Did McCain Choose Palin to Forestall NRA Endorsement of Barr?

Nolan Chart ^ | 8/30/08 | Darren Wolfe

[OCCASparky]

Sorry, but a vote for Barr is as good as a vote for Obama in this election. Palin was a good choice for McCain on many levels. Balance, indeed.

[M203M4]

Palin should eliminate any chance that Barr (or Baldwin) will act as a spoiler in November. Many "moderate" Republicans may not want to admit it, but McCain had a serious problem with the conservative wing of the party - a very real risk that some would vote spitefully. Even a small fraction of the conservative wing doing this could throw the election.

I know Palin is THE deciding factor for me. McCain may be a horrid POTUS, but setting up a conservative for 2012 alone is worth the price of the clothespin. If this ticket succeeds, (1) an Obama presidency is thwarted, and (2) Giuliani and Huckabee's hopes for 2012 are all but dashed. I do not have high hopes for the next 4 years no matter who wins...honestly, not even with Palin as veep. Sorry, I do not trust McCain given his recent history, and ultimately it is the POTUS (not the veep) who leads the march. The future beyond 4 years is what motivates me.

[MCF]

McCain was invited to speak at the NRA convention. I didn’t see Bob Barr there.

[big'ol_freeper]

Barr is an embarrassment. His run is all about ego and adds nothing to the political process, and could cause nObama’s election. I consider his third party farce akin to treason if that happens.

He would have much more positive impact as an advocate of conservative values after nObama is defeated, vocally arguing against the administration when McCain wanders off the path.

[InABunkerUnderSF]

He was a speaker at the convention this year but I don’t recall he mentioned anything about gun owner’s rights at all. I read the transcript and I can’t remember him even using the words “National Rifle Association” or “NRA”. As I recall the entire speech was about the surge.

If I also recall John McCain’s NRA rating in his last election was “C+”, maybe a little better than average. If you go back to the 2000 campaign he said some pretty negative things about the NRA and their influence in the Republican party but this was in his “bitter” phase and the NRA may have already endorsed Bush.

All that said, the NRA is not run by kooks or idiots. Endorsing Barr would alienate both of the candidates who have a chance to win. C+ or not, they were going to endorse McCain.

[DiogenesLaertius]

I think you’re halfway to the mark. It’s not simply about the NRA’s endorsement about Barr but the fact that Barr represents a protest vote for conservatives disgruntled at McCain on a gamut of issues.

Now McCain solidified his conservative credentials on a broad series of issues.

This definitely minimizes Bob Barr’s impact in the general.

[MIchaelTArchangel]

Perhaps, but isn't she the antithesis of Obummer's atheistic statement made in San Fagcisco: "And it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

Palin is not bitter. She exercises her Second Amendment rights. She believes in God and practices her religion. She is cheerful and has no antipathy toward those who are unlike her (so long as they are not breaking the law.) She is not anti-trade as long as it is free trade regulated by free markets not by government bureaucrats. And she is definitely not frustrated even though many people would have been by all but being kicked out of the Republican Party in Alaska for fighting corruption inside the party as well as outside. By doing so she saved the/her party.

Don't be fooled. McCain's choice of Palin is aimed at Obummer and Joe "the Lush" Biden.

[Terpfen]

Count me in that group smarting from the McCain stunts.

Still, I’m not interested in shooting myself in the foot just to say “I told you so.”

[Still Thinking]

But then maybe I am wrong in my impression the ACLU does not consider the right to bear arms a civil liberty?

No, they don't. After the Heller decision, for example, they put a very plain, pointed statement on the front page of their website saying they still held the collective rights interpretation and believed Heller was wrong.

[ccmay]

Any thoughts?

Indeed. You're out of your gourd.

-ccm

[yazoo]

Even a McCain, soft on gun rights is better than an Obama who will do everything to diminish gun rights. It’s not that Palin is pro-gun, it is that she is a true and unapologetic conservative. You can’t be a true conservative if you aren’t solid on gun rights.

[ExSoldier]

I'll say this: THE choice of Palin was absolutely the deciding factor for me and my wife in this election. Had he chosen Ridge, Lieberman or another RINO like Crist (my own governor) ... we'd have trembled and voted for Barr with full knowledge that it might be giving the election to Obama. But that knowledge was worth the risk in knowing we had to teach the Republicans that they can't abandon their "originating" (as the Democratic Pary abandoned their origins of farmers and ranchers in favor of whacked out extremists and minorities) base in favor of creating some kind of neocon base.

[RatsDawg]

I hate to admit it, but I was going to vote for Barr untill Friday.

I didn’t really care for Barr himself, but his running mate Wayne Root was someone I was really pulling for.

Even though I still like Waynes message, Palin is the new direction this country needs.

[purpleraine]

No, too small of a problem.

[Oztrich Boy]

Bob Barr Who?

Isn't he that old guy who hosts “The Price is Right”

[1curiousmind]

“Indeed. You’re out of your gourd.”

___________________

Well, apparently not. Check the other comments and you’ll see that there are some FReepers for whom the addition of Palin was the deciding factor to vote for McCain and not Barr. So IMHO, that indicates there are others like them...all good news for his chances in November.

I don’t think that she was chosen for that reason...but it was one of those “icing on the cake” kind of things.

[o_zarkman44]

I support what you said about voting for Barr. I too was considering strongly that option. The addition of Palin did solidify my position to vote for McCain over Barr. Had McCain chosen a Lieberman, or even a Huckabee, I would have had no remorse in rejecting the GOP and voting for Barr.

As I stated earlier in this thread, that the only way we can institute change in America is to start with the removal of the 9% club that makes up congress. Then replacing those do nothing politicians with true Libertarians who believe in the empowerment of people instead of government. Real change can not or will not come from the POTUS unless they are on notice that they can be outed just as easily as they are voted in.

Listening to the people who say that voting your conscience elects the worst of candidates makes me sick. We are supposed to be electing leaders, not political parties. Play to the party line gets more of the same. I have never been ashamed of anyone I have voted for in the past because the decision was mine to make. Using scare tactics and intimidation to coerce voting a particular way comes from the communist play book. Last time I looked, we still have freedom to choose our vote carefully. In the end, we get what we get. Some will be pleased. Some will be pissed. And many more don’t care because they have been brainwashed into believing their vote don’t matter.

If your vote don’t matter, why would people attack your decision to vote for a President who polls at 5%? Sounds like our vote DOES make a difference after all!

[supercat]

As opposed to Obama? It's like we've been trying to shoot ourselves in the foot this election cycle. It took Palin to get some of these people to commit to voting against Obama? Jeez.

Many conservatives would like to fire as powerful a shot as possible across the bow of McCain and the GOP without sinking them. If conservatives can get fired up about trying to boost Barr's numbers in states like Illinois or Alaska where their vote can't possibly tip the presidential race(*) and will thus make sure they get to the polls and VOTE for the other offices, that would seem better than having them apathetically maybe vote for McCain or maybe not bother (thus not voting for other offices either).

(*)If McCain would be within a vote of winning Illinois or losing Alaska, the election elsewhere is going to be sufficiently lopsided that Illinois' and Alaska's votes aren't going to matter.