Republican McCain Thanks Evangelicals for Support

Bloomberg | 2/3/08

[Mr. Brightside]

Republican McCain Thanks Evangelicals for Support

[not2worry]

I love the Spam and I’d like to see McCain as Toast!

[bronxboy]

Nothing would be worse than MCain as president. Also, I a insulted that Repubs think hatred of the Clintons will force conservatives to vote for McCain. I will not.

[angkor]

But you WILL vote for the “conservative” who despises conservatives and who can barely distinguish the truth from a lie (and that’s only if he senses he might be caught).

Do you know that in South Caroline McCrazy was back to promoting Amnesty for 30 million illegal alien peasants AGAIN!

He won’t speak of it in big public forums like the debates, but it was briefly reported that he was doing exactly that in his smaller South Carolina events. He has no shame whatsoever about “comprehensive immgration reform” and Z Visas. He thinks WE are the problem.

[Popman]

McCain, 71, has had strained relations with the religious wing of his party since he criticized evangelists Pat Robertson and the late Jerry Falwell during the 2000 presidential campaign.

CNN Transcript of his attack on evangelicals

Quote John McCain: "Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance, whether they be Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton on the left, or Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell on the right".

[angkor]

>>>>>chill. You are not going to change my mind.

Fair enough. Personally, Romney is my last and final hope. It’s either him, or sign on with the Ann Coulter brigade and vote for Hitlery. I will NEVER assent by my vote to allow McCrazy to steal the Conservative mantle that he’s been peeing on for the last decade.

[hsmomx3]

I think these people have their blinders on and many are one issue types.

[Popman]

McCain flip flops

Amazing, he remembers he needs the religious right to win.

[WayneM]

I would rather Hillary or Obama be president than McCain.

This is from someone who voted for no one other than Republicans since first voting for Richard Nixon.

There will be NO DIFFERENCE between a Democrat presidency and McCain presidency, other than the fact it will be blamed on the Democrats rather than “conservatives”.

I’m sick to the pit of my stomach.

I will go to the polls on that Tuesday and vote straight Republican, but will leave my presidential vote uncast.

I swear on all that is sacred to me - I will not vote for a democrat, but I will not vote for McCain.

[Mogollon]

McCain is for embryonic stem cell research even though he has back-pedaled on that lately. If it’s legalized then abortion-on-demand will never be over-turned. Seems the evangelical’s for Huck & McCain don’t understand that.

[JaneNC]

No, he does not support gay marriage.

It was McCain who voted against the marriage amendment.

Romney supports MARRIAGE ...McCain does not.

[RetiredArmy]

I will not vote for any of that bunch of pukes. I am through holding my nose. Tired of holding my nose and turning my head. I’m done with it. Finished. If they are not conservative, they do not get my vote, period.

[SpringheelJack]

versus the record of a self-made Conservative businessman who has challenged Fat Boy Kennedy for his own Senate seat (and nearly took it), and has also survived Massachusetts politics for 20 years.

1994 Race for U.S. Senate, Massachusetts

* Edward Kennedy (D) (incumbent), 58%

* Mitt Romney (R), 41%

Near is relative, I guess. Romney's only political experience is one four-year term as Governor.

[JaneNC]

McCain doesn’t need to thank evangelicals...oh wait, maybe he does...the voted for his stalking horse Huck

[angkor]

Whoops. See, you went out to find a “gotcha”, and you came up looking foolish.

Your numbers are from the final vote, not from the six preceding months.

Before the debates, Romney and Kennedy were running neck and neck for months.

It was only after the debates that Kennedy pulled ahead.

PS - I was there, I voted for Romney in 1994, I saw the debates, I read the Globe and Herald every day, and I know the numbers.

[ridge]

oh, stop whinning. McMush is one of the biggest liberals in the Senate. I appreciate the truth.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

McCain is an operational security risk for the military...

Spam shmam...

[ridge]

—snip—
Romney: “I am not in favor of returning to the days of Reagan. I was an independent during the Reagan Bush years.”
—snip—

McMush ran away from Reagan and the conservative movement. Pick a piece of legislation. And you should love that quote. He is talking about spending. The worst you can say about Romney is that he flip to the conservative movement with a record to prove. Not McMush, the sleazy, slimy, sellout. He flip to get his NYTimes endorsement.

[SpringheelJack]

Whoops. See, you went out to find a “gotcha”, and you came up looking foolish. Your numbers are from the final vote, not from the six preceding months.

Of course. You don't get to say that Carter nearly whupped Reagan because he led him in the polls for a spot during the campaign.

[angkor]

>>>>You don’t get to say that Carter nearly whupped Reagan because he led him in the polls for a spot during the campaign.

Your cheap and false introduction of “for a spot” won’t save you.

They ran neck and neck *continuously* prior to the debate. Not for “a spot”. Polls often showed Romney to be *ahead* of Kennedy by several points. And Democrats were concerned for months that Kennedy was going to lose to Romney. This was all duly reported in the Globe, the Herald, and on TV.

That you introduced a false modifier (”for a spot”) as if it were part of your original argument shows that you are intellectually dishonest, preferring that to admitting that you were and are wrong.

[Recovering_Democrat]

You are wrong.

Mitt led the fight against the Massachusetts Supreme Court’s ruling codifying gay marriage.