Posted on 01/31/2008 6:44:15 AM PST by Brices Crossroads
Just ... months ago, the 2008 presidential contest seemed predetermined. ...Giuliani and Hillary Clinton were far ahead... .... Sen. Clinton was all but declared the foreordained winner a year in advance.
But not now. [snip]
The result of all this has been that while Hillary still polls ahead of the surging Obama in most states, in hypothetical general-election polls she runs behind Republican frontrunner, Sen. John McCain.
End of story?
Hardly. In reaction to McCain’s own surge and the Republican windfall, the conservative base went ballistic. Soon a Republican civil war broke out over how best to lose the election.
Despite McCain’s 82-percent career ranking by the American Conservative Union, and his support for balanced budgets, an end to pork-barrel spending and earmarks, strong support for the war, and expressed regret over once supporting the Bush illegal immigration reform package, McCain was branded by the conservative media as a sellout and a near liberal. Not to mention that he was supposedly too old and hot-tempered to be the Republican nominee. The more McCain was discovered not to be a perfect conservative, the more he was accused of not even being a good one.
Even stranger, the various Republican candidates began invoking Ronald Reagan...
Were conservatives supposed to forget that a maverick Reagan raised some taxes, signed an illegal-alien amnesty bill, expanded government, appointed centrist Supreme Court justices, advocated nuclear disarmament, sold arms to Iran, and pulled out of Lebanon — but to remember only that John McCain was not for the original Bush tax cuts or once supported the administration’s offer of a quasi-amnesty?
[snip]
November’s vote may hinge on whether moderates and liberals are nauseated enough by the Clintons...to ... vote for a decorated Republican war hero — that is, if his own flag-waving party doesn’t destroy him first.
(Excerpt) Read more at article.nationalreview.com ...
Why don’t you list some of Bush’s best conservative achievements? No Child Left Behind, Prescription drug benefits, Immigration, Exploding federal spending, Harriet Miers. No vetoes for his first SIX YEARS of even the most wasteful government programs. On spending, Bush is way to the left of McCain. His measly temporary tax cut, which cut the marginal rate from 39.6 to 35%. Bush’s daddy raised the top marginal rate from 28% to 31%, which caused him to lose to Clinton, who raised it to 39.6%. McCain voted AGAINST both the Bush TAX INCREASE and the Clinton TAX INCREASE. If McCain’s votes had carried the day, the top marginal rate would be 28% now, not 35%. The Bushes are responsible, whether directly or indirectly, for both the 1990 and the 1993 tax increases (which McCain voted against). Bush 43 merely returned 4.6% of the tax cut (to 28%) Reagan gave us in 1986 (which McCain also voted for). We still don’t have the other 7%. If Bush had controlled spending, we might have the whole thing back.
I try to avoid calling anybody pond scum and cretin, especially someone who wore the uniform and did so honorably. It does not make them pond scum but it says a lot about you.
“I think I speak for many conservatives in this view,”
You speak for relatively few. I was for Reagan in 1976, worked hard for him both in the primaries and the general election in 1980) And you do not speak for me. Or Phil Gramm. Or Tom Coburn. Or Sam Brownback. Or Richard Allen. All notorious libs. The talking heads, and their followers are loud and hysterical but at the end of the day, they will represent about the same number of votes as Pat Buchanan got in 2000.
“I try to avoid calling anybody pond scum and cretin, especially someone who wore the uniform and did so honorably. It does not make them pond scum but it says a lot about you.”
Too bad your candidate cannot refrain from referring to conservatives in an even worse manner.
McCain is the one destroying our party. He is Bush on steroids. All those mad at our President and now back McCain
are hypocrits.
I am quite sure I speak for very many conservatives who are not convinced by Mr. “Straight talk”, and this has nothing to do with “talking heads and their followers” as your McCain campaign talking points apparently suggest. This has to do with legitimate objections of informed GOP voters, and your condescension in referring to his substantive opponents as such is quite representative of why your candidate is generating such fervent opposition from so many conservatives.
Yes, there are some solid conservatives who I respect that disagree and will support Sen. McCain despite having reservations, and I didn’t claim to speak for ALL conservatives. Unlike the Senator and his supporters, I actually respect opposing viewpoints even if I don’t agree. That being said, I’m quite certain there are also SUBSTANTIAL numbers of conservatives who feel as I do, FAR more than Buchanan got in 2000, and more than enough to make the difference in November.
Keep in mind, your candidate is where he is through a fluke of circumstances and weak opponents. He has not won a majority of actual REPUBLICAN voters in any primary, and about 2/3 of Republicans have voted AGAINST him. If you think that we are such a tiny minority and won’t make a difference in the General Election, then feel free to continue to follow Sen. McCain’s same strategy of diversion, condescension, and misrepresentation.
“involved in some capacity with the McCain campaign”
Now thats a hoot... So like I said before.. Reagan made mistakes but had conviction, McCain made mistakes but has Conviction. Bush made mistakes but has conviction.. Romney panders like the good NorthEast liberal that he is... He contorts his positions the same as Hillary and yet he is getting a pass.. Why because he, Romney, went on the Conservative Talk Radio circuit and McCain did not...
“Keep in mind, your candidate is where he is through a fluke of circumstances and weak opponents.”
My original candidate was Fred Thompson. I am not using McCain’s talking points because I do not work for him any more than I worked for Thompson. That said, It is a multiple candidate field and you are quite incorrect to assume that all of Mike Huckabee’s votes would go to Romney. I know many evangelicals and conservative Catholics and their second choice after Thompson was not Huckabee but McCain. And many more whose second choice after Huckabee was not Romney but McCain. You may not believe this but after Super Tuesday, you will see that McCain will have outright majorities or heavy pluralities in a number of Red States, especially in the South.
“This has to do with legitimate objections of informed GOP voters, and your condescension in referring to his substantive opponents as such is quite representative of why your candidate is generating such fervent opposition from so many conservatives.”
I have not called anyone or any candidate a name, although many here insist on calling McCain “traitor”, “McCain”, “McInsane”, “McVane”, “McQueeg” and a couple dozen other pejoratives. I have not condescended. I merely point out that in the South (which is the heart of the Republican base), I detect no great outcry against McCain, but no little amount of disgust at the shrill comments of the Coulters who say they prefer Hillary and those who, using vulgar nicknames, spit on McCain, in spite of his service.
Disagreements can be civil.
You know. I used to listen to Mark Levin before this and regarded his support for Fred Thompson, federalism and the Constitution to be eloquent. What I cannot understand is why he praises many of his callers who have sons serving in Iraq, but glosses over McCain’s military record and the fact that he has children and grandchildren over there, and calls McCain “McLame” and worse. I understand that people have some disagreements with McCain. Fine. I even understand, although I think it is foolish, that some conservatives will not vote for him, in spite of his prolife, promilitary, anti tax increase, deficit hawk positions. Fine. What I object to is the “over the top “ name-calling. Show some respect for your fellow conservatives who have made a prudential judgment that it is in the best interests of the United States to elect John McCain President rather than Hillary. Because that is what it is gonna come down to.
I point out in my previous post that I think at the end of the day most conservatives, the vast majority, will look at McCain and Hillary/Obama and will not want to consign our troops to a Commander in Chief Hillary or a Commander in Chief Obama. They will not want to surrender our health care system to them either. They will not want three freshly minted liberals on the Supreme Court. Some conservatives will not mind having these things as much as they mind McCain. But most will choose McCain.
Fair enough; And yes, I do agree that Huckabee’s supporters would not go to Romney, largely due to his religion; However that does not change my point about the Senator being extremely fortunate to have weak opponents and a split field.
I also agree that we need to have more civil discourse and recognize some of the excessive vitriol against the Senator; However, I also think that it should be kept in mind that it has been Senator McCain who has shown tremendous disrespect and condescension towards conservatives over the last 8 years, so it should not come as a surprise that many have such a visceral dislike for him. In many ways, he is simply reaping what he has sowed.
Finally, I certainly appreciate and agree that McCain would be far better on foreign policy, health care, and judicial appointments then a Democrat would. However, all of those must be balanced against the damage he likely will do to conservativism, the GOP, and the country in the long run. As such, I think there will be a significant split in November, and he will not get the “vast majority” of conservatives to support him. Much depends on the next few months, but in my view at this point given his record the presumption should be AGAINST him, not for him.
I’ll agree to disagree on some of your other points, but I think you are far underestimating conservative discontent with the Senator. Given his record, if he wants to have any chance of garnering support from the base it is HIS burden to make amends, and demonstrate he is sincere in his desire to do so. He certainly hasn’t done so yet, and I simply doubt he has it in him since it appears to me that his vindictiveness appears to outweigh his capacity to conciliate.
I think CPAC will be a very telling and seminal point in seeing which way the wind will blow in November. If he were sincere about trying to unite the party, at MINIMUM he would start to make amends by promising that he would focus SOLELY on border enforcement and not sign ANY legalization bill for illegals during his first 4 years in office if elected, since that is the one issue where conservatives are united and he can demonstrate he has truly “heard” us...
I think your post is thoughtful. If I have a disagreement with it, it is over the degree of the disaffection. Highly engaged conservatives who do not view right to life as the seminal issue may have more of a problem with McCain than the pure social con right to lifers. I honestly have not noticed this animosity among the many evangelicals and conservative Catholics I know. That said, I agree that McCain should reach out to the conservatives, perhaps reinforcing with a pledge that he would build the border fence before confronting what to do about the illegals still here. There is a lot of time until the convention. And, honestly, aside from the half dozen issues regularly mentioned here, McCain’s total record over the course of a nearly 30 year career is quite conservative. He needs to explain and tout that record.
But Hillary and Obama (probably Hillary) will unite the GOP by her mere presence, particularly because most Freepers and most conservatives are unwilling to consign our troops to a Commander in Chief Hillary. In light of their stalwart service in defense of our nation, that would represent a monumental injustice and ingratitude to them, and I firmly believe most conservatives, even those with white hot hatred of McCain, would put that aside in order not to jeopardize our brave soldiers, especially in time of war.
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.