What to do about McCain?

January 31, 2008 | me

[reaganaut1]

Many Freepers, including me, are disappointed that McCain will likely be the nominee. I'll vote for Romney on Super Tuesday.

If McCain wins the nomination, I will vote for him on the *hope* he will be less bad than Clinton or Obama would be. I see no reason to actively support him by contributing to or volunteering for his campaign. I think we should focus on congressional and gubernatorial campaigns, trying to hold the seats of real conservatives and maybe pick off a few vulnerable Democrats in what will likely be a Democratic year. Any suggestions?

I think McCain is leading because even most Republicans, not to mention the country, are not very conservative. We need to change the overall political climate before we can elect a true conservative. People are conservative for various reasons. To me, contributing the the Club for Growth (focusing on free-market policies) makes more sense than contributing to the national Republican party or especially the McCain campaign. Social conservatives have groups like Concerned Women for America. We also need to fight liberal bias in the schools and the media. There are lots of ways to promote conservatism other than participating in the presidential campaign, with the understanding that the payoff will not come in the near term.

[1Old Pro]

Here are the RESULTS OF THE 2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

JOHN MCCAIN VS. HILLARY CLINTON.

HILLARY WINS......

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b9/ElectoralCollege1996-Large.png

[khnyny]

Reagan lost the GOP nomination to Ford in 1976, that’s how the nation got Jimmy Carter as POTUS.

If Romney loses, expect the Dems to win.

McCain lied last night (Novak article re this appeared today) regarding his statements on Justice Alito.

Judge Robert Bork, btw, has endorsed Romney.

[Reagan80]

Q: What to do about McCain?

A: Vote to elect as many true conservative Republicans as possible to the House and Senate in November in order to thwart everything McCain wants to accomplish!

Unbelievable. We are going to have to elect a veto-proof Republican majority in order to stop a Republican President.

Reagan80

[claudiustg]

If McCain is the nominee, I plan on voting a straight Constitution Party ticket.

“If you can’t make them see the light, make them feel the heat.”

Ronald Reagan

[Army Air Corps]

Considering how chummy McCain is with the lefties (including Her Thighness), I have serious doubts about him battling Hillary during presidential debates and on the campaign trail. Personally, I think that he would behave like a whipped puppy in her presence.

[greyfoxx39]

Wednesday, January 30, 2008

MITT ROMNEY, JOHN MCCAIN, MIKE HUCKABEE

Looking Ahead to Super Tuesday

A McCain-friendly strategist looks at the Super Tuesday map and sees some opportunities for Romney, but probably not enough. Massachusetts (41 delegates) is a gimme (probably by a wide margin), and if the pro-Romney turnout from Mormons in Utah (36 delegates) is on par with the turnout in Nevada, it should be in the Romney pile. Romney has some high-profile endorsements in Missouri (58 delegates) and Colorado (a caucus state, 46 delegates), so presumably with those endorsees' help in the ground game, he could do okay.

One poll in Colorado looks good for Romney. The last ones in Missouri have shown Huckabee, McCain, and Romney all pretty close together.

Looking at the other states...

Alaska? (29 delegates) I've found only one poll in this state, from December, and it put Ron Paul in first place.

Arizona? (53 delegates, winner take all) McCain.

Arkansas? (34 delegates, allocated by district and who wins statewide) Huckabee, obviously.

Alabama? (48 delegates, mixed, somewhat proportional) Probably Huckabee, but some polls show McCain close.

California (173 delegates, divided by congressional district) will be this insane dogfight, with delegates distributed on a per-congressional-district basis, but McCain's ahead of Romney and Huckabee in current polls. With the Rudy endorsement and the help of Rudy's ground game operations, McCain should walk away with at least a healthy plurality, if not a majority of California's delegates.

Connecticut? (30 delegates, winner take all) Looking good for McCain.

Delaware? (18 delegates,winner take all) A lot of folks figured this was Giuliani territory, but I found one poll giving it to Romney.

Georgia? (72 delegates, winner take all) Most folks have been giving it to Huckabee, and polls concur.

Illinois? (70 delegates, based more or less by district) The latest poll puts McCain up, 31 percent to 20 percent. Romney will walk away with some delegates, but it'll probably be another silver medal.

Minnesota? (40 delegates, a hopelessly complicated caucus system) A Star-Tribune poll from last fall put Giuliani in first, McCain in second.

Hugh Hewitt puts Montana (25 delegates) in Romney's pile, and if Romney's run strong anywhere so far, it's been the west. Even though it's a caucus, it's effectively winner take all.

New Jersey? (52 delegates, winner take all) McCain led with Giuliani in it. We'll have to see where the Rudy voters go, but you figure the endorsement will bring over at least some of them.

? (101 delegates, winner take all) Similar story to New Jersey - McCain was up with Giuliani in it; he should remain in front.

North Dakota? (26 delegates, winner take all if he gets more than two thirds, otherwise proportionally). I cannot find any polls for North Dakota. Mitt Romney won a straw poll out there with 29 percent. I'll put it in his pile.

Oklahoma? (41 delegates, some to who wins each district, some to who wins statewide) The most recent poll puts McCain up; before that it was Huckabee.

Tennessee (55 delegates, winner takes all if they hit 50 percent, otherwise based on who wins each district and 13 to who wins statewide): A January poll had Thompson in first place, but Huckabee well ahead of McCain and Romney.

West Virginia (30 delegates, but only 9 on primary day, 3 per congressional district): The only poll I could find was from nearly a year ago. For what it's worth, it put McCain way ahead of Romney or Huckabee, but in March of last year, few had heard of those guys.

In the Romney pile, we’ll probably have about five to seven wins, and the delegates most of Massachusetts, all of Utah, all of Montana, most of Colorado, all of Missouri, and if that poll is correct, all of Delaware, and perhaps most of North Dakota's. And he’ll get some of California’s.

I put him at about 200 to 250 delegates.

In the Huckabee pile, we’ll have Alabama, Arkansas, Tennessee, Georgia, and maybe he’ll get some of California’s.

I put him around 200.

In the McCain pile, we’ll have all of Arizona, all of New York, all of New Jersey, all of Connecticut, probably the largest chunk of California’s, probably most of Minnesota's, probably majorities in Oklahoma and West Virginia.

I put him around somewhere north of 400 delegates.

Alaska may go for Ron Paul, and he may get a majority of their 29 delegates.

That would put things at about McCain at 500+ (needing 1,191 to be the nominee), Romney at 325, Huckabee at 230 or so.

01/30 04:13 PM

 

Link

The REAL Romney

[TornadoAlley3]

bigot.

[Binghamton_native]

Here is a variation on your plan. If you’re not a McCain supporter, and if you live in a state where McCain is heavily favored to win that primary, vote down ballot from president. If enough people do this, the GOP hierarchy might see that the degree of undervoting shows the train wreck ahead. I believe the party hierarchy is largely responsible for the McCain surge. It is his turn, as it was Bob Dole’s turn in 1996. Most receently we saw this at work in the last minute endorsement by FL governor Crist. With this endorsement he delivered his organization to McCain to help deliver a victory to McCain.

[DManA]

Or remember half of what he spouts.

[USS Alaska]

But if Romney wins, I’m voting for the Democrats for the first time. I won’t legitimize mormonism by putting one in office.

Spoken like a true bigot. What makes you believe that Mormons need you to legitimize their religion? As a Catholic, I'll vote for Mitt, and it has nothing to do with religion.

[Army Air Corps]

I am not a Mormon, but I hold no animus toward Mormons. I have known many of them as friends and colleagues.

[BubbaBasher]

I won’t legitimize mormonism by putting one in office.

That's one of the stupidest things I've seen here in quite a while. It's about running and leading the country not his particular religion. I'm not a big Romney fan but he is twice the man that the Huckster is.

[panaxanax]

So you’ll vote for Hillary before you vote for Romney just because he’s a Mormon?

You’re too young to be here. Come back when you grow up.

[sam_paine]

I believe the majority of people are conservative.

I would also like to believe that. But from soccer moms, to greedy elderly soc sec suckers, to teachers to unions to etc etc...I see America cuddling up to anti-gun socialism.

[penowa]

"I think McCain is leading because even most Republicans, not to mention the country, are not very conservative."

You may be correct in your assumption. I think conservatives are simply not voting in the primaries because there has not been a viable conservative candidate running. I don't know about FL yesterday, but all of the prior primary states have had a smaller Republican turnout than in previous years. Only on the Democrat side has there been a BIG increase in voter turnout.

[TChris]

I will vote for him on the *hope* he will be less bad than Clinton or Obama would be.

I'm giving some thought to this proposition: McCain will cooperate with Democrats and pass their agenda anyway, as he always has. So whether it's McCain, Hillary or Obama, the result will be the same.

But only with McCain in the White House would the inevitable unconstitutional, anti-American, subversive government bear the Republican name.

If McCain is the nominee--I hate to even consider it--I will probably vote third-party or write-in and let the Dems have the White House. At least that way, it will be clear who made the mess. There will be no way to blame Republicans for the disaster.

[JaneNC]

EEEEEEEEEEEEEK

Well, frankly, I don’t think people bother alot...they just hear sound bites about candidates.

That is what is frightening.
The ignorance that abounds.

[LadyNavyVet]

I won’t vote for him. I’ve been a good Pubbiebot for years, dutifully taking my clothespin to the polls to vote for Bush I, twice, Bob Dole, and Bush II, twice. Now they’re offering me McCain, and telling me to vote for him because if I don’t, the big bad Dem will win, and besides, I have no place else to go.

The arrogance is breathtaking, and I, for one, will not be a slave to the Republican plantation anymore. If I hold my nose and vote for McCain, I’m no better than the blacks who never step off the Dem plantation no matter how much they’re taken for granted.

If we conservatives vote for McCain, the Party will keep moving to the left. After eight years of McCain, maybe we can elect Chuck Hagel or Olympia Snowe! Hey, maybe Ted Kennedy will change parties and we can all race out to vote for him so that the big, bad, evil Dem doesn’t win. After all, he’s got name recognition!

I will stand on principle instead of acting out of fear. No more. Enough is enough. If the Party wants to elect the likes of John McCain, they will have to do it without my vote.

[Hawthorn]

> Although McCain is not a staunch supporter of the constitution, he doesn’t spit on it <

Yeah, McCain-Feingold wasn’t an act of “spitting” on the Constitution. It was more like “s*itting” on it — with the asterisk standing in for the letter “h.”