|
Posted on 06/07/2009 7:58:01 PM PDT by rabscuttle385
No often means yes in Washington, but we hear from Sen. John McCain's posse that he is not considering a 2012 rerun of his failed 2008 presidential campaign. (W beat him in the 2000 primary, remember.) Word came this week that he is mulling over another try, but a key insider says, "Ridiculous."
(Excerpt) Read more at usnews.com ...
|
Ok. My humble opinion. Title Fields are for titles, comment fields are for comments.
Duly noted.
God I loved that headline! LOL!
Square brackets covered you, I think.
Get out of the way and let the real conservatives run.
Thanks for the parenthesis in the headline. Reflected my views from a year ago and longer...
If I have to alter the headline, my own additions (never deletions) are always in brackets.
...yeah, that’s a guarenteed 2012 winner. *laughs*
Let him run again...he’ll never win the nomination
He did so well the last time.
>> Title Fields are for titles, comment fields are for comments.
It’s quite clear what part was the title, and what part was the comment.
And the comment was dead on.
The bracketed words took the words right out of my mouth.
It’s amazing that anyone would even think this is remotely plausible.
No way Jose.
Palin/Cheney or Cheney/Palin!
Wait a minute, what are you trying to say? Stop tapdancing around it and spit it out.
Hmmmmm
Does McCain think Obama needs his help to get elected again?
RINO yes, scumbag no. His time is past, like Dole in 2000.
Mox nix.
But what do you think of Mitt Romney?
(Just kidding, I already know.)
What’s the difference? We’ll all be behind barbed wire and searchlights due to being right wing extremists.
Let him run against Sarah in the 2012 primaries. Watching him try to explain why he’s a better candidate would be priceless. He’d get his usual crowd of 500, and she’d be drawing 20k screaming fans. Good luck, John.
I would rather have Meghan McCain in 2012. If you have to do a Titanic, you might as well have the ship do a double backflip onto the iceberg.
He’s seeking to insure obama’s reelection.
Romney is a good-for-nothing political chameleon. Unfortunately, the libertarians I know aren’t nearly as suspicious of him as I am.
Rabs did fine. Your opinion is right to be humble, as hard as it must be.
lol can you imagine McCain and Huckster doing their little dance again oh crap.
You were too kind. ;-)
to be fair, he did about as well as could be expected once the credit, financial and stock markets all collapsed at the same time.
If you look at the Fair model by that guy at Yale who plugs in the economic data and predicts the election, and who’s pretty much been right with every election of the past 100+ years, what McCain ended up getting was around what the economic data said he’d get.
He has a tool on his site where you can plug in different variables. If the economic data last year(GDP growth rate, inflation, market performance) was the same as it was in 2004 or 2000, McCain would have won, just as Bush did. Converseley if the data in 2004 was the same as it was last year, Kerry would have won, just as Obama did. It was basically the economic collapse that determined the outcome of the election.
In a way it’s a shame that a guy who did what he did for this country, then went through 2000, waited 8 long years to run again, was totally finished throughout most of 2007 and amazingly won the nomination, saw his shot at the WH ended because of an economic collapse that he really had little if anything to do with.
That said, he was never my first choice, and it’s time for someone new.
Is part of his calculation a “stimulus package” that will never, ever be repaid and which will cripple the American economy lonf after I’m worm food?
Well said.
Oh wait. Wrong abuut the national security thing. He promised to close Guantanamo. Now he's not so sure.
First things first. We need a true fiscal conservative majority in Congress in 2010, or this country is toast.
We can at least have the satisfaction of keeping the bitter little man away from the candidacy again.
Well you can rest assured we’ll have to see the Huckster again. Just looking at that guy makes me want to vomit.
His four year plan should be “don’t die” not run for president. Surely he has at least the self awareness to know that if people thought he was too old in ‘08 he definitely will be in ‘12.
I remember last year on FR when the Juan McLame supporters couldn’t relize that the “jig was up”, “game over” or “game-set-match” until the very end (election night). Then came the sniping on Palin, deniles and finger pointing.
And what did McLame do afterwards? Well, suck up to the winner and the Demmies.
John, to put it bluntly, you can go suck an egg. You were Bob Dole redux (aka: It’s my turn, I earned it) and stabbed your VP pick in the back via proxies.
Go home old man.
Not at all first.
Quite frankly, the pain the country is in is worth it if it yanks the people back to the right and educates the youth.
I and many others will work to oppose any and all social liberals. Even if it means more of what we have had for the last half of a year.
You want to try in 2012 without a unified conservative movement again, go ahead and get a dishwater conservative who is only conservative fiscally. But it won’t work a bit better than 2008.
Time for Juan McLame and his larda$$ daughter to retire to that lettuce farm he’s always dreamed of! He’ll never pay $50 per hour like he claimed but he will give the illegals a sanctuary to gather.
He shouldn’t be running NEXT year for the Senate, either.
“Well you can rest assured we’ll have to see the Huckster again. Just looking at that guy makes me want to vomit.”
Ditto. Every one of those losers from the last election should have the common courtesy to go away and stay away. Our party was horribly split last time because we had no truly acceptable choice that could please the majority of us. The worst of ALL of them was John McCain, a candidate who was not only not elected, but probably unelectable. With Sarah Palin in the game now, I think we have an option that can unite most of our party – if we don’t allow the RATS and media to destroy her before that time comes.
no. he pretty much just looks at the GDP growth rate for the year of the election, the rate of inflation, and the number of qtrs in the preceeding term that were greater than 3% or so. I think market performance and unemployment may also be factored in.
You plug in those figures and it pretty much tells you who’s going to win. Defnitely who wins period and within 1-2 pts of the actual total. His final total was for data through Sept 30 and he had the GOP getting about 48%. Once you factor in that thet 3rd qtr started in Oct and was the worst qtr of growth in 25 years and factor that in, the 46% it ended up with is about right.
My point wasn’t to pump McCain, just to point out that given the date, he did about as wlel as could be expected or hoped for. If the economy was the same as it was in 2004, he would have won, arguably with a greater % than Bush did. The economy was much, much worse in 2008 so he lost. Not his fault really, but it happens.
He says no; we say Hell No!
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.
