Mark Levin nukes McCain, calls for conservatives to rally ’round Romney
posted at 2:27 pm on January 31, 2008 by Bryan
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
As for McCain “the straight-talker,” how can anyone explain his abrupt about-face on two of his signature issues: immigration and tax cuts? As everyone knows, McCain led the battle not once but twice against the border-security-first approach to illegal immigration as co-author of the McCain-Kennedy bill. He disparaged the motives of the millions of people who objected to his legislation. He fought all amendments that would limit the general amnesty provisions of the bill. This controversy raged for weeks. Only now he says he’s gotten the message. Yet, when asked last night if he would sign the McCain-Kennedy bill as president, he dissembles, arguing that it’s a hypothetical question. Last Sunday on Meet the Press, he said he would sign the bill. There’s nothing straight about this talk. Now, I understand that politicians tap dance during the course of a campaign, but this was a defining moment for McCain. And another defining moment was his very public opposition to the Bush tax cuts in 2001 and 2003. He was the media’s favorite Republican in opposition to Bush. At the time his primary reason for opposing the cuts was because they favored the rich (and, by the way, they did not). Now he says he opposed them because they weren’t accompanied by spending cuts. That’s simply not correct.
Even worse than denying his own record, McCain is flatly lying about Romney’s position on Iraq. As has been discussed for nearly a week now, Romney did not support a specific date to withdraw our forces from Iraq. The evidence is irrefutable. And it’s also irrefutable that McCain is abusing the English language (Romney’s statements) the way Bill Clinton did in front of a grand jury. The problem is that once called on it by everyone from the New York Times to me, he obstinately refuses to admit the truth. So, last night, he lied about it again. This isn’t open to interpretation. But it does give us a window into who he is.
Hard to argue with any of that. It’s more of a cry to defeat McCain than it is to elect Romney, but the end result of defeating McCain would be to elect Romney. That bothers some conservatives just as much as electing McCain, which is why we’re in the fix we’re in right now.
As for me, I understand conservative discomfort with Mitt Romney. I’ve gone through it so much in my head that I’ve come up with a name for it: The Romney Paradox. I’ve written a whole post that explains it in detail, maybe I’ll publish it tomorrow once it’s gelled a bit.
Briefly put, it’s the fact that because we don’t elect businessmen to the presidency, Romney wouldn’t be a viable candidate if he hadn’t been a governor, but because he tacked left in order to win his Massachusetts governorship, conservatives have a hard time believing in his sincerity now, even though he probably started off as more conservative and is certainly more conservative now than McCain. But people have a hard time working it all out, so they don’t bother and just decide that he isn’t trustworthy. I get that. I don’t agree with it, but I see where it comes from. I also think that as a businessman Romney has been absurdly successful and as a public servant he’s been a whale of a lot better than most. He fixes stuff, usually stuff that someone else’s incompetence or corruption broke. We have a few things in Washington that need fixing. McCain doesn’t strike me as the guy who can do that, and don’t get me started on the Democrats. They’re not part of the problem, they are the problem.
As for Romney, here’s a rallying point if you need one.
We need to stay in the house that Reagan built.
I think it’s do or die time for conservatives. Either we rally to Romney or we reconcile ourselves to McCain and all that that means. It’s one or the other. We have a few more days to make up our minds.
More: One of my bottom lines in life is that I prefer people who fix things to people who break things. Romney fixed the Olympics, he fixed Bain, etc. McCain broke the First Amendment and I don’t trust him to fix the border. He did, arguably, have a lead role in fixing the war though he’s exaggerating that. On balance, I don’t know of anything that Romney broke but I do know of one thing that McCain broke and one thing he won’t fix. Fwiw.
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 4 »
I myself think McCain is a general election loser. I’d rather the ship go down with a conservative then not.
Spirit of 1776 on January 31, 2008 at 2:30 PM
Levin’s been blow-torching for a while now. Might work for the online community, but the free press from the McCain endorsements are going to wipe these sorts of things out pretty completely. You watch; Super Tuesday’s going to be a blowout.
Vizzini on January 31, 2008 at 2:30 PM
OK Kids, here we go.
You asked for a chance, lets run with it.
.
.
Ok, what to do now…? feel like I should call someone.
Hi, …MOM?
shooter on January 31, 2008 at 2:31 PM
McCain = sanctuary nation
I had not really been aware of his anti-business mindset until last night’s debate. Furthermore today during Ahnold’s endoresement speech, the best thing the Governator could say about McCain is that he reaches across the aisle.
It should tell you something when the same family endorsing Obama is endorsing McCain.
Thank God for Mark Levin. I wish he would make more television appearances. He always gets his point across.
The Race Card on January 31, 2008 at 2:33 PM
I agree. We’re howling into the void. If Limbaugh can’t make headway, Mark Levin’s postings at the Corner aren’t going to.
Doesn’t hurt to try, though.
Allahpundit on January 31, 2008 at 2:33 PM
It’s over Levin. Don’t lose what little dignity you have left.
THE CHOSEN ONE on January 31, 2008 at 2:34 PM
Excellent post, Bryan.
I’m known as being in the tank for Romney, and have been for a while.
Truth be known, I was wavering for a bit with Fred. But that flamed out. So I’m back with Romney. The thing is, for those who distrust his conservativeness, I ask myself: What is his background? Answer, it is LDS, which he has long roots in. For all the theological disagreements people bring up, the fact remains that the LDS church is pretty well bedrock cultural conservative. So Romney’s cultural aspect is conservative–the old 1950’s era stereotype. And the guy believes and lives it–look at his personal life. Why would he gleefully stray off the plantation now?
Vanceone on January 31, 2008 at 2:34 PM
I am a lifelong Republican, a conservative, not usually overly political.
I am voting for Romney this weekend via my absentee ballot.
If John McCain wins the Republican nomination, I will sit out the election.
centralcal on January 31, 2008 at 2:34 PM
I do think the chance to take out McCain was by Fred in SC. That was the last best chance. All that seems left is an anyone but McCain rally cry and that is partly muted by Huck’s effuse praise. I don’t think ST is going to be a blowout, but it’s going to significantly expand Mac’s lead most likely.
Spirit of 1776 on January 31, 2008 at 2:35 PM
When Nancy Reagan give the Ok, doesn’t that mean that Rush, Levine, Hannity, and Laura are going against Ronnie’s wishes.
THE CHOSEN ONE on January 31, 2008 at 2:37 PM
Bryan’s right - Mitt’s the only one left to stop McCain. Disagree with Mitt on an issue or two, and it’s still Reagan’s Big Tent. McCain we can disagree with on the majority of issues, and he’s not even in the tent. McCain can hit all of the Conservative talking points, but look at how he has voted, and what he supports. DEEDS, not words St. John.
Cry Havoc…
juanito on January 31, 2008 at 2:37 PM
Frightening times.
John McCain is mentally unstable - and our nation risks a great deal if this lunatic is put in the White House.
That said - this nation has survived terrible men in office before…..
Lord - I cannot stand McCain…
jake-the-goose on January 31, 2008 at 2:37 PM
The problem is the GOP base needs to work and pay the piper, this is not going to get done by writing some nice article or posting a great expose to a blog. Mitt needs money and phone calls to make it happen. The wife and I ponied up yesterday and we’ll be hitting the pavement in CA to get our neighbors out for Mitt…DO THE SAME
jawbone on January 31, 2008 at 2:38 PM
Sigh I hate to say it but its TOO late. Conservatives should have rallied around Fred not waited till we got stuck with a romney vs McCain ordeal.
The simple truth of the matter is Mitt is unelectible. He does well amoung conservatives when compared to McCain but his mormonism kills him across this country. Face the fact that florida will be Mit’s BEST sounthern showing.
Rush and other conservative pundits sat on the sidelines for months saying “We dont do endorcements” now when the election doesnt go their way they will drop that and go into full attack mode ?
The republican party LOST in 2006 and we are in danger of achiving permanent minority status. Rather than waste all our ammo trying to bring McCain down Id rather save our powdered for the dems.
Because that is who conservatives REALLY should fear. The thought of a Democratic president with a super majority in the house and senate should send shivers down our spine. Instead some want to run full scale into a civil war with the moderates at at time when we are at our weakest.
Is Mitt really worth handing over everything to the democrats ?
Conservatives need to understand its NEVER about personalities its about ISSUES. We need to fight for ideas not for personal preferences. Immigration means more than mitt or McCain, National Defense means more that Mitt vs McCain, preventing creaping government socialism means more than Mitt or McCain. Fight THOSE battles not the personality ones !
So really we need to fight for the SOUL of the republican party not the body. Lets take control of the convention and start backing conservatives who will win against anyone rather than attempting to divide the party when its already weak for a fruitless fight over personalities.
William Amos on January 31, 2008 at 2:38 PM
No.
Slublog on January 31, 2008 at 2:39 PM
Anybody feeling a little depressed these days about Conservative fortunes? Well then! You must not be listening to Mark Levin. Download his show on your ipod and listen during your commute. Instant energy! Let’s get fighting!
RushBaby on January 31, 2008 at 2:40 PM
I agree with most of the criticism on McCain, but honestly, the McCain haters are starting to sound like cry babies.
McCain got an over 80% lifetime rating from American Conservative Union… Hillary and Obama 10 or less. Are you seriously saying that it is an act of good public policy to sit out the election and put Hillary or Obama in the Whitehouse? The Constition says were are striving for a “more perfect union” not a perfect union, that is for G_d.
Suck it up already. It is an election for goodness sake. Gheesh.
georgealbert on January 31, 2008 at 2:41 PM
On those issues:
Immigration - favors Mitt
National Defense - I give to McCain for argument’s sake
Socialism - favors Mitt
Without regard to personality on the issues you mention, it’s 2-1 in favor of Mitt. Add the economy, and you have 3-1.
Spirit of 1776 on January 31, 2008 at 2:41 PM
As personality-driven as the race is these days, it’s also Romney’s yawning lack of charisma. When he’s speaking about an issue he commands well, for that window, he inspires confidence and looks presidential.
When he goes into pander mode, it’s so painfully obvious that people who are very attuned to presentation are turned off by him.
At the risk of drawing a torch-bearing mob of recently converted Romney-ites, Mitt has a lesser version of some of the same tics and discomfort speaking about certain issues that John Kerry had last election. When he speaks on those points, he projects neither conviction nor strength. He comes off like a bit of a stuttering nerd. Ned Flanders.
People are turned off by this presentation, as much as more politically aware people are turned off by any switches on the issues. In the general, it would take a few key Hillary cackles for Mitt to even out-charisma her, IMO.
In Romney’s favor in the primary, McCain has his own personality defects that were on display last night. Simply encapsulated: “GET OFF MY LAWN, YOU LITTLE ****S!”
BillINDC on January 31, 2008 at 2:41 PM
I’ve been for Romney since the start. Well, not true…at first I was worried about his religion. Then I realized I was being a pig-headed bigot.
Thompson was (and remains) interesting. I’d sleep at night with a Romney/Thompson ticket but I doubt that will happen.
McCain is one of my biggest let-downs in life. I wanted to believe in him. But in truth, he is Washington sleaze–of a leftist flavor. Very sad.
Montana on January 31, 2008 at 2:41 PM
Romney/Levin 08!
kcd on January 31, 2008 at 2:42 PM
Is it safe to say that McCain supporters are the defeatist vote? Is the base so emasculated that head-to-head polling numbers are more important than conservative principles?
natesnake on January 31, 2008 at 2:42 PM
tramp
natesnake on January 31, 2008 at 2:43 PM
head-to-head polling numbers are more important than conservative principles?
natesnake on January 31, 2008 at 2:42 PM
Winning is more important than conservative principles.
THE CHOSEN ONE on January 31, 2008 at 2:43 PM
the true spirit of bipartisanship is not to move left to come to a consensus, it’s to convince those on the other side, to come right.
At this point, I’m not sure if any of them are capable of doing that.
Canadian Imperialist Running Dog on January 31, 2008 at 2:43 PM
No? Keep in mind that Nancy favors and pushes for embryonic stem cell research.
amerpundit on January 31, 2008 at 2:44 PM
I don’t think you meant Socialism? That would favor Hillary or Obama.
JDH on January 31, 2008 at 2:45 PM
So he “tacked left” to win the governership in Mass. He also “tacked left” in 1994 to win the senate against Ted Kennedy. I’m sure he would also “tack” left if he thought it would win him the republican nomination. But he has tacked right and people like you and Levin are eating it up. I don’t think McCain is a better choice then Romney but I’m still not convinced he is worse.
Complete7 on January 31, 2008 at 2:45 PM
A good question.
HebrewToYou on January 31, 2008 at 2:46 PM
No, it really isn’t.
HebrewToYou on January 31, 2008 at 2:46 PM
Tick-Tock Tick-Tock people. I really can’t understand how people could possibly think McCain is a better choice than Romney. Their differences are so stark, I just don’t get how people don’t see it.
Before THE CHOSEN ONE starts tearing me down, Yeah, I know, he’s a war hero, I’ve heard that and I agree, that has NOTHING TO DO WITH BEING PRESIDENT.
McCain will change the face of this nation. He speaks with a forked tongue on immigration. Flip-Flop-Flip, admittedly knows nothing about the economy and keeps the company of a schiester snake-oil salesman who has the diabolical plan to wipe out our borders and let the leeches stay permanently.
I think McCain has dimentia and just doesn’t understand what he’s doing. How can a man have this much contempt for Americans without it being deliberate?
Geronimo on January 31, 2008 at 2:47 PM
I meant “favors” as being on the correct side of the issue from the view of a conservative.
Spirit of 1776 on January 31, 2008 at 2:47 PM
Maybe more polite to say they’re voters who fancy that they are thinking strategically, when primaries are the time to vote for principles.
RushBaby on January 31, 2008 at 2:47 PM
I’m in Iowa. I voted Romney. Now it’s up to the rest of you.
But if it ain’t Romney, I say we create the Achievers Party, on six planks:
- Own my life, my choices, and my circumstances.
- Preserve and promote freedom.
- Champion free markets and competition.
- Crave religious freedom.
- Limit government and make government transparent.
- Insist that American citizens determine America’s direction.
McCain fails on at least half of that, and where he’s not an outright failure on a point, those with whom he consorts fail.
Not now, not ever - not McCain.
beatcanvas on January 31, 2008 at 2:47 PM
What do you mean by that?
jewells45 on January 31, 2008 at 2:47 PM
No, it really isn’t.
HebrewToYou on January 31, 2008 at 2:46 PM
Mac will at least respect those principles, Billary looks to destroy them.
THE CHOSEN ONE on January 31, 2008 at 2:48 PM
All true on the charisma front, though I see the “electability” debate from the opposite angle. Many of McCain’s supporters base their entire argument for him on his war record and his “electability.” Just like the Democrats did with John Kerry in 2004 (though McCain’s war record is indisputably stronger). I don’t know of anyone who is basing support for Romney on “electability.” They’re either basing it on “he’s not McCain” or “he knows the economy” etc.
I also think that polls showing McCain competitive with Democrats now are irrelevant. Polls at this point in 1980 showed a blowout for Carter. We all know how that turned out.
Bryan on January 31, 2008 at 2:49 PM
Yay! More identity politics and voting based on a candidate’s religion. I thought Mitt said we weren’t supposed to do that?
Hollowpoint on January 31, 2008 at 2:49 PM
It’s over Levin. Don’t lose what little dignity you have left.
What do you mean by that?
jewells45 on January 31, 2008 at 2:47 PM
I mean THIS ELECTION IS OVER! Mitt may have had a shot to buy it if it weren’t for the geography of super duper teusday. New york, Cali, Connecticu, Arizona, will all go for Maverick. He won’t officially lock it up, but come on. Does he have to have Mitt crying in a puddle of his own urine for you folks to see, its’ over?
THE CHOSEN ONE on January 31, 2008 at 2:50 PM
I support Romney because A) I trust him more than McCain, B) He’s more conservative, C) He has excellent experience with the economy.
The media’s love affair with McCain will end as soon as he accepts the nomination. The “war hero” argument isn’t going to drag him to the White House.
amerpundit on January 31, 2008 at 2:51 PM
If you win, but compromise everything to get their, did you win? If you win the battle, but lose the war, it’s a pointless victory.
McCain might as well be Hillary Clinton. The only difference between the two is the GWoT.
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on January 31, 2008 at 2:51 PM
If you win, but compromise everything to get their, did you win? If you win the battle, but lose the war, it’s a pointless victory.
Yes.No.
THE CHOSEN ONE on January 31, 2008 at 2:53 PM
And McCain is wrong on almost all of the issues - then throw in the personality thing - you know, the part where he’s a first class jackass.
Hewitt’s right on McCain - Great American, Bad Senator, Terrible Republican.
juanito on January 31, 2008 at 2:53 PM
If I wanted to vote for a pro-Iraq (D) I would vote McCain. However, I am not looking for a Pro-Iraq (D). I am looking for a (R).
I will never vote for McCain. Romney would be a choice that wouldn’t cost me sleep.
If McCain gets the nomination, I’ll write in Fred!
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on January 31, 2008 at 2:56 PM
So winning a battle but losing a war is a success? They keep you far away from military strategy, right?
amerpundit on January 31, 2008 at 2:56 PM
Hey those polls were kind of right it was a blow out and carter was a part of it, all being the losing part.
Mojack420 on January 31, 2008 at 2:57 PM
The “Great One” is correct! Mitt’s ad people should get all over the MTP vs. the Debate comments on his immigration bill.
azcop on January 31, 2008 at 2:58 PM
Dude, I would donate my salary for the next two years to get Mark Levin to the Oval Office.
LEVIN FTW!!!
Levinite on January 31, 2008 at 2:58 PM
So, is Medved’s head going to explode in a few minutes? I know he will be gloating about the endorsements but if he actually does take calls from people who disagree with him, he will be getting an earful.
Blake on January 31, 2008 at 2:58 PM
If McCain gets the nomination, I’ll concentrate more of my time on the Upper and Lower House races.
At least it will feel more productive.
natesnake on January 31, 2008 at 2:58 PM
What respect? He doesn’t even respect the law re: border security! What’s the point of winning if in the end we lose what we stand for? That’s called losing in my book.
HebrewToYou on January 31, 2008 at 2:59 PM
I’ll reiterate. I plan on voting for Obama if McCain is the other options.
If Hillary gets the D-nod, then I’m going to the polls and voting on every race except prez.
Please, please, please, put Romney (my original last choice) in position.
askheaves on January 31, 2008 at 3:01 PM
I’m sorry, but this makes no sense. A) Fred finished roughly the same as Mitt in SC, despite the fact that Mitt gave it only passing attention while Fred made it his Alamo. B) Mitt has been running a very successful national campaign & has always been in the top tier re total votes & delegates, while Fred never got out of the bottom tier.
The fact of the matter is that Mitt and Mitt alone was and is our “last best chance” to nominate the best available conservative candidate. You can quibble about his conservative creds, but his stated positions — which have not wavered since he entered the race — are CLEARLY most in keeping with what conservatives want.
The only remaining question between now and Tuesday is: can the conservative base of the party mend its divisions in time, before it has no choice but to accept McCain as standard bearer next Fall.
It truly is as simple as that. It is Mitt, or it is McCain. We have five days to decide. And if it ends up being McCain, it will be because we allowed him (and the media, and the GOP old-boy establishment supporting him.) to EXPLOIT the petty divisions in our conservative ranks.
argos on January 31, 2008 at 3:01 PM
Mark Levin and several others have lost it. To claim that Mitt Romney is the last hope for conservatives is beyond absurd.
Fine. Call Huck a liberal. Let’s go with that.
Romney still isn’t a conservative. Period.
huckfan on January 31, 2008 at 3:03 PM
McCain as the nominee—I will vote for Obama.
He can at least be rolled and compromised and there is the additional benefit; when he screws up the Democrats will be responsible.
woodswalking1 on January 31, 2008 at 3:04 PM
Your handle tells me everything I need to know.
HebrewToYou on January 31, 2008 at 3:04 PM
Levin screeches about McCain “about-faces” on two issues then goes on to say vote Romney? That’s funny.
V15J on January 31, 2008 at 3:05 PM
Romney is a conservative? Guys, that’s delusional.
funky chicken on January 31, 2008 at 3:05 PM
This is exactly what the Nutroots Nation and NBC News (et al) want us to accept. Yes.
argos on January 31, 2008 at 3:05 PM
Bryan -
I think a lot of centrists like his positions and “brand.” I personally like his committment to the war and mantra about cutting spending, though admittedly not much else. And even you admitted the allure of his “brand” as a war hero who sends a message to all of the hippies. In Romney’s favor is his malleability, because it shows that he won’t do anything to piss off conservative voters too much.
I also agree that electability is overplayed given how polls change and the long knives of the media. I also think - when I see glimmers of Mitt talking confidently on economic subjects - that he has the potential to greatly reduce his negative ratings by the time the general heats up, though I wouldn’t bet on it.
Because if the guy hasn’t learned how to sell **** sandwiches with a winning smile by now, who says he’ll learn in the next few months? Nobody wants Ned Flanders as a leader.
That said, I also see McCain potentially wearing on people with his crappy attitude and condescension.
But again, if I were placing a bet, I think McCain’s “brand” along with a less-than-average for a GOP candidate thrashing he’ll take by the media, if he’s the nominee, will favor his electability in a general election. Especially against Hillary.
Your point about overstating snapshots in time in polling is quite valid, though its a lot harder for a candidate like Mitt to get rid of negative impressions than it is for a candidate like, say, Huck, to come out of nowhere and score positive ones.
BillINDC on January 31, 2008 at 3:06 PM
Wow! All you ex-Rudy people telling us to shut up and bow before McCain are coming unhinged that we aren’t obeying your commands and following your script.
I don’t think you guys understand the rage that is out in the real world- not just the blogosphere. Juan McCain has alienated a good portion of the GOP base and, so far, has actually veered so far to the left I fully expect to see Clinton/McCain ‘08 bumper stickers. Juan (and you guys) apparently think that you can bully the right into submission and depend on independents to fill the gap you have when you ignore social conservatives. Lots a luck with that.
For my part your bullying and strident screeching isn’t going to work. I’ll vote for Romney in the primary but I will never vote for McCain because he doesn’t respect my views and show them the same consideration he shows to the views of left-of-center Democrats.
highhopes on January 31, 2008 at 3:06 PM
A day is a lifetime in campaigns. Since McCain leads Obama and Hillary now according to RCP, he’s at least competitive. Support and vote for Romney if he’s the guy, but the GOP has a shot against Hillary with either one.
dedalus on January 31, 2008 at 3:06 PM
Let me help you, so it makes sense to you.
Fred has, coming into the race, established conservative credentials. He had the necessary gravitas for his criticism to stick. Yeah, I think Romney has run a good campaign, but even his contrast ads are dismissed under the guise of his own morphed positions.
Fred had none of those problems. Fred was never going to win the nomination, but what I am saying is that if Fred would have been strong and vocally criticized McCain, esp on immigration, it was the best chance to thwart the growth of McCain’s momentum.
I hope that is clear to you. I am no way claiming Fred is was a viable candidate and Mitt was not. I am saying criticism from the right from a fellow candidate with credentials would have been immensely more productive then anyone else.
Spirit of 1776 on January 31, 2008 at 3:06 PM
The problem is that I don’t believe that McCain will respect those principles. He’s never respected them in the past. When he got mad at GWB after 2000, he just scorched all of GWB’s policies, regardless of principles. The only issue that he hasn’t done that with is the war. Good for him. But I don’t trust him on any other issue.
TX Mom on January 31, 2008 at 3:07 PM
Romney is a conservative? Guys, that’s delusional.
funky chicken on January 31, 2008 at 3:05 PM
No, he’s just not Maverick.
THE CHOSEN ONE on January 31, 2008 at 3:07 PM
Romney is a conservative. (lower case C) Fred! was a Conservative (Capital C). Either is better than McCain… who is lukewarm about everything.
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on January 31, 2008 at 3:07 PM
MeCain is nothing more than a liberal with Conservative talking points. He isn’t trying to win as much as he is trying not to lose the nomination. This is his last chance and he knows it so he attempts to please every bloc of voters out there who he thinks may vote for him. Mel Martinez’ statement on Fox the night of the Florida primary for me was very telling. First he endorsed McCain then at the end of his statement he said
This was more of a Freudian Slip than misspeaking IMO. At this point it is Romney or bust.
Swinehound on January 31, 2008 at 3:08 PM
BTW - I could totally live with and would feel very good supporting Mitt for President. I’m just not sure that he can get it done, if he gets the nod. Maybe against Hillary.
BillINDC on January 31, 2008 at 3:08 PM
Tick-Tock Tick-Tock people. I really can’t understand how people could possibly think McCain is a better choice than Romney.
kcd on January 31, 2008 at 3:08 PM
Point taken. I don’t disagree, but merely my view right now is that the outcome is bleak. I do trust that the dems can always snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Spirit of 1776 on January 31, 2008 at 3:08 PM
I think this post is spot on, Bryan, but I’m afraid AP is right as well.
Like I’ve said before, I used to be the base. I’m not sure who the base is now.
TX Mom on January 31, 2008 at 3:09 PM
Poor rommey, he probably had to look at the total on his bank accounts for the first time in years.
THE CHOSEN ONE on January 31, 2008 at 3:09 PM
I agree with Bryan. The national head-to-head polls are meaningless at this point.
Why do we think McCain is so electable? Is it because we believe the New York Times, the MSM, his campaign, or the Clintons? We are smarter than that.
Someone explain to me how McCain is going to beat Hillary or Obama? His foreign policy experience is his greatest attribute. If this is a war time election, meaning it is the focus, then he can win. Otherwise, I just don’t see it.
Please convince me!
JDH on January 31, 2008 at 3:09 PM
kcd on January 31, 2008 at 3:08 PM
We knew you wouldn’t get it.
THE CHOSEN ONE on January 31, 2008 at 3:10 PM
Wow..After that comment, I’m surprised you still have only one a$$ hole.
That right there is the reason the Dims will win the White House this year.
Old adage, “stand for something or fall for anything”.
ChrisM on January 31, 2008 at 3:10 PM
I don’t want to be crude, but if McCain wins wouldn’t we be more interested in his VP choice? Assuming he attempts to get a hardline conservative to lend him some credibility that could mean that we only have McCain for a couple of years. I don’t want to wish the man ill, but the horizon is awfully bleak. Shameful of me…
blankminde on January 31, 2008 at 3:10 PM
Oh Crap, he’s a successful person. What a crime. Darn him and his ability to run businesses.
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on January 31, 2008 at 3:11 PM
The question is - Why are so many Republicans voting for John McCain in the primaries ?
LODGE4 on January 31, 2008 at 3:11 PM
Tick-Tock Tick-Tock people. I really can’t understand how people could possibly think McCain is a better choice than Romney.
kcd on January 31, 2008 at 3:08 PM
OOps! It did’nt submit my comment.
I said, Bingo! I don’t think this back & forth over Romney or McCain would even be an issue if the conservatives would grow some balls and vote for the most conservative and capable person running! Romney 08! I will vote for Romney and I for one refuse to let the media choose my candidate!
kcd on January 31, 2008 at 3:11 PM
Not much to argue with in that. I place less value on “brand” than most voters, but that makes me an outlier there. I would like the hippie-punching value of a McCain win, I really and truly would. But I think the morning after would give us all one wallop of a four-year headache.
Bryan on January 31, 2008 at 3:12 PM
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on January 31, 2008 at 3:11 PM
Any idiot can invest inherited millions at five percent and do well.
THE CHOSEN ONE on January 31, 2008 at 3:12 PM
I understand that Arnold SchwartKennedy has endorsed McCain. That’s enough reason not to vote for that back-stabbing s.o.b. right there. Amnesty, loss of free speech through McCain/Finegold, and, not the least, the gang of 14 that is so against our Constitution that it is pathetic.
TimothyJ on January 31, 2008 at 3:12 PM
With all respect, Bryan, those of us who have seen all of this from the beginning are wondering why on earth you are so late to the party. I have always been a Romney supporter, but might have been willing to support Giuliani if it came to that. It was evident after the early primaries that Giuliani was out. The weeks between Michigan and Florida could have been pivotal, and the conservative media/punditry dropped the ball. Except for National Review, which endorsed Romney early on. Although the editorial board and the staff reporters/commentators seem to be at odds.
BigD on January 31, 2008 at 3:13 PM
One of the major differences between McCain and Romney is that Romney can always go back to the pprivate sector business and make money.
McCain has no private sector job to fall back on.
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on January 31, 2008 at 3:13 PM
When the Dems hold the White House and both houses of congress socialized medicine, higher taxes and a few more Ruth Bader Ginsberg appointees can be balanced against the noble feeling of having not voted for McCain. Some Dems who supported Nader and ended up with 8 years of Bush understand the feeling.
I recall a lot of conservatives who disliked Bush 41, but I’m glad he beat Dukakis and wish he had beaten Clinton 1.0.
dedalus on January 31, 2008 at 3:14 PM
It’s too late for that. If people were going to rally around Romney they should be been doing it a month ago. It’s way too late now (Hugh Hewitt’s opinion notwithstanding). Taking a look at Rasmussen Markets, McCain is being given 85% chance of winning the candidacy.
Many blew it early by allowing themselves to become distracted by Fred Thompson. I have to admit I liked him but didn’t think he had a snowball’s chance in hell of winning the nomination. I think Romney could win the nomination but if he does, it would guarantee a Democrat in the White House because he doesn’t have a snowball’s chance of winning the general election.
I was having trouble understanding why people would support a candidate that has no chance whatsoever of winning the national election and I think I have finally put my finger on it. It is some kind of political narcissism or something. Certain people are unable to vote for anyone who is not like they are themselves. They somehow see who they vote for as being an extension of themselves or something. As if holding their nose and voting for McCain is tantamount to them saying that they themselves are like McCain or share McCain’s veiws. So they demand a candidate who thinks like they do even if it means running a candidate who has absolutely zero chance of winning the national election. All they seem to care about is having a candidate that they themselves can feel good about voting for even if it means electing a Democrat to the White House. If they don’t have a candidate who they can feel good about voting for, they threaten to stay home … again helping elect a Democrat. It is an odd, self-destructive, selfish and narcissistic way of looking at things.
Roughly 70% of the electorate isn’t even Republican. Roughly 85% of the electorate aren’t strict social conservatives. For a party to run a candidate that only 15% of the population feels good about (and another 15% will hold their nose and vote for) is political suicide.
McCain is probably going to be the nominee at this point. It is too late to rally around Romney. And I trust McCain’s supreme court choices more than I do Hillary or Obama’s.
crosspatch on January 31, 2008 at 3:15 PM
No, he isn’t. He is whatever he needs to be to get whomever he happens to be talking to today to like him. Talk to someone else tomorrow? He’ll change to meet their approval. He’s a chameleon.
And he dang sure is no commander-in-chief.
huckfan on January 31, 2008 at 3:16 PM
And that awkward, “Yeahhh, I’ve got a really big day ahead. I should go.”
It always makes me feel used and empty.
natesnake on January 31, 2008 at 3:16 PM
Out of chrono-order but still just as timely. This is the squishy-softer more compassionate side that is enabling conservative losses. This may be indicative of the new Republican. I will not tow this ideal.
Fred read Ace, McCain comments on Hot Air.
geckomon on January 31, 2008 at 3:16 PM
McCain keeps saying he can garner liberal votes. The only problem with that is why would liberals vote for McCain when they can reach the height of commie ecstasy by pulling the lever for Obama or the Hillary making McCains argument for electability a false one.
Sammy316 on January 31, 2008 at 3:16 PM
I’m with you. If McCain wins the nomination, I’m sitting Election 2008 out. I’ll go on vacation.
msipes on January 31, 2008 at 3:16 PM
I think “our minds” have already been made up. The question is how do we sell this message to voters by Super Tuesday? For a RINO like me, why I want to get the message out is more the particular details like McCain and taxes and especially McCain and citizenship for illegal aliens. Could be so bold as to suggest that perhaps the way McCain be defeated is the facts about McCain and not rallying around identity politics?
thuja on January 31, 2008 at 3:16 PM
If a dead horse is more electable than Hillary Clinton, do we want a dead horse for president? McCain is a mean, vindictive, calculating bastard whose inner core is that of a liberal. He’s Lincoln Chafee, Arlen Spector, Olympia Snowe, Chuck Hagel and his buddy Lindsey Graham all rolled up in one.
Sorry. I’m with BP on this one and will have to vote Mitt. If there’s anything left to decide when Virginia gets its turn. Otherwise, I’m staying home. If we’re headed to disasterous liberal socialism it’s best that one party be completely at the helm to take full responsibility for it. We’ll pick up the pieces and undo what we can when the people finally wake up.
pistolero on January 31, 2008 at 3:17 PM
Is trust Mac tenfold over Romlee. POW vs prep school. Easy decision.
THE CHOSEN ONE on January 31, 2008 at 3:17 PM
Please don’t wait out the election. Republicans at lower levels depend on your votes! And you certainly don’t want a Democratic President with a lapdog Congress.
thuja on January 31, 2008 at 3:19 PM
While we’re still debating gay marriage, amnesty which isn’t amnesty, abortion, and the death tax, a US drone just killed Al-Quaeda’s no.4 today. Confirmed.
THE CHOSEN ONE on January 31, 2008 at 3:19 PM
Look, even as a “moderate” (or squishy fence-sitting wuss, if folks prefer) who isn’t much concerned by McCain’s “amnesty” stance (as long as the borders can get secured for national security purposes) … I have a lot of issues with McCain.
That Reason magazine critique about his instinct for statist solutions is dead-on, and it drives me nuts. Ironically, his call for congress to have hearings on steroids in baseball probably most embodies what I hate about his brand of politics.
That all said, I think the headache is a lot more manageable than the D alternative. If the war wasn’t in the balance, I probably wouldn’t care nearly as much about this election. The trick will be finding the mechanisms to check McCain on his dumber impulses.
BillINDC on January 31, 2008 at 3:22 PM
I crown thee…King of the Non Sequitur.
Slublog on January 31, 2008 at 3:25 PM
Comment pages: [1] 2 3 4 »