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.

[HardStarboard]

>>> He’s winning primaries with around half the votes Hillary is losing with. <<<

The "in power" party traditionally has less drawing power in the primaries than the "out of power" party.

You are evidently more worried about an erosion of the Party than the erosion of the nation with 3 new liberal supreme court justices, Lord knows how many anti-gun laws, an era of unprecedented hate for corporations and a wave of welfare-statism the likes of which we haven't seen since FDR

>>> Instead I’ll write in a conservative candidate... <<<

I respect your intent to fart upwind.

[WildcatClan]

Some of the comments on this thread are a lot of the reason, but McCain has made his bed and he better either re-make it or be willing to sleep in it. The logic put forth by Sage (sorry to single you out) is going to go a lot farther in getting McCain elected than some of the “you elected Obama” nonsense I have seen on this thread already. The main responsibility lies with McCain and if he can’t earn their votes, he doesn’t deserve them.

Sage, should be the example here, this is what we need more of, and it’s sound reasoning as well as rhetoric. You don’t try to guilt or twist arms into getting someone to vote for someone they are not yet comfortable voting for as a general rule. That will only cause a voter to dig in deeper and feel so alienated that they are ashamed to return after they cool off a bit. Many will cool off and vote for McCain, but as I said, McCain has much work to do to bring them to that point. It’s early yet and this race is McCain’s to lose. The opposition is so weak and pathetic it is hard to imagine losing against them. The primary turnouts mean very little in the larger scheme of things so I am not willing to concede to Alibama with a banjer on my knee just yet. His own supporters do not yet know what he has done so far, so he hasn’t won anything yet.

[exit82]

Bob, I’m squarely in the third camp, and I make no apologies.

I have voted for Republican Presidential candidates in every Presidential election since 1972.

I will not be voting for any of the top three presumptive candidates this year.

I am against McCain for his policies, his politics, and his disloyalty to Republican and conservative causes, all of which others earlier on this thread have so eloquently stated the specifics, so I will not repeat them. They are numerous.

I am also against McCain because he is the worst candidate we could put forth in such a serious election at this juncture in our nation’s history. He is an old, arrogant SOB that cares not a wit for all of the things most people on this board cares about. In his mind, he is still the irresponsible, irrepressible, not to be denied fighter pilot jock he was 40 years ago. Tigers don’t change their stripes. He does not have the temperament to be President, and the campaign will soon show that.And there is plenty more dirt that will be dropped on his head by his so-called buddies in the MSM. They will have a field day with him.

My disdain for McCain may be futile in the grand scheme of things, but I must be true to myself. His past activities, statements, and actions are the best indicator of his future actions, so I can not trust him to protect my country or its interests, nor can I trust him to further my conservative ideals.

I also disdain McCain in the fervent hope that the GOP will see their mistake in allowing this clown to become the candidate. If Hillary is the worst threat to the Republic since the Civil War, and Obama right behind her, the GOP puts up McCain? How serious do you think the powerbrokers on the GOP are in protecting America like you think America needs protecting?

There are still 6 months to the convention. If we don’t try now to influence the candidate and/or the VP candidate, we can just shut up and forever hold our peace. We are already being told to sit down and shut up—yeah, that’s a great way to win friends and influence people.

McCain will be a disaster come November. He won’t fight against Hillary, and he will appear to be a dinosaur against Obama.

The truth is, there isn’t a dime’s worth of policy difference between the three of them, only a matter of how fast their liberal vision gets enacted.

You want to commit political suicide, be my guest. I won’t vote for a liberal, regardless of the letter after their name. As for the future, you can read my tagline.

[JasonC]

Which candidate is best is up to voters to try to noodle out in the primaries. Which party's candidate would be a better pres is entirely the voter's sovereign duty to decide. What they do once actually in office is entirely the elected official's duty. All can burn for screwing up their own duty, and none can pass the slightest iota of it off on the others.

[NittanyLion]

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.

*shrug*

Hope it felt good to get that off your chest, because it changes my mind not a whit.

[mdefranc]

What would be a President Hilbama achieve? Answer: immediate Republican unification in total opposition to crackpot leftist legislative bills and nominees, GOP congressional control beginning in 2010, and a conservative presidential victory in 2012.

What would a President McCain achieve? Answer: With the help of the Democrat congress and media, every single crackpot leftist idiocy that McCain has embraced over the years, with the consequences permanently discrediting and destroying the GOP.

Either way, 2009-2010 will be appalling. The question is do things get worse or better thereafter.

[JasonC]

Did you vote for Bush in 2004?

Did he push amnesty?

Are you to blame for electing Bush in 2004?

Behold, the beam is in thine own eye.

[no-to-illegals]

Dearest dearest JasonC:
Ask if you are winning votes or helping to destroy votes?
Your candidate is not being helped by your typing...mho

[TNdandelion]

It has less to do with McCain than it does the Republican Party of late. McCain was simply the last straw. If you will, the "WTF??" moment.

I don't care if people declare their loyalty to McCain and the RINO party, but please allow me to laugh with incredulity at the notion that we are just miserable. In fact, I would even dare suggest that the reluctant McCain supporters are far more miserable and simply resent having it pointed out to them.

[Syncro]

I’ll let this thread find it’s own way and be ack later tonight.

I imagine you're first reaction will be "ACK!"

(disclaimer: Just read the content of your comment in the top of the thread, maybe you are already "ack")

:>)

[so_real]

You go right on clapping yourself on the back, now--the rest of us will be trying to stop one of two socialists from coming to power, and making sure neither gets to choose SCOTUS nominees.

NOW THAT'S FUNNY!  Have you forgotten that President George Herbert Walker Bush brought the "Honorable" David H. Souter to the SCOTUS table? Do you *really* think McCain is capable of doing better? C'mon!

[sitetest]

“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).”

False premise.

It’s an open question who would do more long-term harm - Mr. McCain, or Mr. Obama/Mrs. Clinton.

With either Mr. Obama or Mrs. Clinton, the assault is open, direct and frontal. As with Mr. Clinton, it’s very possible that a moderately conservative Republican congressional majority may arise to thwart much of the leftist agenda. Think: 1993 and HillaryCare and the rise of the Republican congressional majority in 1994. Think: the mitigation of Mr. Clinton’s original proposed tax increases to what was eventually passed.

With the election of Mr. McCain, many believe that we’ll see much of the same agenda passed as Mr. McCain tries to be all things to all people, tries to show himself as a non-partisan type of hands-across-the-aisle leader.

And in that case, it’s quite likely that the Republicans in Congress, as they did under Mr. Bush, will roll over and accept all the liberal policies offered up by a Republican presidency.

And just as we see the long-term damage that’s done to the party, just as we see that the Republican Party has been largely gutted of its conservativism, we believe that another moderate or liberal Republican presidency may magnify the damage done to by the Bush presidency to the cause of conservatism.

I have little doubt that Mr. McCain would betray us on:

- Supreme Court nominees;
- taxes;
- health care;
- federal education policy;
- further campaign finance reform and further restriction of the First Amendment.

I’m not altogether sure that he’d stay with the program on the war.

At best, he might be modestly better than either of the two Dems. In the short-term. In the long-term, conservatism would be utterly defeated as there would no longer be a major party that would give its platform to conservatism. We’d essentially have two liberal parties.

Is this an accurate assessment of the situation? I’m not sure. But it’s certainly a reasonable and logical one.

[Salo]

I learn from my mistakes - you are getting spread-eagled for McCain so you can repeat them.

Did you vote for Bush in 2004?

Did he push amnesty?

Are you to blame for electing Bush in 2004?

Behold, the beam is in thine own eye.

[JasonC]

It is loads of fun, for one. And I like nothing better than the warm inner glow I get pointing out obvious duties I am faithfully fufilling, to others. I especially enjoy the way hissyfitters react when it is pointed out they aren't conservatism, don't speak for it, and are behaving irresponsibly. It is priceless.

And of course I know how you voted, I've been here for eight years and I know which candidates the FR hissyfitters backed - Thompson, Hunter, Tancredo.

They didn't get into double digits for a reason.

[John D]

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).

I disagree. Besides his unstable temper which is very dangerous, McCain would do to the Republican Party what Jimmy Carter did to the democrats. We can survive 4 years, but we can not survive the 12 years or more that McCain would put us back.

[Horns]

I really believe you have it 100% correct.......

[jamese777]

McCain-Feingold
Kennedy-McCain
Lieberman-McCain
Keating Five
Drug addict second wife who stole narcotics from a medical charity and had to be diverted from the criminal justice system by going to rehab.
Any questions?

[mdittmar]

Did you caucus or vote in your primary?

[backtothestreets]

My main reasons for not supporting McCain are twofold. First, I am not registered with any political party. As such, I look beyond partisan politics to what is best for America, not a political party.

Secondly, and of greater importance, liberalized government policies would be easier to enact into law with a liberal/moderate Republican President-Democratic Congress combination.

Conversely, the Republican Party would once again reestablish conservative principles, which are traditional American values, if either Clinton or Obama were elected President. Without such motivation, the Republican Party would continue moving the direction of the Democratic Party, and the combination of the two will further erode the USA.