It was a huge Drama Queen moment for McCain.
Posted on 11/20/2008 6:44:58 AM PST by Rufus2007
I doubt it, since she never spoke up in favor of it and couldn’t oppose it without undermining the campaign (apparently, McCain staffers had all the shovels).
It was a republican....Chris Cox, head of the SEC.
and then Andrew Cuomo to replace him! hey at least he didn’t name Eliot Spitzer.
Hindsight!? Pfffffttttt... Why don't these policy experts log into FreeRepublic once in a while? How hard would it be for them to actually get a measure of the people's sentiments on such issues regarding VOTERS! Sheeze...
You know, I had to think about it a little, but McCain was worse than Bob Dole.
I don't think that would have been nearly enough to overcome the tsunami of American stupidity this time. Too many people wanted to believe Saint Barack was coming down the chimney with presents for everyone.
So, what this is saying is that McCain doesn’t stand on principle? Or that maybe his was standing on principle? Or that McCain needs other people to tell him what to think? Most likely there wasn’t any principle involved at all; the political tea leaves were just misread.
First presidential election you’ve followed?
It was a huge Drama Queen moment for McCain.
no....if Bush could handle the media and win 2 elections then certainly mccain, who has kissed up to them for years...
He was losing ground rapidly as this trumped up "Oh no! If we don't do something immediately the whole economy will collapse!" theme penetrated the culture. Treading water wasn't good enough, the issue was dragging him under. He needed to do something to make voters see him as decisive in the face of a crisis.
His solution was to cancel his campaigning with great fanfare and then, as you point out, accomplish nothing other than support a bill that Obama also supported and 80% of the country didnt. The issue was dead with voters after that, the two were the same but Obama seemed less silly.
McCain wanted to gamble on a game changing moment but then he didnt change the game! Had he come out and said the bailout was unconstitutional and he refused to support it he would have had an issue to go directly against Obama on, a clear contrast. But, he's McCain. The squishy safe middle is where he lives.
LOL
It comes from what she said during the Hannity interview (I assume everyone can agree that she had a fair chance with hannity). I posted part of it in post #55
What do you think we can attribute the difference to?
CBS 9/17/08 re Palin: “Disapointed that taxpayers are called upon to bailout another one,” she said. “Certainly AIG though with the construction bonds that they’re holding and with the insurance that they are holding very, very impactful to Americans so you know the shot that has been called by the Feds its understandable but very, very disappointing that taxpayers are called upon for another one.”
For the big FM/FM bailout, IMO, she was muzzled by her ‘partner’.
Ditto!
Newt literally had to deal with the starving babies because of welfare reform. And he pulled it off.
But all the real lefties were against the bailout. Even Dennis Kucinich complained about how the government was now picking winners and losers in the private sector.
If the GOP had run a genuine conservative, that candidate would probably have picked a RINO running mate, and Sarah Palin would still be toiling away in obscurity in Alaska.
The GOP may be thankful to McCain for that much.
They’re drinking a drink called “power,” “influence,” and “being invited to all the ‘right’ parties.”
It might have been the spark to set off more than we think. I read that phone calls into the DC switchboard were 90 percent opposed.
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.