"...conclude that McCain is GUARANTEED to do untold damage to the Republican party and the principles of conservatism that are ultimately freedom's only guardian, while either Obama or Hillary in the White House would probably be weak within their own parties, have more people fighting them than not, quickly become pariahs, accomplish little of what so many fear they "will" do, and that backlash, combined with my and other conservatives' pointed rejection of McCain, would create an almost guaranteed benefit for the Republican party and conservatism....
Are you urging a McCain defeat as a means to benefit the "Republican Party." If so, this will be a hard sell since you assume a defeat would augur for better things when logic would assume a defeat is a defeat and the consequences are unknown albeit usually bad.
Huh? You said in a response to my post 51, and I quote, that "ad hominem seems to be your chief, if not single, means of argumentation."
So I asked you to elaborate how my post 51 appealed to peoples' emotions or prejudices over their ability to think. Say ... when's the last time you looked up ad hominem?
Are you urging a McCain defeat as a means to benefit the "Republican Party?"
Yes, in particular when the Republican Party in question represents a philosophy that gives popular big government policies priority over small government options to a level nearly equal to Democrats. Big government is the antithesis of conservatism; big government necessarily and by definition diminishes indivual freedoms and labor.
If so, this will be a hard sell since you assume a defeat would augur for better things when logic would assume a defeat is a defeat and the consequences are unknown albeit usually bad.
Suffice it to say your "logic" is different than mine.
From where I sit, there are few unknowns or gambles with regard to the consequences of a McCain victory. In my estimation, sure as sunset a McCain victory would result in:
}Severe disillusion among small-government voters with the Republican party
} Increased government infringement on freedom and my labor (tax dollars) under the name of "Republican" leadership
Less sure, but probable:
} More Democrats in Congress
} Stronger embrace of the communistic "Global Warming" environmental panic -- in the name of Republicans
} Mass confusion with regard to the WOT and policies with prisoners, in the name of Republicans
} Stronger embrace of the positively DEADLY prospect of nationalized health care in the name of Republicans.
As for the judges and the military, it a crap shoot in the same way it's a crap shoot to trust a colorblind guy tell you the green scarf from the red one. Conservative principle goes right over McCain's head, hence his ability to recognize conservatives.
An Obama or Hillary presidency would result in the same things except in the name of the Democrat party. Judges and the military would be more dangerous -- less of a crapshoot, but one can hope that enough right-thinkers could get into congress to battle bad decisions. On the other hand, among "less sure but "probable" or at at the very least possible --
} Recoil within the Republican party at the rejection of McCain
} More Republicans in Congress
} Intense division within the Democrat party
} Increased perception of the Democrat Liberalism bringing on heavier-handed government
If you ask me, the "consequences of the unknown" are a better gamble with the Democrats. But maybe it doesn't matter.
I'm a chicken-livered gamblin type, but I think McCain's going to crack one way or another at some point (so would/will Hillary! What a GAS!) and in the election, it's his vice presidential candidate who's being elected (not so in Hillary's case, I wouldn't think). That's the way I'm going to vote, anyway.