A Question for FR McCain Detractors

FR | 2-23-08 | Bob J

[Bob J]

Ever since Super Tuesday a super debate has been raging on FR concerning John McCain. I was never a McCain supporter, in fact I penned the post Super Tuesday post "Official FR Drinking Thread" so we could together drown our common disappointments into oblivion.

FReepers seem to be moving into three distinct groups. The first are those that have always supported McCain, a lot or partially. There are those that don't like McCain but are willing to support him because they believe they will get some of what they want or to defeat what the see as the more critical danger, Obama or Clinton. The there's the third group, those that viscerally dislike McCain and vow never to vote for him for any reason.

The actions and motivation for support from the first two groups seem obvious...they would rather see McCain in the White House than a dem. But for the life of me I cannot understand some of the actions of the third.

Allow me to explain.

I understand you dislike McCain and the reasons why. He is far too liberal on many issues, he has stabbed conservatives in the back several times and he is too cozy with the dems. These are all defensible reasons to not vote for him or to vote third party and you have every right to vote as you see fit and for whatever reasons you hold. What I don't understand is why some here are making such concerted efforts to dissuade others from voting for or supporting him.

As flawed as McCain is there is no way a logical case can be made that we would be better off under Obama or Hillary (O&H). Even on most issues where McCain is closer to the left than to us, O&H are much farther to the left than he is and would do much more damage than McCain. On the issues where he is not, the WOT, taxes, abortion, etc., the differences are stark and this does not even take into count extended issues like judicial appointments.

So why are you working so hard, so viscerlly, so nasty, to turn votes against McCain? If you truly feel as you do than go sit out November or cast your vote for your 3rd party candidate. That makes sense. What doesn't make sense is why you push for a McCain and GOP loss.

It may be as simple as "misery loves company". It may be that you validate your own position by getting others to believe as you do. It may be that there are some dem propaganda plants on FR. I don't know but I sure would like to and I know others do as well.

[JasonC]

I was asked so I answered. You can go take up knitting if you like.

When eventually you are asked what you did to prevent Iran from getting the nuclear weapons it has used to kill millions of innocent people, you can explain that your self satisfaction at your own purity prevented you from raising a finger. You can lift your nose in the air haughtily as you do so. But the questioner won't be an internet poster, and that answer would send you straight to a warm place.

But it's your life, toss it away for any triffle you please.

[isrul]

Another one who never got a good talkin’ to by a McCainiac:)

[JasonC]

He won't ask anyone's permission.

[The Citizen Soldier]

So why are you working so hard, so viscerlly, so nasty, to turn votes against McCain? If you truly feel as you do than go sit out November or cast your vote for your 3rd party candidate. That makes sense. What doesn't make sense is why you push for a McCain and GOP loss.

In a sentence - McCain is bad for the country. He has proven this over the past twenty years by his comments and by his actions.

As a Viet Nam veteran, I believe he betrayed the MIA/POW's in 1991 as a member of the Select Committee, in his anxiousness to renew relations with a communist Viet Nam.

As an American, I believe he has repeatedly betrayed the nation (and the party) with every bill that has his name on it. To wit:
- McCain-Feingold
- McCain-Kennedy
- McCain-Edwards
- McCain-Lieberman

In 2004 he seriously considered running as VP with John Kerry (another betrayer of Viet Nam veterans).

You seriously ask why we are visceral and nasty?

This picture pretty well sums it up.

[LibertarianInExile]

“As flawed as McCain is there is no way a logical case can be made that we would be better off under Obama or Hillary (O&H).”

If leftist policy is implemented by the left, that policy fails—as it always does—and the left gets the blame only indirectly.

If leftist policy is implemented by the GOP, that policy fails—as it always does—and the right gets the blame squarely. Not the GOP. Not the milquetoast that implemented the leftist policy. The right.

Conservatives do not want to see another 4 years of conservatism being blamed for the failures of leftism. They don’t want conservative fiscal or social policy—which has damn little to do with Bush’s policy, or his dad’s policy, mind you—blamed for the failures of leftism.

Even if he is elected, McCain will bring more leftism. And the results will be the inevitable result of expanded leftism in the GOP and the U.S. government—a fractured base, a fractured country, and a united left eager to implement radical leftism. Do we need a fractured base, unlikely to mobilize for even local candidates? No. Do we need a fractured country, in the middle of a war? No. Do we need a united left or their radical policies? Hell, no. Is that going to be the result of four years of McCain? Hell, yes.

So why would 4 years of McCain be worse than 4 years of Obama or Hillary? Because A) the left gets the blame for those 4 years, because leftism ALWAYS fails, B) the base is unified again and has a chance to realign in a way that allows a conservative nominee instead of a milquetoast C) the country has at least a chance to move back towards freedom again instead of staying in a democrat socialist mode.

Simply calling my statements ‘illogical’ doesn’t make them so. Simply calling my intolerance for McCain or any other faux conservative nominee ‘illogical’ won’t get my vote. Simply pretending that McCain is some sort of conservative or even a nominee conservatives can support on the basis of his lesser-of-two-evils status is not going to cut it.

So it’s about time you make a logical case yourself. And this time, convince conservatives that a dyed-in-the-wool moderate who’s sold them out time and time again will represent their interests best. Oh, and explain why we should expect that he would care about what we think after getting into the Oval Office, when the last 12 years of lesser-of-two-evil GOP nominees have resulted in conservatives repeatedly getting the shaft, and increased national government power and bureaucracy.

[WOSG]

“First the handwriting is on the wall for anyone willing to see it. McCain isn’t going to win. “

That’s nonsense. We have seen a lot worse polling for Republican nominees who went on to win.
McCain is even in Ohio vs Obama, well ahead in FL, VA, and close in PA and Oregon. He is doing better now than Bush was doing around this time in 2004.

More importantly, the Obama image is a lot more moderate than Obama reality. The media loves Obama and has built up a junior senator with a thin resume and a marxist background as the savior. Uninformed young people are getting herded into flocking to him. ... But he’s the most liberal Senator in the SU Senate, his record is Ted Kennedy, and his foreign policy is soft-on-enemies and tough-on-US-taxpayers.

“Second, I see no reason to vote for a losing candidate AND give the GOP a go ahead for a further leftward slide.”
Defining where the GOP goes is a matter for the GOP primary, not the general election. the general election is about where the *country* will go. And letting Obama win is letting America take a sharp left turn.

“Instead I’ll write in a conservative candidate to show what I want to see from the GOP.” - I will be doing that ... In the primary. In the general election, we need to defeat the left-liberal pro-amnesty pro-UN-tax anti-Iraq-war anti-Bush-tax-cut pro-abort pro-judicial-activism pro-socialized-medicine Barack Obama.

[MNJohnnie]

I see, we are suppose to just ignore the McCain record of the last 10 years and blindly believe, as you do, that the McCain of the late 1980s and early 1990s is going to magically reappear in place of the McCain of the last 10 years once he is safely in the White house.

Name for me 3 Presidents in the last 75 years that have moved to the Right once in office?

[Eva]

You don’t get it, I will lose all creditability in my state on issues that are very important to me. How can I argue against anthropogenic global warming alarmists taking away our private property rights or Indians taking over our water rights if I support John McCain? Even if he loses people would argue that the Republicans support these issues, too.

The GOP left us out of the primary, disenfranchised us, so I am concentrating on my state issues, and John McCain is on the other side.

[KevinB]

I already know what you think, and I do not care because you are impotent.

If we are impotent, why did you feel the need to demean us in your original post? If you really believed it, you would simply ignore us.

You couldn't get Thompson into double digits. I liked Thompson, I would have voted for him, but you-all didn't, because you suck at politics.

Wow, you not only know why we are the way we are, but how we voted. We are truly in the midst of greatness here. Just so you know, I would have voted for Thompson, who didn't even campaign like he wanted the job, if he hadn't already dropped out of the race by the time of my state's primary. Who do you think the people in category 3 voted for in the primaries anyway?

[nyconse]

You assume wrongly that McCain can beat Obama; he can’t. The Repubs picked the worst possible nominee...now this nominee will lose big.

[LibertarianInExile]

“Well Bob, I’d imagine it’s because people come to FR to debate the issues and attempt to persuade others to their viewpoint.”

ROFLMAO!

Wait, no, no, take it back, it must be because we’re just nasty, mean, vicious people hellbent on demeaning an American hero. /sarc

[NittanyLion]

But the questioner won't be an internet poster, and that answer would send you straight to a warm place.

Am I to assume you're suggesting that the choice is to support McCain or burn in hell? LOL - some folks never cease to amaze...

[no-to-illegals]

Quit attacking us & get off our backs!

I'll vote for that. I too would appreciate the mccain supporters giving Conservatives some room to ponder. May not change anything....but maybe it will.

[mdittmar]

Well,I imagine,if hillary or obama lose,some on the left would express similar comments as yours.

Seems the candidates are never to blame.

Think back on previous Presidential elections in our history and ponder it for a while.

[VRWC For Truth]

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
-Benjamin Franklin

McNitWit is the SOS. Name one success ever to eminate from the SENATE. History isn't on McShames side. He's a doddering old Senate blowhard fool.

[1curiousmind]

“The Repubs picked the worst possible nominee”

_______________________

agreed...well except for Huckabee!

This blogger says it well:
“This Was Predictable”

http://cassandra2004.blogspot.com/2008/02/this-was-predictable-vicki-iseman-john.html

[CyberAnt]

“... some dem propaganda plants on FR....”

THIS GETS MY VOTE!!

[JasonC]

You have no sense of responsibility and wouldn't know a duty if it bit you. No surprise there, it is par for the course in the modern world. The mystery is what you think is conservative about your indifference to the fate of millions of innocent people, or your belief that your utterly unjustified, warm inner glow of self righteousness, trumps it.

[exnavy]

In a word, amnesty.

That should be a good enough reason for anyone.

[org.whodat]

As far as “sending a message” by sinking McCAin is conserned, that will do nothing but send Obama or Hillary to the White House.

Here is their number take it up with them: Phone: 202-863-8700 Fax: 202-863-8820 Email: Chairman@gop.com, Office of the ... Republican National Committee | 310 First Street | Washington, D. C. 20003 ...