Posted on 06/07/2009 7:58:01 PM PDT by rabscuttle385
No often means yes in Washington, but we hear from Sen. John McCain's posse that he is not considering a 2012 rerun of his failed 2008 presidential campaign. (W beat him in the 2000 primary, remember.) Word came this week that he is mulling over another try, but a key insider says, "Ridiculous."
(Excerpt) Read more at usnews.com ...
RINO yes, scumbag no. His time is past, like Dole in 2000.
Mox nix.
But what do you think of Mitt Romney?
(Just kidding, I already know.)
What’s the difference? We’ll all be behind barbed wire and searchlights due to being right wing extremists.
Let him run against Sarah in the 2012 primaries. Watching him try to explain why he’s a better candidate would be priceless. He’d get his usual crowd of 500, and she’d be drawing 20k screaming fans. Good luck, John.
I would rather have Meghan McCain in 2012. If you have to do a Titanic, you might as well have the ship do a double backflip onto the iceberg.
He’s seeking to insure obama’s reelection.
Romney is a good-for-nothing political chameleon. Unfortunately, the libertarians I know aren’t nearly as suspicious of him as I am.
Rabs did fine. Your opinion is right to be humble, as hard as it must be.
lol can you imagine McCain and Huckster doing their little dance again oh crap.
You were too kind. ;-)
to be fair, he did about as well as could be expected once the credit, financial and stock markets all collapsed at the same time.
If you look at the Fair model by that guy at Yale who plugs in the economic data and predicts the election, and who’s pretty much been right with every election of the past 100+ years, what McCain ended up getting was around what the economic data said he’d get.
He has a tool on his site where you can plug in different variables. If the economic data last year(GDP growth rate, inflation, market performance) was the same as it was in 2004 or 2000, McCain would have won, just as Bush did. Converseley if the data in 2004 was the same as it was last year, Kerry would have won, just as Obama did. It was basically the economic collapse that determined the outcome of the election.
In a way it’s a shame that a guy who did what he did for this country, then went through 2000, waited 8 long years to run again, was totally finished throughout most of 2007 and amazingly won the nomination, saw his shot at the WH ended because of an economic collapse that he really had little if anything to do with.
That said, he was never my first choice, and it’s time for someone new.
Is part of his calculation a “stimulus package” that will never, ever be repaid and which will cripple the American economy lonf after I’m worm food?
Well said.
Oh wait. Wrong abuut the national security thing. He promised to close Guantanamo. Now he's not so sure.
First things first. We need a true fiscal conservative majority in Congress in 2010, or this country is toast.
We can at least have the satisfaction of keeping the bitter little man away from the candidacy again.
Well you can rest assured we’ll have to see the Huckster again. Just looking at that guy makes me want to vomit.
His four year plan should be “don’t die” not run for president. Surely he has at least the self awareness to know that if people thought he was too old in ‘08 he definitely will be in ‘12.
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.