LDS/Mormons and Evangelicals normally vote very similarly. Both were a threat to McCain. The introduction of Fred into the mix meant that that block of voters was split three ways between Fred, Mitt, and Huckabee. Fred was McCain’s stalking horse against Romney winning some states, and against Huckabee winning some others.

While I don’t for a second think Romney was a stalking horse, what he did on February 7th and 14th clearly aligned him as much with McCain as Fred did yesterday.

No, I wasn’t happy to see McCain win. It may be a while before I forgive South Carolina for picking who was obviously not even in the top 3 best candidates.

theregoestheneighborhood on May 15, 2008 at 11:35 PM

…and do you realize the role Fred played in helping McCain win South Carolina?

McCain lost the South Carolina primary to then-Governor George W. Bush in 2000, and McCain was so angry that he revealed his true feelings toward the “Ultra-Right” in a speech he gave in Virginia:

Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance, whether they be Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton on the left, or Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell on the right.

John McCain called Governor George W. Bush “a Pat Robertson Republican” (i.e., “an agent of intolerance Republican”).

When challenged about what he said, John McCain said

“I must not and will not retract anything that I said in that speech at Virginia Beach. It was carefully crafted, it was carefully thought out.” (Hardball, 3/1/00)

I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again, it is a fact that the Communist Party, USA, wants to “Defeat the Ultra-Right”

It certainly appears that John McCain wants to Defeat the Ultra-Right.

After losing SC to Bush in 2000, McCain had a game plan to ensure that wouldn’t happen again. Sadly, it appears that Fred was part of that plan. McCain had to ensure that the “Religious Right” didn’t win SC in 2008. Here are the voting results from this year’s SC Republican Primary:

Candidate # of votes % of total
McCain 143,224 33.22%
Huckabee 128,908 29.90%
Thompson 67,897 15.75%
Romney 64,970 15.07%
Paul 15,773 3.66%
Giuliani 9,112 2.11%
Hunter 1,035 0.24%
Tancredo 115 0.03%

If Fred had not been in the race, who would his votes have gone to? I contend that they would have been split between Huckabee and Romney. As it was, Huckabee almost twice as many votes as Romney, but even if the split of Fred’s votes was 50/50 between Huckabee and Romney (or even just 22% Huckabee / 78% Romney), Huckabee would have won the SC primary.

Giuliani was McCain’s stalking horse in New Hampshire and Florida, to ensure that Mitt Romney didn’t win there.

McCain was declared the winner in Washington State (known for it’s corruption and stolen elections) with only a 242 vote lead and only 87% of the Precincts Reporting! I can’t prove that Huckabee would have won if the other 13% of the vote had been counted, but this doesn’t pass the smell test.

Precincts Reporting: 87%
Republican Winner
John McCain – 25.74%

Candidate # of votes % of total
McCain 3,468 25.74%
Huckabee 3,226 23.94%
Paul 2,799 20.77%
Romney 2,253 16.72%
Hunter 0 0.00%
Thompson 0 0.00%
Giuliani 0 0.00%

highhopes on May 15, 2008 at 8:20 PM

Nicely said. I wish I had the class and self control to have said that myself. I’ve been completely out of sorts with the GOP since the amnesty debacle; little did I know we’d end up with the ringleader as our nominee…and rather than be embarrassed, or angry about it, we’ve got hoards of cheerleaders telling us we’re supposed to be happy and grateful for this miracle…and then all the blood in my body starts spraying out of my eyes and ears like that annoying french guy in Kiss of the Dragon and I lose about 15 minutes of time. But I digress. Well said.

I realize there’s a dearly-held belief among some that if we let a Democrat win, conservatives will rise in disgust and put in a decent president next time. That could well be true. But there’s no point in conspiracy theories and “Fred’s a fraud” namecalling just because he doesn’t subscribe to that theory.

The best thing conservatives can do in this election is to focus on getting a decent conservative Congress get elected. That is the real battlefield of ‘08.

Wouldn’t it be great if McCain had to veer conservative throughout his administration in order to count on getting bills through Congress?

One thing’s for sure: if we don’t start getting a more conservative Congress, the price of gas will continue to go up and up. The only way to reduce the price of gas in the face of rising demand is to raise the supply, and so far Democrats in Congress are smothering every attempt to do that, from off-shore drilling to drilling in ANWR to nuclear power for producing electricity to relaxing environment restrictions on oil exploration to standardizing and streamlining fuel standards so the oil industry doesn’t have to produce 50 different types of gas to meet 50 different states’ requirements for additives.

Obama wants to respond to the rising price of oil by … raising taxes on oil to punish the oil industry. Even if he doesn’t become president, there are lots of democrats in Congress who would do something similar.

And no, I’m not in the oil industry…

But of course, you don’t seem to realize how badly McCain is going to get steamrolled by the new leftist Congress with whom he’s so eager to cooperate.

I don’t see him getting steamrolled at all. What scares the hell out of me is he is going to be actively working with the democrats in congress to pass legislation that will have us spewing beer and cheetos all over the room. He’s been soft on the democrats for months; he’s not just courting their voters, it seems he’s courting the dems in Congress too…given the issues he’s swung far left on, I think he knows he’s going to need their votes to get that garbage passed.

On the amnesty issue, I take him at his word that he learned his lesson with the last effort and will focus on border enforcement firs

You’re kidding, right? ‘I’ll build them their g**damn fence, if that’s what they want.’ And he hires Juan Hernandez to his staff…did you ever wonder why Hernandez is working for McCain and not one of the lib candidates? He spent May 5th mugging with La Raza..and you trust him? I don’t understand you on this one..not one bit.

Supreme Court Nominations.

Look, you guys are hanging your hat on this one and even with an actual conservative President, it’s a long shot that you get someone really good on the court. Reagan had O’Connor…Bush I had Souter…GWB tried to stick us with Miers…I don’t see McCain trying that hard, especially considering how big a majority the dems are going to have. He’s going to be limited in the type of people he can pick..and no amount of screaming on our part is going to change his mind if he picks an a**hat. He’s angling to get into office without the support of a large portion of the GOP…don’t expect to have any control over him.

Fred is trying to influence McCain to be a bit more conservative.

LOL, you don’t persuade a 70 year old to do anything.
….
tarpon on May 15, 2008 at 3:17 PM

You do when that 70-year-old wants to be president as bad as John McCain.

No, I wasn’t happy to see McCain win. It may be a while before I forgive South Carolina for picking who was obviously not even in the top 3 best candidates.

But he’s all we’ve got now. If at some point a third-party candidate looks like a good possibility instead of sheer political hara-kiri, I’ll be happy to vote for the right third-party candidate.

Until then, I’ll have to settle for McCain.

It’s just that: McCain: Hey, he could be worse! is not exactly an inspiring campaign slogan.

You are so right. I think the ‘Heads, although somewhat (cough, cough, choke!) cool toward McCain,

really cannot enable a Marxist win, or anyway any more of a Marxist win than necessary.

Don’t forget the down ticket candidates.

FredHeads for the win!

He is at least committed to fighting pork-barrel spending, which is more than most of our so-called conservative Congresscritters can say.

On the amnesty issue, I take him at his word that he learned his lesson with the last effort and will focus on border enforcement firs

On SCOTUS, he may not nominate another Alito, but I have no doubt in my mind that his picks would be far and away more desirable than any Obama or Clinton nominations. This alone is reason enough to keep the Dem.s out of the WH, as the courts aren’t likely to relinquish their growing “legislative” power, as exhibited today in Ca. The amount of power that the Supremes wield is awesome, and the importance of the power to pick nominees cannot be overestimated.

On the global-warming fairy-tale, he’s just effing nuts.

highhopes on May 15, 2008 at 8:20 PM

I am hardly a McCain cheerleader, but I will respond to your childish rant with three words.

Supreme Court Nominations.

Happy now?

if so, sorry

urbancenturian wants McCain to lose so he can meet Jesus sooner. Um, unhinged isn’t only found in leftist circles.

funky chicken on May 15, 2008 at 5:04 PM

Um, never heard of hyperbole, I see.

But of course, you don’t seem to realize how badly McCain is going to get steamrolled by the new leftist Congress with whom he’s so eager to cooperate.

And no, I’ve never pretended to be a Republican. But I am an unapologetic conservative. Remember that most of the Founding Fathers had nothing but contempt for partisans.

For us conservatives it must be about principles and policies that are grounded in freedom, free markets and the rule of law.

Good comment, Fred. I assume it’s directed at McCain.

Good one! Keep up the good work. It is borderline insanity to imagine that four years under Obama and the ‘crats could be anything but disastrous for our country.

hillbillyjim on May 15, 2008 at 5:13 PM

So Jim, why do you dismiss and slander those of us who see four years under McCain just as bad? I mean really, answer that question for us! Terrye is nothing but a troll that tells us to shut the f**k up because McCain got the nomination. Terrye sees the troops in Iraq as nothing but leverage to make the claim that Obama would be worse. Terrye is flat-out insane when it comes to his/her/its revisionism about McCain’s amnesty bill. Perhaps you can provide the cogent and rational response that he/she/it can not provide in all the screeching and namecalling.

I want one of you McCain cheerleaders to tell the rest of us precisely why Obama would be worse than a man in favor of wholesale no-questions-asked amnesty, is against drilling in ANWAR, rejects social conservative issues, joins with Russ Feingold to abridge Constitutional freedoms, says he wouldn’t support another Alito on the SCOTUS, panders to La Raza, uses Congressional influence to lobby for the savings and loan industry, and a whole slew of other issues. I don’t see that there is so much difference between Obama and McCain.

Clearly you do. Please make the case- I’m sick and tired of your side doing nothing but scream at the rest of us to shut the f**k up and support McCain because he is the nominee. I’m sick and tired of being called a McCain hater because I have LEGITIMATE differences of opinion. Most of all I’m sick and tired of being insulted by mindless McCain supporters who have yet to make the case other than the whole “he isn’t Obama” non-sequitor. I know McCain isn’t Obama. I want one of you people to explain why that matters. So far you all get an F because you don’t work and play well with others.

This conservative was glad to see Fred backing up McCain on his “props” for judge picking. For those whose #1 issue is judicial nominees, that maybe provided a little comfort and may even get a few votes for Johnny Mac. I see no problem with Fred sitting on the stage to agree with his bud on the type of judges we must have. Fred has always said that outside of national security, good judges are the most important Presidential duty.

I’m a far, far cry from being a McCainiac, but as of today I still plan on applying a vice grip to my nose and voting R for President.

Fred’s reasons for appearing on the site / pages of Townhall couldn’t be clearer.

” …Now isn’t the time for conservatives to be looking for a tailored message or a politically expedient route to victory if the end result is going to be the inevitable slide toward the liberalization and secularization of America, and the growth of government and loss of freedom that inevitably ensues…”

Fred Leads, Others Pander

Spirit of 1776 on May 15, 2008 at 8:04 PM

Yes.

If a man were to seek the counsel of others, he could not do better then to get 1 idealist and 1 pragmatist. Hearing both, he could make a well educated path. How foolish it would be, upon assembling such a group, to let it degrade to where the pragmatist slanders the idealist, and the idealist curses the pragmatist. All the party loses.

When you take “conservatism”, and make it a “my way or the highway” perspective, they call it something else – fascism. I don’t mean in any way to imply that you are fascists – I’m just saying that that’s what it sounds like when you refuse to compromise and negotiate.

I will go so far as to add, I spent a large portion yesterday attempting to express what I conceived to be a bridge between the top of the ticket and the grassroots. I’m not clear how that falls under the category of not compromising or negotiating, and as an aside I think your use of fascism is incorrect. Fascism is, in short, about the collection of power into a single central source, is has nothing to do, in and of itself, with adherence to a belief.

Spirit,…
You guys are crazy. Yeah, I’ll start it out with name-calling. From your posts, it doesn’t much matter – you’re putting forth the same kind of irrational venom I would expect to see on HuffPo. How else can you explain wishing the country ill to show opposition to McCain.

I don’t object to you calling me a name, but I don’t see the reason for it. If you desire me to be abjectly rebuked, you will have to explain my error. Nothing I have said, do I perceive to be irrational. Nor have I intended anything with venom.

Spirit, trs, MB4, Robert, et al…
You guys are crazy. Yeah, I’ll start it out with name-calling. From your posts, it doesn’t much matter – you’re putting forth the same kind of irrational venom I would expect to see on HuffPo. How else can you explain wishing the country ill to show opposition to McCain.

Individually, our one puny vote each doesn’t count for much. That’s why I went Libertarian last election myself. But why tear down McCain? You rail against him for not doing everything the way you wanted? The man is a politician, and that’s how you get things done sometimes. And other times, you dig in and call someone out and throw a fit if you need to. Why the hell should you have a problem with that? Grow up.

When you take “conservatism”, and make it a “my way or the highway” perspective, they call it something else – fascism. I don’t mean in any way to imply that you are fascists – I’m just saying that that’s what it sounds like when you refuse to compromise and negotiate. And there is no quicker way to make your opinion meaningless.

connertown on May 15, 2008 at 6:39 PM

It would be interesting to impress your memory engrams on a computer, connertown. The resulting torrential flood of illogic , self parody and red faced hysteria would be most entertaining.
- Mr. Spock