National Review to RNC delegates: You don’t have to support McCain’s VP choice, you know
posted at 4:20 pm on March 12, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
I wonder who they have in mind for the job.
With the names of unacceptable candidates being bandied about as possible picks, conservatives should bear in mind that they are not powerless with respect to McCain’s choice. The delegates to the Republican convention have real clout. Even McCain’s own delegates should be willing to use their power, if necessary, to pursue the party’s (and McCain’s) best interests.
Those rules are such that delegates cannot vote against the presidential candidate’s vice-presidential pick. But that pick needs a majority of all delegates to win the nomination, and delegates are allowed to abstain. If a majority of six states’ delegations support another vice-presidential candidate, meanwhile, they can force a floor vote on that alternative. Six delegations are all that is required to contest a portion of the platform, too.
A convention battle, just what the GOP needs after the Democrats have finished killing each other in Denver. Exit question: How bad would the pick have to be to make a move as contentious as this worthwhile? Huckabee bad, or merely John Kasich bad? And if this is the way to go, why let the nominee choose his own VP anyway? Just do it at the convention or else make the second-place finisher in the primaries the vice presidential candidate. It would have been fun watching Huck and Mitt downshift this past week from “John McCain isn’t the answer” to “John McCain is the answer, but only if I’m running alongside him.”
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:
Criteria
1. Do no obvious immediate Harm
2. Work to help McCain win in ‘08, with no ulterior motives for a 2012 run.
Chakra Hammer on March 12, 2008 at 4:24 PM
This is why we used to have conventions, you know: to hammer out the details with everyone in one
smoke-filledroom.Akzed on March 12, 2008 at 4:25 PM
What is this compulsion Republicans have lately to try to make a bad situation even worse? A convention fight? Seriously? The best/only thing we have going for us at this point is that, unlike the opposition, we’ve settled on a candidate and are headed for a mostly peaceful convention.
aero on March 12, 2008 at 4:26 PM
Oh no. Get ready for a long stream of bitter posts here by “THE CHOSEN ONE” filled with class-envy and who knows what other kind of envy.
Tzetzes on March 12, 2008 at 4:29 PM
Just put the VP spot up on ebay. Romney would bid and the world would be a better place.
hanzblinx on March 12, 2008 at 4:29 PM
Sweet.
Allahpundit on March 12, 2008 at 4:30 PM
Mitt Romney’s only positive is that he was the best of a bad lot after teh Fred! dropped out. With the VP field and the 2012 nominee field wide open, why go with Romney?
boko fittleworth on March 12, 2008 at 4:31 PM
The editorial is doing its part do nudge McCain to the right WRT his running mate. I approve.
RushBaby on March 12, 2008 at 4:34 PM
Great. Now that Mike Huckabee is going to be the VP I can finally support the Mcainiac.
SaintOlaf on March 12, 2008 at 4:35 PM
McCain shouldn’t be allowed to choose anything, ever.
I’m glad NR’s still refuses to tip its hat to Rockefeller.
emailnuevo on March 12, 2008 at 4:37 PM
Fixed.
emailnuevo on March 12, 2008 at 4:37 PM
1. Competence
2. Age
3. Brains
4. Exceptional Health
EJDolbow on March 12, 2008 at 4:39 PM
Actually, if Romney were to spend just as much money trying to be VP as he trying to be President.. then maybe he would seen as not trying to sabotage the ticket.
For some reason I just do not think that he has McCain’s best interests at heart..(Or ours for that matter)
We cannot afford, to have a democrat controlled house, senate and White House for 4 years.
Chakra Hammer on March 12, 2008 at 4:40 PM
Why do some have a death wish, I have never sean a bunch of people that are so pis* off they didn’t get what they want they will tear down the winner. As a Republican I just shake my head.
KBird on March 12, 2008 at 4:41 PM
A brawl in St. Paul is fine with me if McCain picks a hopeless RINO as his veep. I wonder if Huck has had this in mind all along? He is not who I have in mind, and neither is Kasich.
Buy Danish on March 12, 2008 at 4:41 PM
How is he seen as trying to sabotage the ticket? He’d bring economic experience — something John “I Know Almost Nothing About the Economy” McCain Needs.
Why? Because he wants to be VP?
So we nominate someone who knows absolutely nothing about the number one issue – economy – and refuse to put someone on the ticket that does?
amerpundit on March 12, 2008 at 4:44 PM
If he truly wants to be a team player, that would be a different story, and would give it some serious considerations.
Chakra Hammer on March 12, 2008 at 4:44 PM
I second that. If McCain goes with Juan Hernandez, I’m out.
I’m only half joking, would he? No, he wouldn’t, or would he?
Geronimo on March 12, 2008 at 4:46 PM
Have you noticed, the Romney fans saying Romney 2012?
That is said for a reason.
Chakra Hammer on March 12, 2008 at 4:46 PM
Yes, because many expect McCain to lose. McCain loses, Romney runs in 2012. That doesn’t mean they hope McCain loses, but many can’t see John winning against the Messiah.
amerpundit on March 12, 2008 at 4:47 PM
BTW, I would trust Rudy on the economy more that Mitt anyhow.
Heck, if you want someone on the economy why not get Forbes? >:D
Chakra Hammer on March 12, 2008 at 4:47 PM
The Republicans continue to “lose it.” If they don’t stop this craziness and get behind McCain 100%, they will lose it…the election, that is.
They keep shooting themselves in the foot. It’s no wonder they’re limping.
Grantman on March 12, 2008 at 4:50 PM
You are not rational on this subject.
Mitt Romney was on TV a couple of nights ago sticking it to the Democrats in John McCain’s name. Romney called John McCain, “The Big Dog” compared to the libs.
Also, Romney could have pulled a Huck and stayed in the race if he wanted to further is own interests.
When he dropped out, he did it for “the team.”
EJDolbow on March 12, 2008 at 4:53 PM
“Romney 2012″ is said for a reason, yes: because McCain has intimated that he will only serve for one term.
see-dubya on March 12, 2008 at 4:54 PM
Romney is a horrible VP choice and a much reviled character by many many people. His flip flopping liberalness and mormonism will guarantee our loss in november so you can count him out.
Mark my words Mike Huckabee will be VP.
He is the only one who will bring the evangelicals back.
Without them we lose… it’s very simple.
SaintOlaf on March 12, 2008 at 4:56 PM
You mean by dropping out of the race when it was clear that McCain would win and then wholeheartedly throwing his support behind him?
Dead Hand Control on March 12, 2008 at 4:56 PM
McCain has already scoffed at a Romney VP selection. HE said he wanted someone he agrees with.
SO Id say Romney is out
William Amos on March 12, 2008 at 4:59 PM
Fixed it for you.
Dead Hand Control on March 12, 2008 at 4:59 PM
Here is McCain take on Romney
William Amos on March 12, 2008 at 5:01 PM
Ike did not CHOOSE Nixon for his VP, the party did.
Whether or not Romney were McCain’s VP, it would be interesting to hear their take on Bill Gates’ excuse that he’s forced to outsource jobs internationally because he can’t hire enough immigrants stateside, as though citizens have either no skills or a plague. Regardless of Gates’ excuse, it’s unacceptable to say that the USA does not have an adequately skilled work force. Even if that were the case, then why would Gates eschew training US citizens vs. foreigners via his foundation?
maverick muse on March 12, 2008 at 5:02 PM
Uh oh….does this mean Juan Hernandez is in the running?
SaintOlaf on March 12, 2008 at 5:05 PM
I am still holding out for a convention battle over the nominee since a significant percentage of us (enough to lose in November) won’t vote for McCain under any circumstances.
Valiant on March 12, 2008 at 5:09 PM
If it’s good enough for AP, it’s good enough for Comment of the Day™ award.
steveegg on March 12, 2008 at 5:10 PM
What is the matter with you people. Romney would fill out the ticket very well. He brings all the things that McCain lacks to the table. That is economic savvy and business experience. John Kasich would also be very good. He would have been my pick for the presidential nomination in a more sane world.
duff65 on March 12, 2008 at 5:12 PM
I hope this is said in jest. The one VP choice which would automatically cost McCain the election is the Huckabigot..
Think_b4_speaking on March 12, 2008 at 5:27 PM
He will pick Chris Cox as his VP just wait and see
BroncosRock on March 12, 2008 at 5:31 PM
Although I’ve considered myself evangelical this election has made me almost despise (some of)them for their bigotry. If someone is so bigoted against Mormonism (a religion that doesn’t preach beheading of non-believers, I might add) that they would vote against the good of the country over it then to hell with ‘em anyway.
They can hide in their basements and try to worship once the socialists take over and purge Christianity from the public square. Grrrr.
NTWR on March 12, 2008 at 5:32 PM
You people really do exist: someone bigoted against Romney because of Mitt’s faith… disgusting.
If anyone can be convicted of having a flip-floppy liberal past, it’s Huckabee; at least Romney has come around and seen the light. I’m not so sure Huckabee ever has. Romney has two things Huckabee will never have: Class and Dignity.
Huckabee has shown himself to be nothing more than a pompous jackass this entire run, dodging through his own liberally checkered record as governor in the process. And let’s not forget putting all of that within the cloud of Chuck Norris. Romney has spilled his guts on his past record consistently, matching it up against his own changed worldview towards more conservative beliefs and convictions. How on earth McCain got the nomination in favor of Mitt, I will still never understand… It is disheartening to say the least.
I, for one, am happy to say this with great enthusiasm: Mitt 2012!
Jockolantern on March 12, 2008 at 5:35 PM
Dude, Chakra Hammer (related to M.C. Hammer?) is a deranged McCain troll. Just ignore him and he’ll go away.
ErikTheRed on March 12, 2008 at 5:35 PM
Thank you, my thoughts, too.
cjs1943 on March 12, 2008 at 5:36 PM
Agreed
Spirit of 1776 on March 12, 2008 at 5:37 PM
Hey delegates, you gotta pick Hunter or Tancredo for VP. And see if you can’t find a way to keep the Natural Born Panamanian off the ticket while you’re at it.
Buddahpundit on March 12, 2008 at 5:37 PM
I really like what you have to say, too.
cjs1943 on March 12, 2008 at 5:38 PM
I wish that was true about THE CHOSEN ONE.
cjs1943 on March 12, 2008 at 5:39 PM
I still think that of all of the serious candidates, Romney was the best-suited for president. And he has the hair. Seriously.
Might as well stick him in the VP spot. I can’t think of anyone better who has equal name recognition. It’ll give him a higher profile should he decide to run in 2012. If somebody better emerges between now and then, that’s fine too.
This is, of course, assuming that McCain hasn’t already given the spot to Florida Governor Charlie Crist.
No matter who McCain’s running mate is, I can’t see myself getting too excited about him. His record is far less than spectacular, and he really wound up getting the nomination because the GOP insiders wanted him. His candidacy is essentially the GOP giving the finger to its base. I can survive whatever four or eight years of Clinton or Obama may throw at me.
ErikTheRed on March 12, 2008 at 5:43 PM
This is a case of where McCain can’t win the election with a good pick, but he could certainly lose it. Romney would be fine because it gives something to conservative critics.
I don’t think it will happen because McCain really doesn’t like Mitt. It was evident in the primaries. None of the other candidates liked Mitt. So picking him would be tough to explain by Sen. “Straight Talk.”
At least no one is talking about Fred Thompson as VP. The last thing the GOP will need against a possible Obama opponent is the “Grumpy Old Man” ticket.
seanhackbarth on March 12, 2008 at 6:03 PM
I’m usually not one to fight with the clergy, but…
Overwhelmingly, the most devoutly Christian people I’ve met support/ed Romney, Hunter, Alan Keyes, or none of the above. One or two said Huckabee, but they didn’t know anything about him besides his Christianity.
Dobson backs McCain, and he’s a giant in the evangelical circle; assuming evangelicals listen intently to him, and to Hagee, that’s splitting the vote down the middle. I don’t really care what Dobson or Hagee or any other evangelical thinks, we don’t need evangelicals - we need conservatives.
emailnuevo on March 12, 2008 at 6:06 PM
Ummm..
I’m not a McCain troll, if anything I would be considered a Rudy troll >:D
Also, since when did calling someone a dog become a compliment?
Chakra Hammer on March 12, 2008 at 6:15 PM
Mitt Romney French Poodle.
http://i25.tinypic.com/144d9ch.jpg
Chakra Hammer on March 12, 2008 at 6:17 PM
When Mitt Romney dropped out, he said:
Please explain how taking the race all the way to the convention on the Republican side (which in all likelihood will happen on the Democrat side) would “be a part of aiding a surrender to terror”.
No personal offense meant to either you or Mitt Romney, but I honestly thought that was the weakest excuse for quitting that I have ever heard. And it was intended to paint Huckabee into a corner to make him quit, too. (otherwise, of course, Huckabee would “be a part of aiding a surrender to terror”)
Mike Huckabee helped, not hurt, the party and the country by continuing on another month.
Red Pill on March 12, 2008 at 6:18 PM
Me smelleth class warfare from the Great One? I love you Allah, but you have a tick when it comes to Romney.
bobthepeeler on March 12, 2008 at 6:26 PM
Excuse me, you’re wrong. Very, very wrong.
Dobson said he could never vote for McCain and endorsed Huckabee.
I guess you missed this (of course with Allah’s negative spin):
Red Pill on March 12, 2008 at 6:27 PM
Dobson said he had made a plege to God decades ago to never vote for a pro-choice candidate. Doing so would be cooperating with those who support the killing of innocents.
Red Pill on March 12, 2008 at 6:33 PM
What’s next? Is Romney going to call McCain and say:
Red Pill on March 12, 2008 at 6:35 PM
McCain-Mitt. Let’s barrage the McCain campaign with red M&Ms. They’ll get the message. The M&M ticket is a home run. I can’t think of another VP pick who’s close.
Paul-Cincy on March 12, 2008 at 6:39 PM
I don’t think Huck hurt or helped the part or the country. He did, I think, hurt himself – he stayed in an extra month as the only opposition to McCain and STILL couldn’t catch up with Romney in popular vote or delegates. McCain didn’t mind because he didn’t consider Huck any sort of threat – Mac’s people were insisting that Romney get out “for the good of the party” as early as South Carolina, because Romney WAS a threat to his nomination.
Romney leaving the race changed the race. Huck wasn’t that big a factor except as the anti-Romney (which were obvious and explicit in Huck’s own comments.)
sulla on March 12, 2008 at 6:48 PM
Red Pill,
Huckabee didn’t do anything to the GOP by staying in because by then no one thought he had any chance of stopping McCain from getting the nomination. The only person who was hurt was Huckabee. He looked silly plugging along telling people he “majored in miracles.”
seanhackbarth on March 12, 2008 at 6:51 PM
I love how Mitt operates. He’s always time zones ahead of Huckabee. Huck cannot get out of the way quick enough. Mitt reads the landscape and gracefully exits…months ahead of the Grand Cayman Orator. Then, just as Huck fades into oblivion, Romney comes out refreshed, energized, and ready to promote the Republican agenda. Huck is not ready for primetime. His “what about me” agenda is narrow and without any coherent vision. Mitt, whether by chance or design, has effectively marginalized Huck. Has anyone seen Huck lately? Is his show on Comedy Central in re-runs yet?
Cold Steel on March 12, 2008 at 6:59 PM
Really?
Not doubting you (I googled it; you’re right) but I can’t believe I got that so wrong.
Nonetheless, point is, conservatives over evangelicals – every time.
emailnuevo on March 12, 2008 at 7:17 PM
It’s Dobson to Huck, Hagee to McCain.
Either way, split down the middle, no?
emailnuevo on March 12, 2008 at 7:18 PM
Maybe they believe that some things are more important than winning elections.
aengus on March 12, 2008 at 7:28 PM
Nor did Reagan want Bush the Elder as his VP but he too relented to party pressure.
aengus on March 12, 2008 at 7:31 PM
This mentality is the reason why Republicans are sliding leftward. Mormons are acceptable because they don’t behead people? I would hope the criteria for VP would be a little more discerning than that.
aengus on March 12, 2008 at 7:36 PM
Well then all of you that forced McCain on the rest of us and keep telling us social conservatives to f**k off in one breath and demanding complete support of McCain in the next had better start acting like adults if you want to win in November.
Put another way, you McCain apologists need to start respecting the fact that McCain is unacceptable to a large portion of the traditional GOP base. Having Triceratops pick a real Republican for the VP slot would be a good first step at healing the rift that you all have, so far, been happy to leave open. You want party unity? It starts with you.
highhopes on March 12, 2008 at 7:47 PM
No, it’s that Mormons are not unacceptable simply because a small number of unhinged whackjobs insist that they are. The more those idiots spew their “a vote for a Mormon is a vote for Satan” shtick, the less scary the SECOND LOOK AT MORMONS! becomes.
Our peculiarity trends toward Pleasantville anachronicity, by golly, not global conquest by blood and terror. Even Lawrence O’Donnell admitted it: he’ll savage Mormons because the worse a Mormon’d do to him is bake him a pie, maybe mow his lawn. He won’t do the same to the terror types, because they might retailiate.
Al Qaeda kills. Mormons just audition for American Idol.
sulla on March 12, 2008 at 7:48 PM
I’ve never heard anyone say anything like that. All we know for certain is that Protestant Evangelicals won’t vote in large numbers for Mitt Romney (or presumably any Mormon). You haven’t established why that is. Or if you have on some previous thread then please link.
aengus on March 12, 2008 at 8:10 PM
I would hope the criteria for VP would not have a non-Mormon litmus test. My point was that, although there are some religions that may not work well in our representative republic, Mormonism is not one of them. I do have a religious litmus test, and it requires that the religion of the person running does not want to destroy America or all those who do not believe that one religion.
Romney has been and will continue to be the most “presidential” of the presidential candidates this cycle, and it’s a sad commentary on the electorate that we would toss him out or consider him liberal because of his religion. Meanwhile trying to elect a real liberal, and giving Huck a pass on his liberal positions because he belongs to a mainstream religion.
NTWR on March 12, 2008 at 8:16 PM
Hmm, you must have missed the Huckabigot’s quotes on the subject – look it up. The most widely noted comment in question relates to his ‘understanding’ that Mormons believe Jesus and Satan are brothers. For my part, this Christian will do everything in his power to make sure that the Huckabigot and his like are kept from the levers of power.
Think_b4_speaking on March 12, 2008 at 8:32 PM
Don’t get me wrong, Romney was my favourite. I was upset when he lost. I just don’t accept that Protestant Evangelicals ‘failure to vote for Romney (or even any Mormon) means that they’re all bigoted hicks who ought to know better. If they don’t want their country to represented by a non-mainstream Christian sect then that’s fine. There has been, to my knowledge, only one Catholic president (JFK) and two Quakers.
aengus on March 12, 2008 at 8:36 PM
sulla on March 12, 2008 at 8:38 PM
I heard about but that I read that Mormons actually believe it in which case it isn’t a bigoted statement but a statement of fact.
aengus on March 12, 2008 at 8:39 PM
Thank you.
aengus on March 12, 2008 at 8:41 PM
aengus, though I am sure you are saying this in good faith, please understand that I find this “statement of fact” deeply offensive. Whether it’s bigoted depends on who says it, and what else they’re saying. I don’t think you’re bigoted. But imagine someone taking a doctrine that you hold near and dear, and boiling it down to a soundbite for the sole purpose of ridiculing you.
To Mormons, that’s one of them.
I try not to go into the nitty gritty of my beliefs here, because the politics is contentious enough, and I suspect most don’t want to read it.
sulla on March 12, 2008 at 9:07 PM
When exactly did that happen? In 2000 and just recently Dobson said he wouldn’t, couldn’t ever vote for McCain. Rudy got the same treatment too.
funky chicken on March 12, 2008 at 9:10 PM
McCain is pro-life, BTW.
funky chicken on March 12, 2008 at 9:12 PM
I’ve elected not to vote for the repbulican (liberal) candidate, Juan McCain. If Mitt or Fred is the selected VP, Juan, you’ve got my vote.
hoi polloi on March 12, 2008 at 9:14 PM
Well I must apologise then. I am sorry, sincerely. I don’t even remember where I read it. I shouldn’t have even mentioned it as its not the first time I’ve gotten burned for standing behind an unsourced idea. I’m interested in learning about anything but if you don’t want to post links to be dissected on the net no problem. One of my sisters owns a copy of the Book of Mormon. I’ll borrow it off her and read it.
aengus on March 12, 2008 at 9:28 PM
You people going back and forth about the Mormon religion; they believe satan is Jesus’s brother crap, is just that, crap. I don’t care what they believe. Execept what another poster said, as long as they don’t want to kill me and my family. When JFK ran for president people were all concerned he was going to bring the pope into the white house. Did that happen? No. Mitt, and anyone else, is not running to be the spiritual leader of our country, but for president.
cjs1943 on March 12, 2008 at 10:27 PM
It is an established fact that Romney is an unacceptable candidate who alienates a HUGE majority of voters in the USA. (178 million Christians)
I will never vote for Mccain if he selects Romney as his running mate.
In fact I will vote for the Hildebeast just to stop him!
SaintOlaf on March 12, 2008 at 10:39 PM
SaintOlaf on March 12, 2008 at 10:39 PM
funny thing about facts, you assume not one of those 178 million Christians will vote for Mitt, and Mitt garnered more Christian votes than Huck, the “Christian Leader”
Conservative Voice on March 12, 2008 at 10:47 PM
Thank you, aengus. I have appreciated the tone of your comments.
Speak of the…
Nah. Too easy.
sulla on March 12, 2008 at 11:17 PM
Since you were lying about your statistic, I’ll help correct it for you.
SaintOlaf on March 12, 2008 at 11:18 PM
SaintOlaf on March 12, 2008 at 11:18 PM
He didn’t just win in Utah doofus.
Conservative Voice on March 12, 2008 at 11:32 PM
Good thing McCain is pro-life
Squid Shark on March 13, 2008 at 12:00 AM
Loaf doesn’t care about the facts. They’re too messy. Take Nevada for instance: factoring out the wacky Mormon vote in NV, Romney still crushed. There are other examples….but facts don’t keep you warm at night….hate and class-envy keep the home fires burning, right Loaf?
Cold Steel on March 13, 2008 at 12:09 AM
SaintOlaf on March 12, 2008 at 10:39 PM
Hillary over a McCain/Romney ticket? Where’s the logic in that? Is Romney opening borders, limiting free speech, hitting prostitutes, reaching across aisles, killing babies, or race baiting? You’re letting animosity and prejudice cloud your judgement.
Cold Steel on March 13, 2008 at 12:17 AM
Allahpundit has such a deep dislike of Mitt. It almost rivals Huckabee’s disdain.
Mitt would be a great VP choice. Conservatives were told by alot of the McCain punditry to grow up, calm down, chill out and get on board. It’ll be interesting if McCain is smart enough to take this advice and grow up, etc and pick Romney as a running mate.
And to address Allahpundit’s question a bit ago that asked what experience does Mitt have to be commander of the army, I think Walid Phares said it best when he endorsed Mitt:
“This is why I have come to the conclusion that Governor Romney has the capacity of managing the counter strategies against the Jihadists, only because he stated to the public that he sees the enemy as to who they are. And if a President can see them, he can defeat them.”
I’ll vote for McCain without Romney on the ticket but I will actively campaign for a McCain/Romney ticket.
sheryl on March 13, 2008 at 3:49 AM
“The best/only thing we have going for us at this point is that, unlike the opposition, we’ve settled on a candidate and are headed for a mostly peaceful convention.”
Uh, I will gently point out that we’ve been forced to ’settle’ on a nominee who isn’t a conservative and was chosen by the Media. It’s a lot like having mom shove the cod liver oil down our throats, but I must accept this fact and say that Juan McAmnesty is still mucho better than Herself and Hussein.
Christine on March 13, 2008 at 12:54 PM
Right on Sheryl, (sheryl on March 13, 2008 at 3:49 AM), I would like an honest disclosure as to why AP doesn’t like Romney, but if it’s gonna be wordy, fuggetaboutit.
Christine on March 13, 2008 at 12:59 PM
I don’t understand conservatives backing down and capitulating to electing a more liberal candidate all for the sake of the ‘Party’. Honestly, I don’t get it. The Democrats are fighting over Tweedle-Dee & Tweedle-Dum who both basically hold the same governmental philosophy and that philosophy MATCHES there constituency. We on the other hand have an Independent/Moderate/Liberal heading the GOP ticket and we’re willing to let him pick another independent/moderate/liberal to the VP slot just to “get along”? Whaaaaa!?!
For better accuracy why don’t we just change our party name to the New Republican Moderate/Indepedent “I don’t believe conservative ideas can sell, so I just pick the least stinky moderate I can find…” Party and get it over with.
I on the otherhand, as a female, have less of a limp wrist than most of the conservative males around here (think that’s how we manage to elect the likes of Senator Larry Craig year after year giving the Democrats the ability to claim hyprocrisy in the GOP while they talk away the likes of a Gov. Spitzer) and don’t think that a threat to Sen. McCain is a bad thing. Make him think about where he wants to go, and whether he really wants to be so damn “Maverick”. Read: Damn conservatives I can win with Hawkish Liberals and Independents!
Sultry Beauty on March 13, 2008 at 1:52 PM
Comment pages: