Posted on 05/02/2009 7:43:33 AM PDT by rabscuttle385
The campaign between Sen. John McCain and Chris Simcox is likely turn into a fight over who’s the real Republican.
While Simcox has questioned McCain’s conservative credentials, turns out the activist has not exactly been a loyal member of the party from which he is now seeking a nod of approval.
(Excerpt) Read more at azstarnet.com ...
I joined in 1980.
The Democraps went Marxist in the 1930s or earlier. Didn’t you notice?
When describing the McCainiacs, it would be most accurate to state that they are not always off team.
Simcox draws fire, because he wanted border control, an incredible sin according to anyone who could possibly support McCain.
Simcox should draw strength from this. Having the McCain camp endorse you, would be the kiss of death.
What a silly little article. Simcox was registered as an Independent and that is cause for alarm? Ronald Regan was once a registered Democrat and look how his career turned out.
I too smell fear. McCain is beginning to sweat.
Yes the Democrat party went south a lot earlier than 1980, but the post McGovern era was something different than the pre McGovern era.
Look at John Kennedy. He was a supporter of the military and actually cut taxes to spur the economy. Imagine that in the post McGovern era.
I’m not saying Kennedy was the greatest, but I can give him his due, and recognize that today’s leftists bear no connection to him at all.
The real question is will McCain campaign harder, get more personal, and be less respectful of his opponent this time against a fellow republican than he did and was against the guy against whom he took a dive in 2008?
I’m guessing he will. And the contrast will only fuel my suspicion that he was supposed to tank in November.
What do the democrats really have on McCain? Do they know something about Hanoi, courtesy of their fellow democrats in Vietnam, that we don’t?
From what I've seen, Simcox had a differing opinion than McCain on how to control the border.
His opinions on benefits for illegals and amnesty were not much different than McCain's.
Wonderful. Okay, scratch that guy off my list.
I joined in 1980.
The Democraps went Marxist in the 1930s or earlier. Didn’t you notice?
The Dixiecrats moved to the Republican Party in the late 70s and early 80s. Both parties went Progressive in the early 20th Century. Clearly you display a complete ignorance of American politics.
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
Well not complete. I am Learning :)
;-)
The Dixiecrats moved to the Republican Party in the late 70s and early 80s.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My Grandfather, a lifelong Democrat, was selected for the Alabama Delegation that went to the GOP Convention when Richard Nixon was the GOP Candidate, simply because he had changed Parties. He was a very well respected gentleman in Montgomery, Alabama. He didn’t actually attend because of declining health, so the alternate went in his place.
I still contend that in my heart of hearts I’m a Dixiecrat mostly because of Southern Politics. I’d register as a Democrat if I lived in a State where I had to declare when registering to vote. (We don’t in Georgia.) And where I live, most of the local Republicans act like National Democrats . . . stuck on stupid. We even have our own little “mini-Soros” running the local Republican Party from the sideline.
bookmark
Agree. Hayworth or Deakin will probably get my support.
Why didn’t you post most of this stuff before the election? If you knew about Obama’s buddy and family connections you surely knew about his involvement in getting home loans to those who could never pay them off.
What’s up with that? You’re doing a post mortem dissection on something you could have helped save had you spoken up loud enough when people needed to hear it.
Oh boy oh boy. Red Star the communist rag that wipes the Tucson City Council’s red diapered butts every day doesn’t like Simcox. Wowie wow.
I was at the Maricopa Co. Precinct Committee conference last January '08. There we had a straw poll of all of the Republican candidates running in the primaries at that time (McShame, Thompson, Romney, Paul, ect....) which candidate would be the absolute UNACCEPTABLE candidate for president of the whole field?
McShame took #1 in that whole field (of 9 choices).
Three weeks later, he "won" easily with over 75% in the state of AZ.
Either voter fraud happened (which is quite possible...many of the voting sites required and requested "provisional" ballots from those who were already registered Republicans, including those who have repeatedly voted in every election), or the rest of the state (liberal Tucson) tilted the scale.
McShame, is not well liked in Maricopa Co. Hasn't been in a long time. Yet, they held their noses in the last general election, and look where it got them. An Obamination.
Nam Vet
Simcox says the registration history reflects his misgivings about McCain and others in the party.
Simcox’s Simcox says, “This campaign is about Republicans holding a mirror up to themselves and finding out what they’ve become.”
(Fixed the typo in the original article. Everyone needs an editor)
I like this guy!
“Strike One against him right there. Doesn’t AZ have anyone that can run against McCain that is from AZ, is a longtime member of the GOP, and conservative?”
The Arizona RED STAR is a commie propaganda rag trying their best to get the most liberal person possible elected to the Az senate.
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.