Replies

"Come on DJ, you are politically savvy; it’s unbecoming to see someone with so much knowledge trick himself."

I'm not backing Fred simply because he's from my state (indeed, it was Frist who was talking about making a run, not Fred -- and I would NOT have backed Frist because he was close to incompetent as a Senate leader. He is an excellent surgeon and was great as a backbencher, but not as a leader), I'm backing him because I believe him to have the best leadership skills, ideological suitability and character to run. He's also the only person in many years who was DRAFTED by the people to run. Not by his own egomania, which is the case with virtually every other candidate. That's simply remarkable, and cannot be dismissed.

"Fred hasn’t led Rudy in at least close to a month, we know that. RCP has him about 10 points down on avg (I think)."

We've seen conflicting data all over the place. I still stand on what I said, though.

"Fred has been in DC since WG, but he does not have the portfolio or hands-on that McCain does. Mc has 20 years in the Senate, 4 in the House, and 3 as a congressional Naval liason. Mc also has 22 years as a Naval officer and he commanded the largest squadron. I have been for McCain for a while; there are some around - they just mostly keep quiet."

McCain will also be older than Reagan was when he was first elected, he's had cancer problems, he spent time in a prison camp that compounds his problems, both physical and psychological. Electing a man at that age to the Presidency is taking a serious risk -- Even if he didn't have health problems. My grandfather was the same age as McCain would be in his first year in office (73), and he was an OLD man. I can't imagine having elected him to anything at that age. He has a host of other issues that make him a risk (even if he were 10 or 20 years younger). I do NOT consider him a loyal Republican or loyal Conservative. He's one of the biggest loose cannons in DC, and that's not a good thing (there are positive mavericks and destructive mavericks -- a good maverick is Dr. Coburn, but McCain is a bad maverick). He is a media suck-up, which is also bad. Frankly, when I witnessed what he personally "had no problem with" in the 2000 primaries, that was my final straw with him. He knew amongst legitimate Republican voters, he couldn't win the primary vote, so he had rodents playing games with our primary in MI steal the vote on his behalf, bussing in thousands of Black Detroiters that had no intention of voting Republican in the general. That, sir, was fraud. Dirty fraud. I have zero respect for the man. He needs to retire from public office.

"I’m not for Rudy, Romney would be backup, Fred might be nice but I am having trouble seeing him pull this out."

Fred's the only one now who can pull it out. You always have to watch who the media prefers as a GOP nominee. Their aversion to Fred proves that he is the best of the bunch from that standpoint. They'd love to have Rudy McRomneybee as the nominee, as it would be a cinch to destroy them after their nomination. I know their tricks.

"Fred is not weak on experience but 8 years in the Senate will be nearly the same as Hillary. And you know she will say first lady (not that it mattes). It’s hard for Fred to out-do her in the experience dep’t unless he falls back to promoting he was a political lawyer, and that has downsides."

Fred's been rooting out corruption all his adult life. He brought down a profoundly crooked rodent Governor in my state, played a substantial role in the Watergate situation, and was well on his way in the Chinagate affair (until united rodent Senate opposition stopped him). Hillary is the epitome of corruption with more skeletons in her closet than in the average cemetery. Therein lies the difference. McCain couldn't beat Hillary, he'd be too busy kissing her ass.