Posted on 02/23/2008 10:56:29 AM PST by 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.
Rasmussen General Election
John McCain vs. Barack Obama
Date McCain Obama
02/24/08 46% 44%
02/23/08 46% 43%
I do not want a Republican party cast in the image of Insane John McCain.
Thanks for your response.
I’m, sorry. I forgot about the blue. I’ll keep it in mind in the future.
Don’t confuse pushing for defeat with standing ground against being pushed around by GOP liberals determined to ram their boy down our collective throats. McCain is a poor choice at best. He’s going down in flames in the general election, much to the glee of the Media, DNC, and many a liberal republican. Party on. I’ll help shovel the ashes from the post crash fire.
"So why are you working so hard, so viscerlly, so nasty, to turn votes against McCain?"
I believe I have read most articles posted about McCain. There are some, like you, who post thought out reasonable responses. The there are those who post comments that I believe can be described as that above. I wasn't posting that comment to you but to those who it applied to. If you don't feel it describes you, than it probably doesn't.
The extension to that was people who posted to me saying the pro-vote-McCain crowd was just as nasty. I agree, some were. But I wasn't addressing them at the time. I never said the pro-vote-McCain were angels nor did I deny that there were nasty comments coming from them.
"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."
I stand by this comment, at the time I did not understand the rationale coming from that group. Now I think I have a better grasp on it. I don't feel any better about it but at least I can put it into a framework.
Regarding the "plant" comment, I think it is possible there are people here pushing an anti-GOP agenda (nothing illegal about that but one does have toput those comments into context), but at this point I would expand that to 3rd Party crowd. I don't think it has anything to do with reg dates, some of these people could have been for a long time.
Once again, nothing illegal or immoral about that but pushing an agenda is different than honestly debating an issue, particularly when one talks about principles.
You’re post shows you responding to my #706 but all the references are from my original post. Was this intended?
Is this the question you want me to answer?
“What could a candidate possibly do, that would disqualifiy them as a person you could vote for, just to keep Hillary or Obama out of office?”
I’m, sorry R, this is a “when did you quit beating your wife” question. To me, political philosophy and political reality are two different things. Philosophically we have opinions and standpoints that define us as a citizen and voter. We work and strive hard to get the person that most reflects our own philosophies into positions of power so those philosophies can be put into action.
The political reality is we live in a country of 300 million, each with his or her one set of philosophies. People that think EXACTLY as you or I do might only make up 2-3% of the population. But 2-3% of the vote is never going to get anyone elected. So we join up with others who have some of the same beliefs as we do and pool our votes, so to speak, to elect someone who generally holds enough of the same philosophies of the group as a whole in the hope that we can get a majority to elect them and when they get into power we can get some of things we believe in a reality.
The entire time you got the other 50% who generally disagree with your positions working against you in the hopes that they can get their candidate elected.
But no matter what, you’re not going to get 100% of what you want, the system doesn’t work that way. If you get 80% you’re hitting bullseyes but I would say if you’re getting 50% that makes the overall effort worthwhile.
I have no illusions about politics. National parties have less to do with precisely defined philosophies than about getting their people elected and that has a lot to do with money. The party in power gets the salaries and budgets. I have seen too many people who I thought could make a difference get ground up and spit out by the system.
This is my opinion of most politicians...they’re either a whore going in or a whore going out. Nobody is clean and everyone is compromised to one degree or another.
If you’re lucky enough that “you’re candidate” wins the primary, good going and congrats. But if he doesn’t you’ve got to suck it up and do the best you can with what you got. I wasn’t a GB man and actually I was horrified when he got the nomination...but I wasn’t surprised, he was the lowest common denominator and in a democratic society it is usually the lowest common denominator that can pull in enough support from everyone to hit that 50%+1.
I won’t even go into how much Bush has disappointed me, but I would still vote for him over Kerry because I know I’ll get some of what I want. The bonus withBush is we got Alito and Roberts and the long term value of that cannot be estimated.
So to answer you’re question, I would vote for any candidate that would give me more of what I want than O or H, has a chance at winning and it doesn’t matter what party theyare affiliated with.
Call me a principled conservative but a pragmatic voter.
You have you’re reasons to vote or not vote as do I. You took umbrage at some of my comments and I understand (although I wasn’t directing them at you, I didn’t make that clear) and will have to be more selective regarding my language in the future. But I take a little umbrage at the implication that those of us who have decided to vote for McCain because we’ll get some of what we desire and to keep the dems out of the White House, have abandoned our principles, our philosophies and our honor.
I understand completely when you say you have to vote your conscious, you’re heart. Don’t criticize others for believing they are also voting with a little reality in mind.
I did revert to the paragraph you posted that you said you stood by. I thought it best to address that in order to express my thoughts on where I am at with regard to McCain. By responding to that paragraph I thought I was able to explain in fairly good detainly what I’m coming from.
As for your comments about us only getting 70% and having to realize that’s reality, I do take exception to that. Let me respond to you in the next day or so. I’ll do it here and take a pass on pinging anyone. I’d rather you and I discuss this without other chiming in to take sides.
You have a great evening Bob.
D1
After I got to know the candidates better and a few dropped out, one was too strident, one sided with Code Pink, etc., etc., I narrowed it down to Thompson first and Romney second. As time went by, I actually thought Romney was going to be the nominee, and I was ready to vote for him.
Now it looks like McCain has it sewn up. I must admit that the last time I wrote a reply concerning McCain, I rated him lower than a dog turd. That was before Romney suspended his campaign. A few weeks prior, I wrote in a reply that I would not stay home, that I would go to the polls and vote, and that I would not waste my ballot with a protest vote.
Of all the different political parties out there, the ones that actually have a chance to elect a U.S. President, the Republican Party is the most close to my personal beliefs. The basic Republican ideals are family, God and country, however, not every Republican candidate holds, or for that matter, lives those beliefs.
I personally have my doubts about McCain, mainly that he won't have to give his Inaugural speech from a stretcher. But, if he is the nominee, I will vote for him. I will not stay home and let the socialists/communists/marxists win. I will not cast a protest vote that helps the socialist/communists/marxists win. I will not do it. I will vote, and I will vote for McCain.
Even if it doesnt work out that way and Obamas as much of a disaster as I expect him to be, Id rather see a Democratic disaster for four years, and Id rather see the rest of the GOP learn the lesson to never nominate this kind of moron again.
Ill admit its a gamble, and I might be wrong. I wont be spending any time insulting those who decide to support McCain, but I will defend my position from attacks. If McCain supporters want to keep up their tactics of insulting conservatives who arent on board Im more than happy to reciprocate.
These are my feelings too & many of us here at FR who will not give in to the republican party & vote for whomever the MSM decide should be our candidate.
I'm tired of the liberal media deciding for us!
I will vote for the congressional candidates next November & hope to put some more republicans back in office, but will not vote for President! This is simply a choice between all libs, there is no conservative running!
Why, have Obama and Her Heinous done that, yet? How will THEY be on amnesty for illegal immigrants?
Here here.
I will do the same.
Not eight years, well OK 7+, years of difficult. The Bush Administration has fought the war on the cheap. A lot of the blame for that goes to Rumsfeld of course, but ultimately the President is supposed to be the leader.
But there other hundreds of thousands who never got a chance to cast an effective vote against him. Such the voters in Texas and Ohio, among others. This was due, in part, to the order of the primaries, which had mostly liberal or less conservative states up front. This eliminated many of the Conservative candidates as they lost momentum, and funding. That and the MSM, and many here as well, tendency to treat elections as horse races.
You expect the leader of the Gang of 14 to appoint strict constructionist judges and justices, when he can't even understand "Congress shall make no law"?
Not in the mold of McCain. More like GWB or even GHWB.
It is not a matter of cost but manpower. We do not have the size of the ground forces we used to. When you retire divisions they are not reconsituted overnight. W’s father had reduced the size of the Army from 21 to 15 divisions after the fall of the Soviet Union. Bubba went further and cut it to 11. They are rebuilding them but without a draft it takes more time to man, train and reconstitute these forces again.
Any chance that Hillary or Obama will?
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.