| Times Online | 0 | |
| Fox Boston | 0 | |
| Merc. News | 0 | |
| Big Govt | Obama’s Shock Troops: SEIU and Political Intimidation in St. Louis |
0 |
| NYT | 0 |
Audacity of Truth
Whiner-in-Chief:
"[W]hether the grumbling is about Republicans on Fox or bloggers in pajamas, there's a word for what the president and his aides are doing. That word is "whining." And nothing [...] does more damage to Obama's credibility or authority than the sense that a popular president is becoming the whiner-in-chief."
- John Nichols, Nation Magazine - 10/12/09
If it comes down to it …
… and McCain gets the nomination, would you support him?
Two recent polls for South Carolina suggest the momentum is shifting in his direction. First, a Rasumussen poll via NRO’s Corner blog:
The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey shows McCain at 27% and Huckabee at 24%.
That’s a significant change since last Sunday. Just before the New Hampshire vote, Huckabee was leading McCain 28% to 21%. In mid-December, Huckabee and Romney were tied for the lead with 23% of the vote while McCain was well off the pace at 12%.
And then there’s this one, via Fox:
Following his win this week in New Hampshire, Republican presidential hopeful John McCain takes the lead in South Carolina — though Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney are both close behind.
A new FOX News South Carolina Republican presidential primary poll shows McCain is now the front-runner with 25 percent, followed by Iowa caucus winner Huckabee at 18 percent and Romney at 17 percent. The results for all three top candidates are within the survey’s margin of sampling error.
Fred Thompson, who is from the neighboring state of Tennessee, captures the support of 9 percent, while Rudy Giuliani and Ron Paul both receive 5 percent.
Now I know after NH, there is a renewed skepticism out there towards polling and pollsters, but let’s just assume for purposes of discussion that this one is a sign of things to come in SC.
There are a number of issues conservatives feel McCain has betrayed them on, with immigration at the top of the list. Could you see yourself pulling the lever for him in November against Obama or Hillary, or would you stay home?
RSS feed for comments on this post.
45 Responses to “If it comes down to it …”
Comments
Blogads
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of ST's advertisers, nor do their opinions necessarily reflect ST's. Stats
I will stay home. I do not want John McCain leading the
Republican party. If he is the nominee it will mean I’m
not a Republican anymore.
I’d sta6y home. If someone put a gun to my head and said I had to vote, I’d probably tell then to pull the trigger.
In 2000, McCain was Soros funded. I realize that folks make mistakes, but compounding that with his immigration stance I just couldn’t ever support him. I vote Obama or Hillary first, I think. I would realize that a Hillary term in office will probably draw conservatives back to true consertism in the Republican party out of need for survival.
I’ve been supporting McCain througout 2007. I’m stoked he’s doing well now!
Check it out:
“It is worth remembering that the Arizona senator was the front-runner for the nomination when the race began more than a year ago. But his manner and refusal to adhere to the party orthodoxy turned off too many GOP activists.
He began the campaign as the establishment choice because Republicans usually nominate the aspirant considered next in line — and since there was no incumbent president or incumbent or previous vice president, he inherited that slot.
But strong opposition to his candidacy among some of the most conservative elements of the Republican Party, who suspected he really was not one of them, cost him dearly.
By last summer, McCain’s campaign was almost broke, and there was serious talk that he might throw in the towel. Reporters began writing his political obituary.
Nevertheless, his New Hampshire victory has put him back at the top of the pack. Those same folks who rejected him are now on the spot.”
LINK
And that is exactly the attitude that we don’t want or need. This is not some sort of empire that Bush should choose the next in line to suceed him. McCain has stabbed everyone in the back. Not just on immigration, that is only the lastest BS. How about the gang of 14, which the Dems on that deal left McCain holding the bag. How about McCain-Feingold. It went so wrong that Thompson pulled his name from it. Why Because McCain decided to agree with the Dems and restrict our 1st amendment rights to a voice. McCain is due nothing from the Republican Party, and if he is the nominee, I will sit at home and hope and pray there is something left of the United States to start over again with in the next election. – Lorica
Look, I’m not thrilled with the prospect of him being president, but I certainly don’t want to see President Hillary or President Barack.
Do you?
McCain-Feinghold, McCain-Kennedy….
McCain is the main reason we are in this idiotic election cycle and why the rules have gone so south.
So yeah, I’d rather see Hillary in than McCain for the readon I stated above. It would be a tough 4 years, but I think after that it would help bring America back around to a conservative (little “c”) style governemet…small, non-intrusive and fiscally sound.
If they want to invoke the name of Ronald Reagan, this is the only way I see his style of governement happening.
I don’t want to think about that yet (I am a FredHead, so I have to keep the red truck running).
It took a Jimmy Carter for us to appreciate a Ronald Reagan. Is this not the same situation?? Will it take a Hitlery presidency before we get a true conservative in this office?? God I hope not. I can’t stand the idea of Hitlery getting into office, but I will not vote for John McCain. – Lorica
Exactly.
No, it’s not. We didn’t have 150K US troops in a foreign country trying to win a war against Islamofascists.
As we all know, we had just gone through Vietnam several years before, where the Democrat Congress cut off funding for the Vietnam war, effectively ending it and in the process making the US look like cowards, and leaving unfinished business (which hasn’t gotten better).
It is certain that mistake will be repeated if we elect a Democrat who will rubber stamp the Dem Congress’ attempts at cutting off funding via a “slow bleed” strategy, and setting a rigid “timeline” for withdrawal from Iraq. I’m not fond of McCain myself, but my number one issue is Iraq, and ensuring that the mission that over 3000 troops died for there is complete, so their families will know that they didn’t die in vain, and also so the spark of democracy that is lit in Iraq may (hopefully) be an example elsewhere in the region, which would help us directly and indirectly. As long as the Dem majority doesn’t become veto proof, McCain would be able to do what Bush has done in holding them off. Both Hillary and Barack Obama both have said that genocide is not enough of a reason to keep US troops in Iraq, and we know that would happen, on top of everything else.
The US has an obligation to finish what was started in Iraq and fulfill its promises to this country, as well as the Iraqi people. I think McCain would work hard to see that that happened. It goes without saying that neither Hillary or Obama would do the same.
I’m torn on this one.
First, I think Ted’s got a good point. We’d never have had Ronald Reagan if it weren’t for Jimmy Carter. Could the U.S. survive four years of misgovernance by Empty Suit or Hildebeest? And would the American people be brought to their senses by experiencing an unending string of humiliations abroad and by seeing the economy disappearing into the toilet? My gut feelings are yes, and yes.
But then, ST makes an equally good point. The situation isn’t quite the same. The Soviets, for all their evil and power, weren’t fanatical lunatics bent on destroying the West – they wanted it intact. The Islamofascist enemy today could not care less if the entire globe ends up a smoking cinder. I’m not sure if we can afford four years of incompetence in the area of national security, and that is, and will always be, my number one issue.
A tough choice. Right now i’m leaning toward sitting this one out, but that could change.
I don’t believe that McCain would, not for 1 second. For the last 10 years at least, he has been a man of political expediency. You don’t think the Dems wouldn’t come up with some “deal” that John McCain could live with?? Sadly I do. Iraq is a huge issue for me too, but in all honesty the Iraqi army is taking over more and more operations, AQ is on the run so far infact that we are sending Marines from Iraq to chase them in Afghanistan, and Iran has been proven to the world to be an aggressor nation. I have been hoping that if things continue in 2008 as well as they have did in 2007, that Iraq will be a winning issue for the good guys, politically speaking. Even the Dem candidates have given it up as an issue. I have no trust for McCain, and I feel that the man does the exact opposite of what the party conservatives actually want. I am sorry but I will not vote for McCain, and I know all to well what is at stake, I see it everyday. – Lorica
Of course, if Fred’s campaign could catch fire and inspire some dedication outside of the blogosphere, all those points would become moot, wouldn’t they? We can only hope…
Ohhh Also, Rush was talking about someone today who has a book out about if a Dem gets into office, there will be a war with Iran. You will have to listen to the podcast or get his next Limbaugh letter, but the reasoning was sound. It would not shock me at all, if a Dem became President, GOD FORBID, that war with Iran would come to pass. – Lorica
No, I don’t. Not on Iraq. He’s taken a lot of heat on his position from people who have viewed him as a “moderate” yet he’s stuck by it since he made it.
I know, which is why your position baffles me. I respect your position, but I strongly disagree with it.
McCain is not my top pick but Baehr makes a good argument on why you should not only vote for McCain if he wins the primaries but why you would want him to win the primaries – link
is he my favorite candidate? no – but I think he’d make a better President than anyone running for the Dems. and would do great in a lot of areas.
Just saw the Op/ed McCain and Lieberman wrote about the surge in today’s WSJ:
The Surge Worked
sodaboy, thanks for the link.
I’m an undecided voter at this point, but my primary vote won’t matter anyway, as it’ll probably all be decided by the time it gets to NC. I will vote for whoever the Republican nominee is, because every one of them (except Ron Paul, of course) are committed to making sure we don’t cut and run from Iraq. I may not be overly enthusiastic when I pull that lever, but then again, it wouldn’t be the first time.
Lorica, ST’s right on this point. Iraq is the one issue where we’ve been able to count on McCain, no matter what. He was rock-solid about 18 months ago, pre-surge, when a lot of Republicans were losing their spine on Iraq in the run-up to the 2006 voting.
It’s every other issue that bothers me about McCain. There, I think, Lorica’s on solid ground. Taxes, court appointments, the GW nonsense, not to mention his signature contribution to stifling political speech – everywhere else, McCain is the Democrat’s dream GOP president.
Lesser of two evils people.
IF…. IF McCain wins, which is better, McCain in which we as Conservatives still have a voice to try and push in the right direction, or Obama / Hillary where once in, most likely will shut down our voices?
While McCain is not the best choice, he is still better than the alternative.
Have we not learned the lesson of not voting with the senate and house?
What did we learn there? Nothing?
So whats next, we get Democrats control of senate, house and presidency?
Yes, lets by all means not vote.
It is a right, a right that was purchased in blood by our ancestors…are you so willing to throw it away?
Vote – because your life does depend on it.
Well said, ST and sanity.
I’ve actually done alot of public speaking at schools, civic groups, churches, etc. I tell them about my experiences in Iraq and my subsequent recovery from my injuries. No matter who I am talking to I always end the same way.
I tell them that over 3,000 American Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines have given their lives to give the right to vote to complete strangers. Those same strangers risked their lives time after time and braved snipers, car bombers, and suicide bombers, standing in lines for hours, just for the privilege to have a voice in their government.
Never take that right for granted, some people on this planet may never know what it means to vote freely in their entire lives. It’s a powerful tool, let’s use it.
Maybe I have no forgiveness in my heart for McCain, and it is clouding my judgement, but he bought and paid for this attitude. I have no trust of the man. He has betrayed conservatives to many times for me to start trusting him now. I don’t like him politically. God Love the man for his service to this country. I am sorry, but I fear that he would betray our troops in the field if it were politically expediate. If I am wrong, I will apologize, but I won’t trust him again.
I still don’t honestly believe that the war is going to be a problem. I believe that the surge has worked, better than we expected. Granted we should stay on our guard, but the Marines are chasing AQ in Afghanistan, and soon and very soon the Iraq military is going to be able to hold their own against what’s left of the enemy.
Choosing between McCain and Clinton (or Obama) is like being asked, “Which do you prefer – a face-first fall off of a 10-story building or a 110-story building?”
Obviously neither. But the country could possibly survive a McCain presidency. I am not sure the same is true for Clinton or Obama.
My friends, don’t fall prey to the pablum du jour the MSM is attempting to pawn off on you. Mr McCain’s support will prove to be very thin. Reality trumps rhetoric.
I will vote for McCain over Hil/Oba/Edw
But I would be holding my nose. The same as Huck.
My top 3 choices are Romney, Guliani and Fred Thompson with FRED THOMPSON being my FIRST CHOICE
Oh please, stop with the hyperbole. It’s not even that important a position.
Fred’s doing well on the Luntz focus group on Fox. They liked him.
If it isn’t that important Neil, then why would Hitlery waste all of this time and money?? What has the Dems gone thru in the last year going for this un-important position?? 200 million and counting?? – Lorica
Because they are ego-maniacs.
Yeah that’s it
– Lorica
It’s not even that important a position.
Oh please, stop with the jokes (you are kidding, right?)! Anyone who can say that (except in jest, I hope) must not have lived through the Carter debacle. We are still paying for the goofs of the Nut Farmer from Plains. And what exactly was Clinton doing to stop al Qaeda?
The office does matter – and so does the person occupying it.
And yet somehow the nation survived.
If the Republican field does thin a bit with some Conservatives remaining in the race, then a more conservative candidate (Not Huckebee, he is a tax and spent liberal, so he will not get the nomination.) will win over McCain. In the end the Democrats and news media like McCain, but they don’t get to vote and he will lose out again to either Romney or Thompson or both.
You guys are talking about the country surviving this candidate’s or that candidate’s presidency if they were elected.
You are failing to see the country is practically dead on arrival no matter who is elected unless something akin to a Carter catastrophe occurs.
I think the chances of Clinton withdrawing from Iraq abruptly are not that much more than McCain. First, the anti-war nut roots hate her because of that uncertainty. Second as previously mentioned, McCain is a man of political expediency. He was at one time Soros funded after all, who is completely anti-war now. McCain is responsible for the laws that allowed the anti-war activists such politically powerful entities such as moveon.org. to exist legally.
Basically, I trust McCain no more than I trust Clinton.
But back to the survival point: we need to bring the shock paddles out for this country. Nothing short of this will we survive if one of the status quo candidate like McCain are elected. His election will take us merrily down our current path of self destruction. NOTHING would prevent it if he were elected.
The shock paddle needed may well be a Clinton. Like Carter, she will throw this country in economic turmoil because of her knack of over regulation and socialist causes. The ONLY thing the the American people understand is an empty pocket, and these policies will do it. When credit will no longer be available and the pocket has nothing but lint in it, that will be the time when they may well look at a Reagan-esque character for leader.
That is the only chance of survival this great nation has. And while it may well be true that we wouldn’t fulfill our obligation in Iraq, that would be another embarrassment this nation may have to endure….like Viet Nam.
“Have” to endure? WADR, this nation doesn’t “have to” endure anything of the sort. I, for one, am not going to chance Iraq turning into another Vietnam in order to attempt to teach this country any sort of lesson. If this were in peacetime, it’d be different, but it’s not.
Furthermore, the people doing the most “enduring” would be our troops and their families, both of whom have sacrificed so much for a goal that is achieveable if only we are able to set aside our differences with whoever the Republican nominee is in order to make sure what we set out in Iraq to do from the get go has a chance at succeeding. If we don’t, our troops and their families won’t be the only ones “enduring” another Vietnam. The Iraqi people will be enduring it, too – and in a way no innocent person should have to suffer, especially not when the US has promised to stick around until they’re reasonably sure that Iraqi law enforcement will be able to prevent that from happening.
Our troops have sacrificed a lot more than most of us have for this war. I don’t think it’s asking too much to sacrifice our pride and vote for the person who will work hard to make sure that those same troops will have a Commander in Chief who will work to make sure that the goal is achieved in Iraq, then allowing our troops to return home from the mission with honor.
And yet somehow the nation survived.
Democracy is not the natural state of mankind. It is something that can be lost far more easily that most people think. Germany voted the Nazis into power in a free and fair election. And Africa is a continent littered with “one man one vote – one time” failed democracies.
It’s highly probable that whoever the Republican nominee will be it’ll be someone I dislike and distrust. That’s just the way it’s looking now. In any other time, I’d sit the election out and just sulk, and figure that if we get a Democrat it’d just make the conservative position stronger in 4 or 6 years due to the bad governance we’d get, ala Carter.
But, as ST has said, we are in the middle of a larger war against Islamic Fascism, that is just too important to back track and take a 4 year break from. As Patton said, he didn’t believe in falling back and regrouping, didn’t want to pay for the same real estate twice. He was dead on right, and we cannot afford, after the advances we’ve made, after the butt kicking Al Queda has received from us, after the smack down they’re getting in Iraq, to back up and give them a victory and chance to regroup. That will most likely lead to a mushroom cloud over a US city, and that’s a price I will not willingly pay, so I’ll hold my nose and vote for whoever the Republican nominee is, even if it’s McCain, as no Democrat has their head on straight with respect to the war and defense.
Baklava and I are of similar mind on our picks of who we want, and I too would hold my nose and pull the lever for McCain if it came down to it.
We cannot afford a Hillary or Obama runnig this country. Not cause of race or gender, but because their ideas would hard this country.
The last time we tried to show displeasure and ‘teach’ the republicans a lesson, we lost the senate and house. It seems republicans didn’t lear n a lesson in it….and neither did we.
Do you enjoy the democrat control?
Now take a moment and think of what would happen if Democrats controlled all three, Senate, House and Presidency.
Really think on it…what do you think would happen to this country, to the republicans, to radio talk shows…even to bloggers?
Hold your nose if you have to, but Hillary, Obama or Edwards cannot be allowed to win – pull the lever that will not be a vote for them.
Hillary – 1 vote
McCain – 1 vote (someone held thier nose and voted)
Hillary – 1 vote (Hillary ahead)
McCain – 0 vote (decided not to vote)
Easiest way to give the Democrats what they want is not to vote.
For the most part I take people at their word.
McCain has several issues I differ with him on but after listening to him during last night’s debate, I can tell he is more in line with us on those issues than the Democrats by far.
He wanted tax cuts but wanted spending cuts. He was one of the most forceful on spending cuts. Him and Fred Thompson were clear and kept going back to spending cuts.
There’s a few thousand people who died on 9/11 who might disagree with you…….if you could ask them.
Democracy is not the natural state of mankind. It is something that can be lost far more easily that most people think. Germany voted the Nazis into power in a free and fair election. And Africa is a continent littered with “one man one vote – one time” failed democracies.
And here I thought only Ron Paul supporters feared that a fascist coup was around the corner.
There’s a few thousand people who died on 9/11 who might disagree with you…….if you could ask them.
You might want to rethink that statement because it makes absolutely zero sense in this context.
Well, let me see here.
You quoted MD:
Then you said:
And yet somehow the nation survived.
I took that to mean that all of the screwups of the Clinton years had very little bearing on our present situation. Am I right? Perhaps I took it the wrong way, could you clarify?
Then my point was in support of MD’s by stating that 9/11 was the result of the Clinton foreign policy. Meaning that it is, indeed, important. Like it was for those who died on 9/11.
I would not stay home. Even though I don’t want McCain to be the nominee, I will be voting for the down ballot candidates anyway so I am sure I will vote for whoever the GOP nominee is since any of them are better than Hillary or Obama. What I don’t know if I can do though is put forth any excitement or work in any way to support McCain. I really can’t see me campaigning for him. I fear that if Republicans nominate him because they think he is the only one who can win, we will be in trouble because I just don’t see any widespread enthusiasm for him. Think Bob Dole in 1996.
Lorie, I don’t think any of the people who will withhold a vote for McCain will simply “stay home”. I’m leaning toward not voting on that race, but I’ll certainly show up and vote for the best congressional and other candidates.
And from what I’ve seen so far, there won’t be any widespread enthusiasm no matter who the GOP nominates. Fred has some hearts in the blogosphere racing, but not much outside of that…and none of the other candidates bring Reaganesque devotion. Other than the Obamaniacs, no one’s really caught fire yet this year.