Posted on 06/11/2008 4:10:28 AM PDT by TADSLOS
CINCINNATI -- As the architect of Ohio's ballot measure against gay marriage, Phil Burress helped draw thousands of conservative voters to the polls in 2004, most of whom also cast ballots to reelect President Bush. So Burress was not surprised when two high-level staffers from John McCain's campaign dropped by his office, asking for his help this fall.
What surprised Burress was how badly the meeting went. He says he tried but failed to make the McCain team understand how much work remained to overcome the skepticism of social conservatives. Burress ended up cutting off the campaign officials as they spoke. "He doesn't want to associate with us," Burress now says of McCain, "and we don't want to associate with him."
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
I want alternative energy. Nuclear, wind, hydro, wave, natural gas, methane, solar — all sources of energy should be pursued.
I wish McCain was on board for drilling in ANWR, but we’ve had 8 years of a President who was strongly supportive, and I think the last count was that we couldn’t even get to 50 votes for it in the Senate, much less 60.
It would be like opposing a Presidential candidate because, while he supported judges who would overturn ROE, he didn’t support banning abortion for rape and incest.
Maybe you shouldn’t. After 6 months of conservatives saying they would never vote for McCain, it’s hard to fault him for deciding he better find votes elsewhere.
It’s like those who deny money to the RNC until they fix everything people don’t like. If there is no incentive for fixing SOME things, why bother?
The problem with playing hardball is that you can overplay your hand. In a year when there was no clear conservative candidate, and where conservatives showed they were best at attacking candidates rather than fielding one, it’s not surprising we ended up with a candidate who is not counting on conservatives — because we have kind of shown that we are not to be counted on unless you are 100% in lockstep with us.
Except that if you are pretty much dead-on, like Duncan Hunter, we won’t support you at all.
The problem with this strategy is that those newly targeted voters might vote democrat down-ticket. Now, if they are targeted in districts that already were democrat, that’s not a big deal. But it would be a shame if McCain managed to win by attracting democrats OUT to the polls where they defeat our vulnerable down-ticket candidates.
Nailed it...unfortunately.
>> I want alternative energy. Nuclear, wind, hydro, wave, natural gas, methane, solar — all sources of energy should be pursued.
I agree, but I think they should be pursued according to free market forces — NOT subsidized by the taxpayer. OTOH, McCain thinks taxpayers should subsidize them.
>> I wish McCain was on board for drilling in ANWR, but we’ve had 8 years of a President who was strongly supportive, and I think the last count was that we couldn’t even get to 50 votes for it in the Senate, much less 60.
That’s where leadership comes in. The support from W wasn’t strong, it was lukewarm. The GOP has trouble spelling the word leadership, let alone providing any.
>> It would be like opposing a Presidential candidate because, while he supported judges who would overturn ROE, he didn’t support banning abortion for rape and incest.
Hyeah. Like McCain’s ANWR policy is the only reason a conservative would have to oppose him...
I've been taken to task repeatedly on this forum for my intention of not supporting McCain in the voting booth come November. At least that's my intention now; November is some time off.
This is a significant decision for me since I've voted straight Republican my entire life. But today I look at the political map and I see exactly what such blind obedience has gotten us. Today, if we had a more viable, conservative-friendly, candidate, I just might do it again. But McCain has shown such disdain for conservative ideals, has shown such willingness to work across the aisle, and has even (perhaps) considered switching to Independent, that I just can't find myself willing to be part of the "sheeple" one more time.
I fully realize what's in store should the GOP lose in November. But I also realize that McCain is running one of the dumbest campaigns I've seen, and the GOP is doing little to resolve the problems they face. Everyone tells me it'll be my fault should McCain lose and my vote isn't there. My reply is NO! It'll be McCain's fault because he's done nothing to give me a reason to vote FOR him. He wants the office? Great. He needs to show me why he should have it. And being the least of two evils is NOT an answer.
Come November, if he still hasn't convinced me, my position will not have changed, and I won't feel one ounce of guilt should my vote for President be absent.
McCain is scheduled to speak before the NAACP and La Raza in the next few months. He is going to move further and further to the Left in the quixotic attempt to win independents and moderates. You can't outdemocrat a democrat. McCain is going to take the GOP down with him. Only the Stupid Party nominates its maverick to be its standard bearer.
I guess you could argue that free-market principles should apply to our national security regarding energy. Certainly we need to allow the free market leeway.
But in another sense, developing new energy sources is a lot like developing a new weapons program. It is a defense for our country, and we don’t usually just let the free market build our defense and then pick and choose.
Still, what I would like is for the government to support the research by GETTING OUT OF THE WAY, by giving tax breaks and freedom from regulation.
However, we live in a country where much of the innovation has been taken over by university and other think tanks which are heavily tied to government funding. Since we are unlikely to fix that in the next 4 years, the next-best thing is to keep that system from discriminating against new energy sources.
You make an excellent point, which is why I see the whole left vs right debate being moot. In truth the debate is between statists and libertarians. McCain and Obama are both statists - they disagree on little except the details. In fact, the GOP hasn’t offered a libertarian candidate since Reagan. Those of us on this side of the debate are long tired of holding our nose and pulling the lever with hopes that we will get one of our guys next time.
I am more hopeful for our future. I think the economic collapse that we are facing is going to cause many people to finally wake up.
I am HARDLY a McCain supporter, but I don’t want this country to be absolutely destroyed over the next 4 years. All of the talking heads are saying that there may be an even bigger Democrat majority come November, well, there won’t be if the conservatives actually come out to vote. Don’t vote for the Presidency if you are really that anti-McCain, but not voting at all is pretty much plungering our country down the drain.
This congress has the lowest approval rating of any congress in history. What’s the difference between this one and the one prior to 2006? There are more far leftist wacko Democrats that played the electorate by acting moderate to conservative prior to their election. Even the Democrats know that they can’t win on their core beliefs, so they are pretty much hoping you stay home and the media wing of the DNC (MSNBC, CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS, NYT, etc) are talking up this gibberish about the Dems picking up more seats (and it being a foregone conclusion) because the want you to stay home as well. This is mental voter suppression. It happened in the choosing of our candidate and even in the choosing of the Dem candidate. Don’t fall for this crap when the country is on the line.
Again, you don’t have to vote for McCain, but don’t just stay home or only focus on local issues because if you do, the national level issues will end up affecting the local ones in the next couple of years (especially if we have someone like Obama and a socialist congress).
I understand what you're saying. My point is, this has been his method of operation all along. He's NOT conservative, he's more than happy to work across the aisle on democrat policy, and has shown little interest in conservative values; regardless of what he wants us to believe. Tell me again why I should vote for him.
It’s like those who deny money to the RNC until they fix everything people don’t like. If there is no incentive for fixing SOME things, why bother?
Oh, so in order to get things done we should continue on with supporting that which we don't want. I get it.
The problem with playing hardball is that you can overplay your hand.
Tell that to John McCain.
I've never said I wasn't going to vote. I'm not only going to vote for Congressional and state races, I'm working actively for candidates I support. I (at this time) have been given no reason to vote for President this November.
>> ...developing new energy sources is a lot like developing a new weapons program. It is a defense for our country, and we don’t usually just let the free market build our defense and then pick and choose.
Slippery slope. Example: food is strategic, so not only farming but food processing and distribution must be centrally planned and controlled. Ditto computer operating systems, semiconductor manufacturing, steel production, ...
>> I would like is for the government to support the research by GETTING OUT OF THE WAY, by giving tax breaks and freedom from regulation.
Uh... giving tax breaks and freedom from regulation to a select few (selected under what criteria, by who?) is NOT “getting out of the way”! You’re on the right track, though. How about tax breaks and freedom from regulation to EVERYONE? ;-)
First, Congress did pass drilling in ANWAR but Clinton vetoed it. Second, the times they are a changing with $4+ a gallon of gas. The high cost of energy causes the reduction of discretionary income, which reduces consumption in other areas sending us into a downward economic cycle. The cheaper the price of energy, the better for the economy. Third, we are just at the beginning of this crisis as world oil supplies have remained stagnant at 85 million bbls a day while demand is increasing. We have very little excess capacity.
The idea that we can get off oil anytime soon is pure nonsense. We can't conserve our way out of this crisis. Yes, alternatives should be pursued but let the marketplace decide the way to go and not have the government provide the direction as they did with the subsidization of ethanol.
McCain is stubborn and will stay with a position regardless of the facts and a change in circumstances. Instead, he still is against drilling in ANWAR and for limiting severely offshore drilling. McCain likes to tout his environmental credentials, but the environmentalists are the ones who have largely gotten us into this jam.
In the meantime, the Reps in Congress are pushing their Drill here, drill now, pay less solution including drilling in ANWAR. This is beginning to reasonate with the American public with 57% now favoring drilling in ANWAR and offshore. The gasoline hike is really a regressive tax that affects those at the lower end of the economic scale more. This will have an impact on how the politicians vote if they want to keep their jobs.
“He says he tried but failed to make the McCain team understand how much work remained to overcome the skepticism of social conservatives.”
It’s not just socons. If you are any kind of conservative, the McJackass camp has NOTHING but contempt for you. They hate your guts. You embarrassed Juan at the amnesty party last year and NOW YOU ARE GOING TO PAY!
John McCain is a conservative on most fiscal issues, and has a relatively conservative view on government power. He is pro-life, and good on judges. He’s strong on the War on Terror and support for the military.
He’s good on guns, and pretty good on marriage and the gay agenda.
He’s a moderate on a lot of other things, and sometimes liberal.
The problem with denying RNC money is, no matter what they do, it’s not enough, so they pretty much figured out that there was no point in trying to please those who would never give them money unless they essentially did 100% of what those people wanted.
So that' a reason to contribute? Duh!
Should that anti-amnesty people have sent money to the RNC when the republicans killed the amnesty bill? Would that have encouraged the RNC to look for candidates who would vote that way?
Or should we have held back, since the republicans hadn’t voted to cut earmarks?
How many “correct” votes should we wait for until we support the people voting?
Frankly, I don’t give to the RNC anyway, never have, so it’s kind of a moot point. But I don’t think you can send a message if you simply never send them money. To send a message, you have to let them know you exist, which means sending money whenever they do something right, and sending a “not one cent” message whenever they screw up.
You see? Here's the fallacy of your argument. You're arguing from your perspective; not mine. You don't give to the GOP, so it stands to reason that your opinion wouldn't be worth a hoot. But I HAVE! Every election cycle. We just received another letter ostensibly from Laura Bush yesterday asking that we send George a birthday card (which was enclosed BTW), and of course, make a donation!! Guess what, the card wouldn't go to George but to the GOP.
So, by your own reasoning, my withholding funds from the GOP because I don't believe they're on the right track is a logical step. And not only because my money goes directly to candidates; not to the GOP who'll spread it around regardless of candidate temperament.
The reason I make this "dire prediction" is that the McCain camp seems to be going out of its way to alienate the base. These guys seem to have no appreciation of what it takes to run a winning presidential campaign. If they are this inept in other strategy areas, and it seems they are, I contend we are screwed big-time.
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.