Fox News calls it for McCain; Update: NBC, CNN too
posted at 8:13 pm on January 8, 2008 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Disaster for Mitt!
Update: NBC’s calling it too. Who could have guessed the GOP race tonight would be over before the Democratic?
Update: And now CNN’s calling it.
Update: McCain vs. Huck vs. Romney’s last stand in Michigan. What’s the best outcome?
Update: At least the nightmare scenario is averted. Showdown in Michigan!
Update (bp): Michael Barone was just on Fox and said that it’s possible that Hillary’s lead will hold and she would win. That seems unlikely, but it would be good news for the Republicans if she hangs on. The Democrat race would keep going. The Clintonistas would keep getting uglier. The downside is we’d get another “Comeback Kid” meme started. Ugh.
A Hillary win also keeps Giuliani viable, for the Rudy fans out there. He needs Hillary as a foil and would run poorly against Obama imho.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « 1 2 [3]
LOL, I just saw the pic of the rest.
Question: Will Fred Thompson break 1,000 votes? Only 53 to go.
BKennedy on January 8, 2008 at 9:30 PM
We know that you are a Huckabee campaign implant. Just go away.
Mcguyver on January 8, 2008 at 9:31 PM
What will the delegate count be after tonight?
PowWow on January 8, 2008 at 9:31 PM
I just spit my soda out and fell off my chair! lol those are great!
broker1 on January 8, 2008 at 9:33 PM
I’ve been out…
McCain & Clinton? Are you kidding me?
Ugly on January 8, 2008 at 9:35 PM
Haha, I owe you a keyboard… and a trip to the chiropractor… but if you want to hear the audio of those (and yes, they’re real!) and more, there’s this site:
http://www.dubyaspeak.com/audio.phtml
I’m obviously not some far lefty Bush hater, but as Larry the Cable guy always says “I don’t care who y’are that’s funny right there.”
RightWinged on January 8, 2008 at 9:36 PM
I know I’ll get laughs for this from the Fredheads, but go to Hugh Hewitt’s site. He has a good chart for delegates and total voter support.
davenp35 on January 8, 2008 at 9:36 PM
My guy is not Romney, but no way is Romney finished. Frankly, I’m beginning to think that the Internet is cheapening the process, the voters, and ultimately, America itself.
Connie on January 8, 2008 at 9:36 PM
Does it boil down to these two for us?
McCain, a liberal running as a conservative.
or
Huckabee, a liberal running as a liberal.
HarryBalzac on January 8, 2008 at 9:37 PM
Not if people would start supporting Mitt who were with Fred and Rudy.
davenp35 on January 8, 2008 at 9:38 PM
Disaster for Mitt? How, exactly?
This looks an awful lot like 2000. Back then McCain came in 5th in Iowa, but won in New Hampshire and Michigan (and his home state of Arizona). But three days before Michigan, he got beaten handily in South Carolina, and went on to lose Virginia, Washington, and California badly.
Basically, McCain looks now like he looked back then, in terms of election results (except that he finished ten points lower tonight than he did in 2000). It certainly wasn’t “disaster” for Bush then and it’s sure as heck not disaster for Romney now.
Romney has the delegate lead, too. McCain didn’t even bother to show up in Wyoming.
Jimmie on January 8, 2008 at 9:40 PM
McCain & Clinton? Are you kidding me?Early primaries reward the folks who spend a ton of time there.
Jimmie on January 8, 2008 at 9:41 PM
Thanks. That is what it’s about. I just heard Kristol on Fox spinning about second place finishes. And the delegate count popped in my head.
PowWow on January 8, 2008 at 9:42 PM
I thought McCain’s speech was great!
Now, if we can just keep him away from Teddy Kennedy, he would be a great wartime president, no?
PattyJ on January 8, 2008 at 9:43 PM
That, coupled with 24/7 coverage & beginning the next election as soon as one ends… to quote Mr Rogers: “Can you spell ‘BURNED OUT’? Sure you can”
Ugly on January 8, 2008 at 9:43 PM
Yeah, other than the whole open borders thing…
Grayson on January 8, 2008 at 9:46 PM
No mandates on healthcare, thanks.
Connie on January 8, 2008 at 9:46 PM
Rudy vs RonPaul update:
with 46% of the vote in:
Rudy 8,597
RonP 7,766
Rudy widens his lead by a few hundred votes from earlier.
Romney is also tightening things a bit vs McLame, but that mundane stuff you can see on your TV screens.
The all important Rudy-RonPaul matchup somehow is not being featured on Fox or CNN…
Always Right on January 8, 2008 at 9:46 PM
Exactly. How can someone run on the WOT and not understand the importance of securing our borders?
Connie on January 8, 2008 at 9:48 PM
And the fact that he’d sooner give captured terrorists a backrub and a noogie than actually interrogate or make them remotely uncomfortable.
Grayson on January 8, 2008 at 9:48 PM
MKH - humbling for pundits? Um, ok.
Connie on January 8, 2008 at 9:49 PM
Lol I love Dubya but I would grab popcorn just to watch his press conferences or speeches. Would at least make a couple gaffs sure to get some giggles.
broker1 on January 8, 2008 at 9:49 PM
Rudy doesn’t need the beast to do anything!
He’s the best candidate in the race PERIOD!
He has the MOST executive experience that has actually had real accomplishments, cutting taxes, reducing crime, getting people off of welfare, as George Will said the most conservative governance in the last 50 years!
He puts ALL 50 states into play no matter if it’s Hillary or Obama. Actually if it’s Obama that would make NY even easier! LOL
Rudy’s been kicking terrorist’s butt since he was in Reagan Administration!
Chakra Hammer on January 8, 2008 at 9:50 PM
Mitt can’t buy a vote..
Someone should send him a memo that truth and trust can’t be bought.
Fred Thompson at 1% he lost to Ron Paul! LOL
Chakra Hammer on January 8, 2008 at 9:52 PM
Fred wasn’t expected to do well at all and Ron Paul was actually expected to come in 3rd so I fail to see how on earth anything you’re saying is the least bit valuable.
MrSteve on January 8, 2008 at 9:54 PM
McCain: Shamnest & anti tax cuts
Huckabee: RINO, weak on taxes, spending, foreign policy, crime, and immigration. If he wins, I’m dropping the Republican party.
Romney: I’m scared I will see him with Ted Kennedy by his side on signing day.
Guiliani: I’ll think about it.
Thompson: The best conservative and the only one I trust. Vote for Fred if you are a conservative. Vote for anyone else and the Republican party is in shambles.
msipes on January 8, 2008 at 9:54 PM
Don’t look now… Mitt’s gap is closing!!!! He’s down to losing by 5%
Micheal on January 8, 2008 at 9:56 PM
Fred just isn’t going to be around come Super Tuesday. It’s hopeless unless he dominates in South Carolina.
I still think Romney is the most viable candidate. He has the most total votes cast for him and despite what the MSM reports he did technically win in Wyoming. So Brian Williams, he isn’t 0-2 in his “quest to sweep the primaries” he’s actually 1-2 and still sitting pretty nicely, although it would have been nice to see a win here tonight.
MrSteve on January 8, 2008 at 9:57 PM
Don’t you get it, party trumps person”
KBird on January 8, 2008 at 9:59 PM
Bunk. What Obama doesn’t (and you don’t) realize is that SUBSTANCE matters. Pretty catch phrases and MSM adulation can only get you so far. America is the greatest nation on Earth for a reason.
argos on January 8, 2008 at 10:00 PM
Fred is McCain riding an Elephant..
Same thing McCain-Feingold-Thompson
Both old, at least McCain has energy..
Fred wanted to get rid of the party platform in 1996 with regards to Abortion..
Chakra Hammer on January 8, 2008 at 10:00 PM
Thats what Fox News exit polls said..
Chakra Hammer on January 8, 2008 at 10:01 PM
Drudge has 29.9% GOP in
MCCAIN 37, ROMNEY 29, HUCKABEE 12, GIULIANI 9, PAUL 8, THOMPSON 1
McCain wins because the rest is split
McCain should win liberalville because he is for anything for illegals, he is the father of campaign finance reform which empowered Soros and hog-tied public interest groups before elections, he hates borders which are barriers to group hugs, and his eye twitches when he is enraged.
That Mitt did relatively well may have to do with his idea to set up health insurance buying pools for the whole nation to get everyone insured. That hasn’t got a lot of play but I heard it on CSPAN. That is some bait for a lib
Fat Elvis moved fast and blew some sympathy to his wife. When Hubby blows up defending wifey the ladies swoon.
Share the Pain to Make some Gain
entagor on January 8, 2008 at 10:03 PM
Actually I have. Who said Huckabee was going to get the nomination? If he is so awful, surely he will get thrown out with the wash? Foreign relations? Bush had zero experience in this field and he did great (IMHO). I have listened to Huckabee; he is not my choice at this time but each time I have heard him speak he has made just as much sense as the rest of the Republicans. He has great ideas regarding the fair tax, energy and socially, he is as conservative as any in the running. I just don’t understand the Huckabee hatred I have seen here and have heard from some of my favorite talk show hosts. As I said before, I will be voting Republican this November no matter who our nominee is. That is what conservatives do. You vote to forward your cause, not run away and hide like a child because you did not get your way.
carbon_footprint on January 8, 2008 at 10:04 PM
McCain has energy for evil purposes: passing the Amnesty, “fixing” Global Warming, plotting with Ted Kennedy. Just the energetic lunatic everyone needs!
Oh yeah, and someone liked his speech! Now isn’t that special, what this country really needs is an Orator in Chief. Pick Obama, while you’re at it! Change!!!
Igor R. on January 8, 2008 at 10:05 PM
New Hampshire is a long ways away from the US southern border, that’s true. And Senator McCains’ amnesty legislation may not be as resonate in N.H. as it is in a more southern place.
That is to say that one small state’s vote does not make a whole nation’s primary, or (s)elected nominee.
Within another month, no less than 28 other states will have had primaries, and I really doubt that Senator McCain will still be anywhere near the Republican lead, then.
localmalcontent on January 8, 2008 at 10:06 PM
Sorry, I don’t know you from Jack and I need SUBSTANCE. McCain was the only politican with something at stake who stood rock-solid behind Bush re Iraq when all the talking heads were saying that America was willing to write the war off.
I have problems with McCain, but your comments are pure rubbish. And frankly, I doubt your military claims.
argos on January 8, 2008 at 10:07 PM
I’ll say it again..
Don’t blame me for Huckabee I haven’t voted yet i’m in MN!
I’m a Baptist and I will NOT vote for Huckabee!
My vote goes to Rudy!(I don’t do identity politics)
Chakra Hammer on January 8, 2008 at 10:08 PM
I know you cant necessarily compare the Dem race to the GOP race BUT, since indys can vote in NH let me just say that …..
right now Dennis Kucinich is handily outpolling Fred Thompson. 2200 to 1500.
That is how badly Fred is doing in NH.
Always Right on January 8, 2008 at 10:09 PM
Guiliani’s record on immigration(YOUR MORE THAN WELCOME IN NYC) and his current “excuses galore” reasoning makes it tough to go all out for him. Although Guiliani IS better than any democry canidate.
christophercube on January 8, 2008 at 10:10 PM
I’m one of the many who’d have a hard time voting for most of our candidates, but if worst comes to worst, (Huck, McCain) I’m going to at least turn out to vote for my most conservative choices for Senator and Rep., even if I do leave the top blank. We’re going to need a double fence around the Oval Office if a Dem wins.
NellE on January 8, 2008 at 10:12 PM
Amen to that. Go Hillary, you magnificent bastard!
argos on January 8, 2008 at 10:12 PM
Well how did Kucinich do in Wyoming?
Fred wrote off NH, the polls were always between 1-2%. What do you expect?
Igor R. on January 8, 2008 at 10:14 PM
In terms of simple logic, this makes no sense. Are you sure you’re not a democrat shill?
argos on January 8, 2008 at 10:16 PM
This morning, amidst the media’s celebration of Obamafest 2008, Fred was pushed by some talking head to predict the Democrat race. He said Hillary would be the nominee because of the strong Clinton machine. Right now he looks rather prescient.
flyfisher on January 8, 2008 at 10:17 PM
Boy I can’t stand the Silkmeister. Pure Socialist tripe!
Son of Sam Kinison on January 8, 2008 at 10:19 PM
I think its time to put Silky firmly into the moldy dustbin of history and move on.
Always Right on January 8, 2008 at 10:19 PM
More proof that human beings are the dumbest animals on the planet.
Pcoop on January 8, 2008 at 10:19 PM
His exploitation of Nadeline Sarkissian here is disgusting
Son of Sam Kinison on January 8, 2008 at 10:21 PM
flyfisher: I think that was last nite on O’Reilly. Bill asked Fred at the very end: if you had to make a bet on the eventual Dem nominee and put money down, all or nothing on Hills or Barak, who would you select.
And Fred thought a bit and said: Clinton. Coz she’s still got a potent organization machine.
If only FRED had such a machine, huh….
Always Right on January 8, 2008 at 10:21 PM
Well, yeah, but Hillary/Obama will give them bj’s on top of it.
argos on January 8, 2008 at 10:21 PM
I don’t see that relic McCain making it very farther than this.
Nobody in New Hampshire apparently believes that change is a good thing, they obviously voted for the status quo.
Pcoop on January 8, 2008 at 10:22 PM
Did Silky just say McMountains?
PowWow on January 8, 2008 at 10:22 PM
Seems like many are willing to compromise to complete the process.
Connie on January 8, 2008 at 10:22 PM
The result tonight actually makes things interesting. Delegates split all over the map, Huckabee looking weakers, Romney on the ropes. Maybe Fred was right to push on SOuth Carolina and see if a southern strategy can carry him through in such an evenly divided race. A Romney win and a stronger Huckabee result would have made this unlikely scenario pretty much impossible.
A brokered convention, I’m telling ya!
michaelo on January 8, 2008 at 10:22 PM
he speaks to a ot of sick people
PowWow on January 8, 2008 at 10:24 PM
Uggh, Silky. He’ll finally end poverty, global warming, ring around the collar and wealth-envy.
localmalcontent on January 8, 2008 at 10:25 PM
At some point, principle matters and staying home - even if it yields undesirable results - is worth it. …
Midas on January 8, 2008 at 9:22 PM
Yeah. Until Obama/HIllary gets to nominate the next Supreme Court justice. Then you’ll be thinking, Gee. maybe we should have given a damn.
argos on January 8, 2008 at 10:26 PM
Why on earth would we even consider nominating John(it’s not amnesty”Mccain? Did we not learn that 80% of Americans are against amnesty for illegal aliens? Why would we nominate Mr. Amnesty himself?
HaraldHardrada on January 8, 2008 at 10:26 PM
Mark Levin slices and dices Huckabee and McCain in the same masterpiece rant. Enjoy at marklevinfan.com .
nivram1 on January 8, 2008 at 10:27 PM
Don’t count McCain out on the terrorist fellatio issue; he has not yet begun to bend over. Should he become President I believe he will make a Gitmo a true vacation resort, not the Sandals dive it is now, but something real classy.
Grayson on January 8, 2008 at 10:30 PM
True, but he hasn’t spent his entire life running for President. And unlike Hillary, he didn’t hoodwink almost an entire state into believing he cared about them in order to run for POTUS.
Connie on January 8, 2008 at 10:31 PM
My God, my God. The humanity.
argos on January 8, 2008 at 10:34 PM
I’m kinda hoping for that, actually, for my candidate’s sake. And it sure looks like it could go that way.
No, not a fan of R.P… or McCain, Rudy or Mitt; yet I’d vote for my party’s nominee over any Dem.
localmalcontent on January 8, 2008 at 10:34 PM
Duh huh? Excuse me but didn’t Fred come in somewhere behind Ron Paul tonight? Why should Fred’s lousy outcomes be a basis for hope, while Romney’s second place finishes (in two out of three states, with 47 to go) amount to a “disaster”? I like Fred, but I see no need to be idiotic about it.
argos on January 8, 2008 at 10:46 PM
I’ve been a fan of McCain the man but have been unimpressed with his Senate activities in the last couple of years. In fantasy land, I’d be backing Duncan Hunter or Newt if he were in. But I have to admit, McCain passes my primary test, being pro life issues. Behind that, he has balls and integrity as a man coming from his Navy career and POW experience. He’s been around the world and his name is a very recognizable across the globe. People respect McCain the man. Given that, I do not think I would have to much problem in pulling the knob for him.
Bruce Hendrix on January 8, 2008 at 10:53 PM
Btw. HotAir, noticing we have pages now.
Good job guys. A welcome change from scrolling past 300+ comments.
BKennedy on January 8, 2008 at 10:55 PM
Talk about being in denial. Ron effing Paul? Jesus. It’s bad enough being thoroughly drubbed by Huckadoodle.
argos on January 8, 2008 at 10:57 PM
I would beg you to reconsider.
sanantonian on January 8, 2008 at 10:57 PM
For all you foolish conservatives who say they won’t vote for John McCain or are otherwise disparaging him, I sincerely ask you to rethink your position.
John McCain is a pro-life fiscal conservative who has pledged to go after out-of-control federal spending while preserving the present tax cuts and to nominate strict constructionist judges to the federal bench.
More importantly, John McCain is clearly the most qualified of the candidates to be Commnader in Chief. He is heads above the rest in terms of experience and knowledge about military matters, national security and foreign affairs. That is why he has the endorsements of, among others, former Secretaries of State George Schultz, Henry Kissinger, Alexander Haig and Lawrence Eagleburger, former national security officials R. James Woolsley, Robert Inman, Bud MacFarlane and Tom Keane, former Cabinet Secretaries Jack Kemp, Tom Ridge and Jack Schlesinger, and former Navy Secretaries John Lehman and William Ball. Consider Iraq as a test case: John McCain was right for years, first in criticism of the prior “light footprint” strategy that left too few troops and then in supporting the surge under Gneral Petraeus when it was not politically popular — when Democrats were declaring defeat and Republicans were either hedging their bets (like Senator Lugar) or looking at their shoes (like Romney). Not John McCain, who throughout supported the troops, visiting them often. I must give heartfelt thanks on this point. My older son is a U.S. Army First Lieutenant with Ranger tab who last October finished a 15-moth tour of duty in Iraq as an infantry platoon leader earning a Bronze Star and Commendation Meal for Valor for actions under fire; and yes, I knew how lonely it was to support the troops a year ago and yes, I valued John McCain’s support of the troops.
Finally, John McCain, a combat naval aviator and the son and grandson of U.S. Navy Admirals, is a genuine war hero.
Phil Byler on January 8, 2008 at 11:07 PM
Good grief. Fred! gets beat by Paul and some on here think its a big deal? Last I checked NH wasn’t exactly a bastion state of conservatism. Fred! played his cards correct, he is saving it for SC. If Fred crashes in SC then talk all the trash you want. I am seriously starting to believe that there are those on this site who suffer from Fred Derangement Syndrome.
RobertInAustin on January 8, 2008 at 11:13 PM
I’ll be honest, this puts Mitt in great shape. Second in both Iowa and New Hampshire with two liberals straddling him, its going to make Romney look really good to most strong conservatives who don’t want to see McCain or Huckabee. As for Huckabee, seems like when he was away from that carefully crafted group of evangelicals, his appeal and support drops immeasurably. Conversely when McCain isn’t surrounded by liberal and blue-blooded republicans, he loses big. But in both those areas, Mitt Romney has strong support and came in second.
Fred dead meat, sorry but he isn’t going to win in SC or anywhere else
Defector01 on January 8, 2008 at 11:19 PM
Phil,
McCain isn’t my top choice but my top choice never had a prayer (Duncan Hunter). I prefer Romney but I don’t hate McCain as much as I can’t stand Huckabee. If its huckabee vs Democrat I’d go libertarian to make a point. If its Mccain v Democrat i’ll vote for McCain without a second thought.
Defector01 on January 8, 2008 at 11:23 PM
Ugh. I just can’t do the McCain-thing. Thank God the race isn’t over.
sinsing on January 8, 2008 at 11:27 PM
I want to refer you guys to an awesome piece by Frank Rich in the American Thinker ‘The One-Two Punch Aimed at GOP Conservatives’
Rich argues brilliantly that the media is pushing both, with love, to kill off the conservative wing of the GOP.
Believe me, they have not treated Huck like they normally treat flaming religies.
Conservatives like Reagan had to battle the press, while McCain gets a ride, and Huck gets a pass, almost as if the press likes the idea of Huck’s ‘Christian soldiers’. Right
This is why Rich warns people to stop. And Think.
entagor on January 8, 2008 at 11:31 PM
Defector01,
In the interests of keeping Republicnas together, let me explain why, I am sorry to say, Romney leaves me really cold. I don’t think Romney can lead concerning military matters, national security and foreign affairs, which are critical parts of the President’s job. In this time of a war with the radical Islamic jihadists (and Democrat idiocy concerning the radical jihadists and natioanl security), we need the best Commander in Chief we can have in a candidate, and that is John McCain, certainly not Mitt Romney. Romney was looking at his shoes when the surge was instituted in Iraq. Just the opposite, McCain could and did lead on the Iraq because he knows his stuff on military matters. Romney also alientated me when he said that his sons were serving America by working on his campaign; in contrast, one of John McCain’s two sons is a U.S. Marine and the other is attending the Naval Academy. As I indicated in my 11:07 PM post, my older son is a U.S. Army First Lieutenant who has served with distinction as an infantry platoon leader in Iraq; my younger son will be commissioned a U.S. Marines Second Lieutenant having already passed officer training at Quantico. Now, I ask you; why should I not be put off by Romney while seeing in the McCain family a kindred devotion to country?
Phil Byler on January 8, 2008 at 11:45 PM
In China, a butterfly flaps its’ wings.
The wind from that butterfly’s flapping causes a whirlwind half the world away.
Why did the butterfly flap its’ wings in the first place?
Mitt Romney. That’s why.
/hewitt
thirtypundit on January 8, 2008 at 11:45 PM
Wait a minute. 2 second places and the most delegates is a disaster? Sheesh.
Priscilla on January 8, 2008 at 11:46 PM
Priscilla, it may not be a comlete disaster for Romney, but he has spent a lot of money and really shold not have lost in his back yard in New Hampshire. Romney all but lives in New Hampshire and I believe is the first Masachusetts candidate to lose the New Hampshire primary.
Phil Byler on January 8, 2008 at 11:51 PM
The thing about this loss for Mitt is that his support from when he was ahead of McCain never diminished. The undecideds decided this. Just like Huck in Iowa, he had a nitch electorate to hit and just like Huck, he did it. IMO, the tell will be in MI. mitt needs a win there or I think he is seriously damaged. Unless Rudy wins and Mitt is second again.
csdeven on January 9, 2008 at 12:01 AM
I fail to see how that says anything about Fred. I don’t get you people. It says what it’s always said about NH, even back in 2000. For goodness sake, Ron Paul isn’t even a conservative and is only Republican in name. He’s politics are Libertarian at best, and that says more about the Registered Repulican voters in NH than it will ever say about Fred Thompson. And if you aren’t savvy enough to know the electorate you’re deal with and you let Iowa and NH (a bunch of moderates, independents, and liberals) decide who the GOP candidate is for the True Reagan Type Conservatives, then I’ll just bow out gracefully and let you have the party. It’ll be the GOP but it won’t be the Party of Reagan, sort of like Teddy and the Progressives, or Whigs and Republicans. It’ll all shake out in the wash. But I’m not having the likes of Ron Paul supporters entering the GOP determining the Presidential Candidate I support. Sorry if you think they’re worth that much of your time and attention.
Sultry Beauty on January 9, 2008 at 12:12 AM
Phil
I find Romney to be more conservative on social and internal matters including abortion, tax policy, immigration and the role of government. You can’t forgive Romney for that stupid comment he made about his sons, granted that was incredibly moronic. I can’t forgive McCain for what he did in supporting McCain-Feingold and for the amnesty bill. I think he’s less conservative in many of those areas then another politician I admire - joe lieberman. I think Romney will be solid and strong on the war on terror and the like with the solid conservative values in the domestic policy. MCCain will be strong externally and in foreign policy without question but its internal matters and his love of ‘compromise’ with the democrats which means they take 95% of what they want and we give up 95% of what we want, that concerns me immensely.
Defector01 on January 9, 2008 at 12:14 AM
Yes, McCain has a lot of problems as a domestic policymaker, to put it mildly.
But would Clinton or Obama be better? In an imperfect world, I would take him any day. At least our enemies would be afraid.
Then like I say, we keep an eye on him and amnesty, etc. No lunches with Teddy!
PattyJ on January 9, 2008 at 12:26 AM
Deector01,
I really don’t see Romney as more conservative on domestic issues.
Romney more conservative on abortion? You mean the guy who has had to explain why he has changed from his strong advocacy of a pro-choice position when he was running for Governor in Massachusetts? In contrast, McCain has always been pro-life and argued the position to quite a number of pro-choice voters in New Hampshire in Town Hall meetings, and he is committed to nominating strict constructionist judges, which is key on this subject.
Romney more fiscally conservative? Not really. When Bush originally proposed the tax cuts, McCain called for domestic spending cuts along with the tax cuts at a time when we were needing to finance military expenditures; that was the fiscally responsible conservative position. How many times does this have to be pointed out? Going forward, we need to get out of control federal spending under control, don’t you think? McCain is a fiscal hawk for cutting federal spending and eliminating earmarks. McCain is for continuing the present tax cuts and points out that had he been listned to, maybe we could be talking about more tax cuts. What makes Romney better on this issue?
What makes Romney better on immigration? He simply did not have to take a vocal position on immigration when last summer’s bill was being proposd. Meanwhile, McCain has been saying for months that he got the message, that law enforcement comes first. I heard him say it back in September in New York City. Also, the immigration bill that McCain sought to pass was not amnesty on its face; what would have caused it to be amnesty is if the law enforcement provisions were not enforced. As McCain recognizes, the immigration bill signed by none other than President Reagan back in the 1980’s created an amnesty then because its law enforcement provisions were not enforced, creating the present problem. McCain says that while we need to address the underlying problem, we must first focus on law enforcement. McCain has an intellectual understanding of the problem, which is why it is not unforgiveable to me. I don’t detect the same level of understanding in Romney.
What makes Romney better on campaign finance reform? Like immigration, he simply did not have to deal with it when it was voted on by the Senate (conservative Fred Thompson voted for it). I do not regard campaign finance reform as unforgiveable. It did not kill free political speech; regulation of the electoral process is not by definition a First Amendment violation. What McCain was seeking to do, with the best of intentions, was to cut the influence of money on politics. There are problems with the law that lawyers like me understand and that have been occupying the U.S. Supreme Court; suffice it to say that this is not going to be an issue that will dominate the legislative agenda in the next four years.
In contrast, what will matter are military matters, national security and foreign affairs. Romney may be saying the right things about the war on terror, but what really concerns me is that the lack of experience and knowledge means he can’t lead on such subjects. I have cited Iraq as a test case when he was looking at his shoes while McCain, who knew his stuff on the subject, was out front and vocal in supporting the surge when it was politically unpopular.
That’s how I see it.
Phil Byler on January 9, 2008 at 1:05 AM
Clinton wouldn’t deport the illegals that Rudy sent to him!
Rudy was stuck with those illegals!
What would you have done? He did what he had to do to keep his city safe, by allowing illegals to report crimes against them.
Obviously, his policy was effective as it reduced crime dramatically, and in a place that was ROTTEN to the CORE caused by democrat negligence.
Chakra Hammer on January 9, 2008 at 1:10 AM
What military experience did Ronald Reagan have besides making war movies and heading the Screen Actors Guild? Romney is a state Governor while McCain is a Senator with a vote on the issue.
Romney would be a President with civilian background like Roosevelt. He does take the hardest public position on terrorist jihadists. His position is so politically incorrect I have to assume he truly believes there is a movement to eliminate the West as we know it.
How real are his positions? We have to judge based on the way he honored campaign promises made to the voters of his state
entagor on January 9, 2008 at 1:55 AM
EXIT QUESTION: Is John McCain a Hillary Plant?
NickTx on January 9, 2008 at 3:27 AM
IMO, Mitt lost Iowa over the “Christian Leader” issue. He lost NH over the national security issue.
In MI he will have the religious, military, AND economic issues to deal with. One of those he wont compete in (religion). Huck will continue to play religion politics and if Mitt continues to ignore the national security side of this because MI is in economic straits, he will not win NH AND he may even fall to third. Here are the latest polling numbers from RCP.
One other thing that may make a difference….the rest of the primaries are closed. You have to declare rep or dem, so the indies will not play the role they did in Iowa and NH. Who benefits?
Heck, I don’t know.
csdeven on January 9, 2008 at 5:30 AM
Huckabee campaign implant? Okay, I guess Romney’s fortune really paid off big for second place!
Does that make me a loyal ‘fredhead’ like you now?
popularpolitics on January 9, 2008 at 12:56 PM
Comment pages: « 1 2 [3]