Skip to comments.MAC A FLASHBACK TO GOP'S 1996 DOLE-DRUMS
Posted on 04/04/2008 1:17:17 PM PDT by The_Republican
WASHINGTON - A great old war hero - arms man gled by battle and known as an acerbic straight shooter - is picked by Republicans to be their nominee to make darned certain that a Clinton doesn't get back into the White House.
No, Bob Dole in 1996.
And it didn't work out very well for Republicans.
Dole lost after a campaign vexed by senior moments such as when the nominee fell off a stage, or when he referred to the Los Angeles Dodgers as the Brooklyn Dodgers.
All along, President Bill Clinton showed extreme deference to Dole, heralded his "long service" to the country and talked about what a war hero he was.
That's exactly how Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama begin every reference to McCain these days.
"The guy's a war hero," Obama likes to say, heralding McCain's captivity. When he goes on to talk about the "fierce urgency of now," Obama leaves McCain coughing in the dust.
With McCain, who turns 72 later this year, all we get is the "fierce urgency of yesteryear."
Even before settling on their own nominee, Democrats have begun ridiculing the Republican challenger as a kooky old man.
A recent Democratic campaign video shows McCain during a press conference in Iraq veering wildly off-message, only to be publicly corrected by his friend and colleague, Sen. Joe Lieberman.
Only five years older than Lieberman, McCain looks rattled and confused by comparison.
To mark McCain's appearance on David Letterman this week, Democrats drew up a Top 10 list of reasons to vote for John McCain.
No. 7 was "Early bird specials at the White House cafeteria."
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Dole lost because some doofus wrote him a convention speech that said “I want to build a bridge to the past...”
Okay, that’s only part of it. But I don’t think the age factor will play the same for McCain as it did for Dole.
Not sure ~why~ I think that, but I do.
Anyone with a modicum of objectivity who did not snore through the debates could see that John McCain did not seem to be all there.
That coupled with his horrendous record on almost all things conservative and his temper towards anyone willing to correct him on his wrong positions on the issues makes him unfit in my book to be CIC.
Never forget, either, that Clinton never received 50% of the popular vote in either election, yet won anyway.
I’m trepidatious that this will happen again, given the conservatives’ dislike of McCain.
We can only hope that under a Demo president people will wake up and come to their senses. Then maybe Repubs will take back Congress, this time by even larger margins.
One difference between ‘96 and ‘08 though is that Bill Clinton is not an incumbent. Hillary is no Bill, and Obama has some weaknesses Bill did not have. Still I think the Dems have the edge in this election. Reading this piece makes me think that even more.
Bull! The Klintoon campaign savaged Bob Dole at every turn and their media sycophants made sure his fall off that stage was played endlessly. Meanwhile, nary a mention was made of the Klintoons incinerating 84 American citizens, ignoring terrorist attacks in 1993 and 1996, giving missile technology to the Chicoms through Loral and supercomputers by relaxing controls on computer exports including moving jurisdiction to the Commerce Department from the State Department.
... and killing Christians in the Balkans to help the Muslims who were allied with Al-Qaeda.
And so it starts. RINO McPain will be compared to osama obama or the hildebeast, and the voters will be asked “which one will bring you change?”
Similarly, I am not buying that to turn things around the GOP needs to be crushed first, like some people around here suggest.
Bob Dole lost because he had the personality of a turnip.
Both Bush I and Dole lost because of Perot. It’s that simple. Unless another third party conservative-leaning candidate runs again, McCain has a real shot.
Bill Clinton would still be chasing trailer trash in Arkansas if it hadn’t been for Ross Perot, both times.
That said, watch the Obamanators of the MSM turn “feisty, straight-talking maverick war hero John McCain” into “Naasty, stubborn, clueless old coot deranged by commie torturers Bob Dole redux”.
While we're making personal observations, I wonder if anyone else finds Obama's thinness rather striking. There's something odd about his languid temperament and slender build, uncharacteristic of a man nearing fifty (also uncharacteristic of a man whom old photographs reveal to have been chubby in childhood).
Michelle Obama works with a personal trainer and looks athletic. Obama may be athletic also, but I don't think exercise alone could account for his appearance. He says he never smoked heavily and is now a non-smoker. He says he long ago gave up cocaine. How do you account for it?
Fasting during Ramadan.
Another article written by a guy who MUST write regularly, therefore he has to say SOMETHING. He CAN’T say the truth which is that this election will be over the second Barack McGovern accepts the nomination.
The only interest I have in watching the “experts” on TV lately is listening for the most rediculous explanation of why this is a “Democrat” year.
LOL That happens only once a year. :-)
Dole was horrible in the debates; his wife told him not to go for the jugular because she did not want to miss all those social gatherings in DC.
McCain is not afraid to debate the libs and he is quidk witted.
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.