South Carolina Ping
Add me to the list. | Remove me from the list.
Posted on 05/06/2006 10:09:31 AM PDT by FairOpinion
Last October, J. David Woodard, a Clemson University political scientist who doubles as a strategist for conservative Republican candidates, polled 450 South Carolina GOP voters, asking: "When it comes to politics, do you consider yourself closer to George W. Bush or John McCain?" Sixty-three percent picked Bush. Twenty-one percent said it made no difference. And just 16 percent chose McCain.
The message? "I think McCain has a lot of work to do if he's going to win here," Woodard told me recently. "There is a long-term memory, especially with Christian conservatives, about his comments after the 2000 race."
Last September, with a McCain candidacy on the horizon and the senator out-polling most other potential Republican candidates, Falwell called the senator and asked for an appointment. The two had not spoken for years, since before the 2000 election.
Later, Falwell asked McCain to come to Liberty University. The trip has been portrayed as the beginning of a rapprochement, but in fact the reconciliation is already well underway. When I asked Falwell if he could see himself supporting McCain for president, he quickly answered, "Of course. If he is the candidate, he'll certainly have my support."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Nope, no way, zip, nada, nyet, what part of HELL NO doesn't McCain understand.
I don't think he does either. But I have been thinking about who is likely to emerge from Iowa, NH and SC and right now, I have no clue. We have a number of good candidates (such as Allen) who can hold the states we need to hold, but we need someone who can take a big Dem state away. And we need to hold Ohio--that may be tough.
It has crossed my mind that, in the red states, Hillary may lose so big that she could, if Ohio falls (or some combination of CO, IA, NV and NM (what happens if Richardson becomes the VP candidate)) lose the popular and win the electoral.
But will the Dems be crazy enough to select someone who will not be able to govern? We are, sadly, getting a taste of that right now. (Bush has unfortunately become the issue.)
McVey
I do -- and it scares me.
You may be right, but if you think of the judges ANY Dem appoints, you (and the country) should be terrified.
By the way, I like you tag. I just finished a series of lectures on Churchill--what a leader! The essence of leadership.
I don't see how McCain is going to suck up to the Evangelicals after that dirty trick of working with the liberal media to tar Bush for visiting Bob Jones University, thus attempting to get Evangelicals and Catholics feuding with each other.
It didn't work, and I don't believe either Catholics or Evangelicals appreciated it. McCain would be just about as convincing taking a photo-op holding a Bible as bill or hillary.
Strange story, a few of my friends, on the liberal side, went to a fundraiser that Hillary was hosting.
This was right after the elections, and she did a speech and then a little Q and A segment.
She said a couple of really weird things, including faulting Kerry for trying so hard to win Ohio when (according to her) it was unwinnable and that he should have instead tried to win other swing states.
She also made some negative remarks about Iowa that confused everybody.
My friends were there representing their teachers union, but they were kind of confused by the things she said, but the way she made it sound was as if Ohio was like texas.
Don't even think it.
In most cases, I will make a "lesser of evils" calculation, and vote Republican. I may not like the guy, but theoretically he's better than the alternative.
There are only about two exceptions. I will never vote for Specter, not for anything. The man turns my stomach.
And I will never vote for McCain. Not for anything.
So, if anyone in the Repub hierarchy is listening, you'd better factor that in. He may look like the perfect candidate to you, and you have the right to make your calculations. But calculate winning without me. I will vote my own name, or my dog's name, before I pull the lever for McCain. So don't do it.
If you think that McCain losing to Clinton might destroy the country, then count this as a warning. The destruction didn't come when we sat out the election, it came when you ignored our warnings, and nominated McCain.
I think McCain is a Democrat in disguise. I would not trust him with my wallet, much less the country.
I think you are right and just like last time their hot air scheme will soar with all the grace of a cement blimp.
I agree to hope and pray and work to make sure that will NOT be our choice in 2008 - if it is, however, we will have to bite the bullet and convince others to vote McCain too.
and don't forget, McCain has already been raising money for the GUb and Ca GOP and will be back this summer and fall to do more for aRnie. How special.
South Carolina Ping
Add me to the list. | Remove me from the list.
McCain is being groomed for the southern primaries, particularly ours.Maybe your primary but I can guarandamntee you not mine.
Having someone mentally unstable in the WH is the last thing we need. I suspect someone in the opposition has embarrassing medical records that can be released at the proper time.
McInsane? Never in a million years :)
I agree. I just found it interesting that the WP was giving that pig a buttermilk bath. They made a point of highlighting every McCain opinion that might endear himself to [their idea of] southern conservatives while simply ignoring the many issues that make us loath him.
I've thought of all that you said, and unfortunately I cannot see a lot of difference.
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.