the 1993 World Trade Centre bombing as a terrorist act. Ditto the embassy bombings in Africa, and the attack of the USS Cole.
If McCain becomes president, no stable country is likely to "test" him. North Korea, maybe, but that country is run by a fruitcake.
If for no other, this seems sufficient reason to hope McCain is the next U.S. president, which, barring the unforeseen, I can't see him missing.
Considering that she was married to Bill Clinton that sounds perfectly plausible to me.
Fractious conservatives are already on side.
I totally agree and have had the same thoughts.
Isn’t it funny that the Godless party is the party of lies and evasions?/sarc
Really? Where?
As it stands now, whichever side loses a convention fight, a lot of the loser's supporters will likely opt for McCain.
There's a reason for that: He's almost indistinguishable from either Clinton or Obama on may of the issues the Craps care about.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
I’ve said it for months, McCain will cake walk this election.. regardless which Dem gets the nod in Denver, they will lose and lose in a landslide the likes of which the country has not seen since McGovern.
These 2 are the weakest candidates I have ever seen in my life, without the added drama of the fact their snipping will very likely split the party by the General.
While McCain has his warts, he looks like Jesus Christ walking on water compared to these two bafoons, and while some conservatives will scream about McCain being the nominee, he will win the swing voters easily by a 2 to 3 to 1 margin if not more.. not to mention the 10-20% of dems who will cross over if their guy doesn’t win.
And if HillBilly gets the nomination after losing the popular delegate vote, the most consistent reliable voting block the democrats have will be gone for a long long time. Black’s will no more march lock step to the Dems... which actually might help them out more than they could ever know.
Worth repeating.
Yep. And if a sniper somehow DID manage to pick off Hillary, there was always Monica to turn to for solace, about that time.
Bill Clinton knew bin Laden was a terrorist, just as he had to have known that the aforementioned attacks were clearly acts of terrorism. Clinton made the political calculation in each case not to rock the boat, and he maintained a policy of appeasement which led directly to the World Trade Center Bombing of 9/11.
His recalcitrance in dealing with Iraq left a huge mess for his successor. President Bush has dealt with that difficult situation in a forthright manner, despite having great difficulty in achieving stability there.
Clinton also failed miserably with his phony North Korea treaty, and he did nothing whatsoever to slow down the Islamofascists in Iran, who are hell-bent on getting the Bomb.
These accomplishments have caused most democrat voters to swoon over their beloved Bill. If he had actually accomplished anything of substance beyond staining the sink in the Oval Office and a pivotal blue dress, the libs would be in South Dakota carving his face on Mt. Rushmore.
There is great solace and forgetting in a Monica.
No need to be redundant.
The Donks must know how I felt when Bob Dole got the nomination.
But John McCain is also really a Democrat, so a Democrat is going to become the next POTUS no matter which one it is!
bob dole - God bless him. great american who was a terrible presidential candidate.
“There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.” — Disraeli
Democrats lieing? Who would have ever imagined it!
Dole deservedly copped the title “tax collector for the welfare state.” Grassley and Lugar and in the running for the title now...
That’s a great graphic and soooooooo true. I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.
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.