Posted on 08/09/2008 7:29:47 AM PDT by Will88
"Joe Lieberman, the former Democratic vice-presidential nominee who has endorsed John McCain, is being vetted as a potential running mate for the Republican presidential hopeful, according to an adviser to Mr McCain’s campaign."
"Conservatives would be pissed as hell – I think you would have a revolt, but sometimes John does what John wants to do,” the McCain adviser said.
(Excerpt) Read more at ft.com ...
McCain's a Rat.
I agree with you...but when the alternative choice is Barack and Michelle Obama...& friends...it’s a chance to put COUNTRY 1st....not PARTY 1st.
This election isn’t going to be close, IMO.
You must remember, that if Obama’s Supreme Court made a ruling on the 2nd Amendment....your right to own firearms will be terminated...instead of kept safe by a 5-4 majority.
Why not? The whole rest of the GOP establishment does.
If Ronald Reagan were alive and lucid today he wouldn't be a Republican.
The rules of the presidential election allow candidates other than the two “major party” candidates to win. Show me what in the rules of the Super Bowl allow something other than the two teams involved to win.
Show me, while you’re at it, how the rules support taking points away from one of the two teams involved by supporting one of the teams who isn’t.
Not one of the more conservative candidates even got out of the bottom 2% overall in the primaries. Hmm. Seen ANY unity or consensus around another candidate since?
So you can believe all you want that a non-major party candidate "can" win, but the reality is that that is not going to happen. Therefore, it seems to me that is not a credible basis on which to decide how to vote.
Therefore, supporting the Ravens to win a game in which they are not even playing is a good illustration of what it's like to think someone other than the Republican nominee or the Rat nominee is going to be our next president.
As for your other question, of course the analogy is not exact because in the general election, unlike the Super Bowl, the result is determined by the votes of the electorate, not by play on the field.
That said, the point of the analogy, obviously, was that there are two teams playing on Election Day and one of them WILL win. Therefore, it's a little looney to proceed as if someone else WILL win.
If you want an analogy on how "the rules support taking points away from one of the two teams involved by supporting one of the teams that isn't," naturally we have to go with an analogy where (unlike the Super Bowl) the final result is determined by voting between two finalists, who became finalists after a sort of "primary" process.
An analogy for that is American Idol, for example.
The result (the election of the American Idol) is determined by how people vote, with a series of "races" that eliminate all but two candidates.
At the finale, anyone who cares who the next American Idol is---by that I mean, cares enough about the result to do what is available to him to do to influence the outcome of the finale (election)---must vote.
A person can influence the outcome of the finale (election) by voting for the candidate he likes best or by voting against the candidate he dislikes more.
A person cannot influence the outcome of the finale (election) by voting for someone who was eliminated from the contest weeks previously.
If a person really, really doesn't want "x" to become the American Idol, he can sit around and support someone who was eliminated from the show in previous rounds. Which does exactly NOTHING to influence the outcome of the finale (election). Or he can vote against "x" by voting for "y," thus, in effect, taking a vote away from "x" and, thereby, doing what he can do to stop "x" from winning.
The only people facilitating the election of Obambi are those voting for him directly and those voting for him indirectly by refusing to vote for McCain.
lieberman was veted....he LOST along with the algore.
Of course he would be a Republican.
Remember, he said, “I didn’t leave the Democrat Party. They left me!”
But I agree that he would have a terrible time keeping HIS Eleventh Commandment...”Never speak ill of another Republican”! ;^)
Some people like to think things through a little more comprehensively, but suit yourself.
McCain-Feingold, McCain-Lieberman, McCain-Kennedy...
Yes...as distasteful as that is, it becomes EXHIBIT A when proving that he has distanced himself from partisan politics...exactly the candidate we need to go up against the likes of Barack Hussein Obama.
I would rather swallow McCain's koolade, than Barack's and Micelle's koolade.
A corporate-controlled beauty contest of an evil corporate media oligarchy in which has-beens that can't get a job anywhere else decide for us who of the pretty, plastic vapid entertainers is going to represent our world, while all of the hypnotized viewers that are leeched from ignore the fact that the whole circus would be pointless and would stop existing on a dime if we just stopped giving them all our attention and energy and lived our lives the way we wanted to, societal pressure or banal institutions be damned?
OK, now you've got the beginnings of a good analogy.
I don't let other people tell me how to think. I support who and what I want, and don't put my finger up to the wind to do it for me.
Besides, your analogy fails on one other critical point. The people watching the Super Bowl don't decide who wins. The players do. Every last person in the stands could be a Patriots fan, but if the Giants score more points, it doesn't matter half a hoot.
The media, the corporations, the established parties, none of these people decide who will win the election. The voters do. You do. There is absolutely no reason we are ever forced to only choose from the choices we are given, especially when they're as much a nightmare as this election is. There is no reason that it is any less possible for anyone to win this election. The moment that you decide that what you really want is too hard, so you'll just always settle for the restricted set of options your rulers have been so kind as to force feed to you, you become a slave.
Enjoy that life, if that's what you want.
And I believe that today he would say exactly the same about the party he went to after them.
Writing in Reagan as an independent. The thought of that is almost enough to get me back into the voting booth.
By aligning himself with Rat partisans? Does not compute.
Doesn't matter that American Idol is all you said. Deal with the ANALOGY---that the finale is between two candidates chosen after a series of elimination races---and then you might be making progress toward a subnstantive answer.
As for your comments on the Super Bowl, duh. That's exactly what I said. It is determined by the players on the field, but that does nothing to take away from the fact that it's pretty stupid to sit in the stands and cheer for a team to win that is NOT EVEN PLAYING IN THE GAME.
Nobody, least of all me, is trying to tell you how to think. I couldn't care less how you think or vote. However, you posted to me and I responded to your points, quite unlike what you have done.
There is absolutely no reason we are ever forced to only choose from the choices we are given, especially when they're as much a nightmare as this election is.
No one is forcing you to choose between the Republican and Rat nominees. You can vote for SpongeBob if you want to; it's completely up to you.
However, if people want to analyze, oppose or even ridicule your choice or reasoning, so be it. That's life. And that's the point of signing on to a political debate forum, isn't it?
There is no reason that it is any less possible for anyone to win this election.
Sigh.
Yes, there is. It's called reality.
You are right back where you felt prompted to post to me in the first place: cheering for the Ravens, so to speak, in a Super Bowl between the Giants and the Patriots.
The moment that you decide that what you really want is too hard, so you'll just always settle for the restricted set of options your rulers have been so kind as to force feed to you, you become a slave.
I'm not a slave because I realize and accept the reality that in a Super Bowl between the Giants and the Patriots, either the Giants or the Patriots are going to win.
For my part, I would say that the "moment you decide that REALITY---the hand you've been dealt---is too hard," and therefore you decide to nurture fantasies such as someone other than the Republican or Rat nominee will win the presidential election in 2008, that's when you've got a problem.
Suit yourself.
Okay, I’ll ask the one question that usually puts a stop to this nononsence:
Who do you think is representative of the type of individual who will be SECDEF in a McCain administration?
Who do you think is representative of the type of individual who will be SECDEF in an Obambi administration?
If you don’t want to answer those questions directly, or want to argue that they are flawed questions or not relevant or not meaningful to you, please don’t post back to me.
Thanks.
nononsence = nonsence. Sorry!
There will be several candidates on the ballot.
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.