GOP strategists fantasize about McCain landslide; Update: Landslide canceled!
posted at 2:01 pm on May 24, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
“Landslide” being a relative term: If all goes well he could win by 50 electoral votes, greater than either of Bush’s margins over two inferior Democrats. I don’t buy it, but admittedly that’s due more to my own natural knee-jerk pessimism and the hunch that the GOP brand is so poisoned that not even McCain will be immune than to any substantive analytical reason. Yeah, Obama’s money advantage will be enormous, but he’s been outspending Hillary too and she’s still pounding him in battleground states. And yeah, he’s going to mobilize black voters like no one before him, but McCain maybe can make that up among Latinos and independents leery of Wright. None of which is to say he will win, merely that he’s not a sure loser the way any other Republican would have been this year.
Among the 10 strategists interviewed by Politico for this story, there was near-uniform belief that had any other Republican been nominated, the party’s prospects in November would be nil…
The case they make for a comfortable McCain win is not beyond reason. Begin with the 2004 electoral map. Add Iowa and Colorado to Obama’s side, since both are considered states Obama could pick off. Then count McCain victories in New Hampshire and Michigan, two states where McCain is competitive. In this scenario, McCain wins the Electoral College 291-246, a larger margin than Bush four years ago.
If Obama managed only to win Iowa from Republicans and McCain managed only to win Pennsylvania, McCain would still win by a much greater margin than Bush — 300-237…
Even the potentially dramatic rise in turnout of African-Americans may only gain Obama 1 percentage point in many swing states, according to Maslin. Yet Obama’s weaknesses may end up neutralizing some of those relatively modest gains.
All right, here’s a substantive reason for why Obama will win: organization. This is Karl’s hobbyhorse, that the media overlooks the effect of nuts and bolts GOTV efforts for sexier angles about race and gender. The most surprising thing to me about the campaign thus far is how Team Barry has been able to compete with the Clinton machine, which probably could have and would have won (its many mistakes notwithstanding) against almost any other novice politician. If he’s savvy enough to outmaneuver an operation staffed by associates of a two-term president, I’m guessing he’s savvy enough to beat a guy whose own operations aren’t up to normal GOP standards and whose party advantage in voter targeting ain’t what it used to be.
Just in case McCain does win, though, the post-election narrative is already being set. Exit question: Anyone surprised to find Newsweek, a magazine that reduced 40 years of Republican victories to “successfully scaring voters,” wielding something called a “Racial Resentment Index”?
Update: Right on point, yet somehow I missed it. I’m slipping.
Senator John McCain’s presidential campaign is in a troubled stretch, hindered by resignations of staff members, a lagging effort to build a national campaign organization and questions over whether he has taken full advantage of Democratic turmoil to present a case for his candidacy, Republicans said.
In interviews, some party leaders said they were worried about signs of disorder in his campaign, and whether the focus in the last several weeks on the prominent role of lobbyists in Mr. McCain’s inner circle might undercut the heart of his general election message: presenting himself as a reformer taking on special interests in Washington…
Some state party leaders said they were apprehensive about the unusual organization Mr. McCain had set up: the campaign has been broken into 10 semi-autonomous regions, with each having power over things like television advertising and the candidate’s schedule, decisions normally left to headquarters.
More than that, they said, Mr. McCain organizationally still seems far behind where President Bush was in 2004. Several Republican Party leaders said they were worried the campaign was losing an opportunity as they waited for approval to open offices and set up telephone banks.
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: « Previous 1 2 3
TC? True Conservative? I am not now, nor have I ever, claimed to be a True Conservative. That’s somebody else.
As I’ve said before, recently here on HotAir I’ve discovered that I’m apparently not Conservative enough, not Christian enough, and definitely not smart enough to be ranked at the level of TC.
But to your last point, yeah, pretty much. The gop hasn’t represented me for a very long time now. In my opinion, the gop doesn’t deserve my vote. And with McC, it’s really not getting it. McC is a dem, along with a very large percentage of those with R’s next to their names currently in congress.
At this point, like I’ve said before, I’m voting for a little more time in the hopes world events will swing a little further in our favor. It’s happening. I’m just not sure it’ll happen fast enough to head off an unacceptable ugliness.
techno_barbarian on May 24, 2008 at 11:49 PM
totally agree.
Sekhmet on May 24, 2008 at 11:50 PM
Fair enough, I was expelled to RINO land long ago, when I went against the Bush Momentum in 2000
Squid Shark on May 24, 2008 at 11:51 PM
I can respect that.
However, my intention is to convince as many Democrats as possible to support McCain while continuing to speak about him honestly among fellow conservatives. I often say I’m not going to vote for him but if it’s a close election I probably will unless there’s a fantastic new 3rd party ticket erupts on the scene.
If it weren’t for the devotion many American’s feel toward their political party of choice, which is similar in nature to the loyalty of fans in famous rivalries between certain sports teams, McCain would very likely receive more Democrat votes in November than Republican. I think that would be the ideal—for McCain to win being elected, for the most part, by Democrats. I’m hoping that in spite of party loyalty Democrats will come to terms with Obama’s idiocy and the danger he poses and realize that McCain is the best Democrat to run for president since Bill Clinton. That way, we’ll get the best president from all of the awful choices but, perhaps, Democrats will get the lion’s share of the blame.
I realize this is far fetched but I don’t think it’s impossible, and to take a step further into the realm of implausibility: imagine for a moment that McCain’s failed administration damages, not the Republican Party so much, but the Democrat Party. His left wing policies damage the country and people want a change, but although he might be viewed as a Democrat, he has an “R” next to his name. As a result the Republican Party might unofficially become, for all intents and purposes, the “New Democrat Party” and the “old Democrat Party” might be cemented into the role of the Soros-Socialist party. People will want to swing to the right but, (ideally, IMO), they won’t look to Democrats(Socialists), or Republicans(no longer in name only), but to a new and improved conservative party.
Sure, I realize I’m just foaming at the mouth but it’s Saturday and I’m just playing around with my sick political fantasy.
The best scenario of all would be for the Democrat Party to find itself backed into a remote corner of socialism and trapped there by history.
FloatingRock on May 24, 2008 at 11:55 PM
That is a very optimistic scenario. May it actually be so if Obambi wins.
I just can’t help feeling that the idiot dems will take this time in history to completely oust the centrists, overthrow the party, and go hard left with a vengence. If that happens, everybody but our enemies lose.
I’ve enjoyed the conversation with you and everyone else on this thread. Thanks for the civility and reasoned discourse. Very much appreciated.
techno_barbarian on May 24, 2008 at 11:55 PM
Your words and thoughts pretty much mirror my own. I think McC is going to win, not with gop votes, but with a hell of a lot of centrist dem votes. It will still be a dem victory, and most will see it that way, I believe.
That is exactly what I think will happen if McC wins and the far leftist dems are defeated. That possibility should not be underestimated. There is real power there. The dems need to be discredited and thrown from power. This is the only way I can see to do it, at this point.
Excellent post, FloatingRock.
techno_barbarian on May 25, 2008 at 12:04 AM
That’s what I’ve been saying since McCain started to take the lead. We are in complete agreement in that respect.
I can respect the “hold your nose-rs”. Were it not for my long history of knowing McCain for exactly what he is, I would probably be one of them too.
But my long and careful analysis of the situation leads me to believe that America would have a better chance of surviving and recovering from a spectacular crash of the Obamallary marxist bus than it will of the insidious, metastasizing cancer that is riding on the ‘Straight Talk Express’.
Well, Yer pays yer money and yer takes yer choice. Unfortunately there will be no refunds if you aren’t satisfied with the purchase.
I’m just trying to make sure that folks know exactly what they are buying.
LegendHasIt on May 25, 2008 at 12:06 AM
Right back at you – thanks to you too.
Limerick, before I punch out: the reason that I think that will change is that no one (excluding the darkest hearted) wants to leave our men in a lurch over seas. Nor do they, at the end of the day, want to negate all their hard work by precipitous with-raw. Now is different then ‘06 to the casual observer. Now victory is in the range of visibility. I think that will weigh more heavily the closer we get.
Spirit of 1776 on May 25, 2008 at 12:07 AM
haha. Withdraw. “precipitous withdraw”
Spirit of 1776 on May 25, 2008 at 12:09 AM
Believe me, as a small independent entrepreneur, I understand exactly what’s at stake in this election; my and my family’s ability to make a living.
Fighting McC at POTUS for me would be preferrable to being at the mercy of the guaranteed marxist dem trifecta.
But what do you honestly think the ramifications of a dem loss would be. No snark. I’d really like to hear your thoughts on this. Wouldn’t the defeat pretty much insure the completion of the radical leftist dem’s destruction. Wouldn’t that be a reasonable and acceptable outcome.
Seems to me it would be hard for them to maintain any influence whatsoever if they lose this election; even to the RINO McC. The dems get completely exposed as the frauds they are.
And if the news in Iraq and the ME continues to get better, and the oil bubble actually pops… all kinds of things become possible.
I realize that’s a lot of ifs. But still, what are your thoughts?
techno_barbarian on May 25, 2008 at 12:15 AM
As I’ve said on a few occasions to the beloved Mrs B, “That almost never happens.” ;o)
techno_barbarian on May 25, 2008 at 12:18 AM
We didn’t stop McCain. We didn’t change his mind. We scared enough of the other members of the Senate, the President and the House just enough for them to hide it away for a couple of months.
I know McCain well enough to know that he will do things by Executive Order if Congress opposes him on things he considers important.
He doesn’t give a damn what you and I and the rest of the unwashed American Citizens want.
The personality and courage that made him heroic at the Hanoi Hilton are precisely the things that would make him VERY dangerous as President.
LegendHasIt on May 25, 2008 at 12:18 AM
Damned Valu-Rite…
techno_barbarian on May 25, 2008 at 12:19 AM
In the event of said executive order, you could count on me to be out there protesting at the top of my lungs and with every new media weapon I’m capable of wielding.
I can’t say he’d take it that far. I honestly don’t know. That would definitely start a sh*tstorm though, and we’d have more than a few sane dems on our side, too.
The reason I have hope is because we really have stopped it so far. Doesn’t mean they’ll stop trying. I don’t expect that to be the case. I’m expecting a steady fight on this issue, and prepared to do my part in fighting it.
techno_barbarian on May 25, 2008 at 12:25 AM
…it, being the outright legalization of amnesty, that is.
techno_barbarian on May 25, 2008 at 12:28 AM
What makes you think dems like Mccain?
They already call him McBush and hate him fiercely because of his position on the war.
SaintOlaf on May 25, 2008 at 12:28 AM
The biggest problem with the fantasy scenario I mentioned above is that, due to party loyalty, many Democrats will continue voting for the Soros-Socialist Party and Many Republicans will continue, by rote, voting for the New Democrat (Republican) Party and the new conservative party will probably never get off the ground… again, because of party loyalty.
If McCain win’s with Republican votes our entire political environment will take a big swing to the left and nothing good is likely to come of it. I think LegendHasIt’s scenario is more plausible because it doesn’t involve American’s shifting Party Loyalty en mass.
If McCain wins and drives the country into the ground people won’t be in the mood for another Republican, they’ll be looking for a Democrat president, and since our system will have swung to the left already, an Obama or Hillary will probably follow McCain and have even more power than they would if they win this November.
FloatingRock on May 25, 2008 at 12:30 AM
Thanks.
FloatingRock on May 25, 2008 at 12:32 AM
Haha. No comment, your honor.
Spirit of 1776 on May 25, 2008 at 12:34 AM
I’ve found it unproductive to discuss pretty much anything with you, so I won’t be trying further. Thanks.
There’s a lot of truth there. But I still think we’re underestimating the level of defeat should either obambi or hillary lose to McC. It doesn’t defeat McC’s liberalism, but it sure as hell pummels the radical left.
I believe that the far left comprises maybe 30% of the democrats as a whole. I think the majority aren’t insane, and as the dem primaries continue they’ll see more and more of Comrade Obambi’s feet in his mouth, his appeal will be weakened. I predict eventually his gaffes and formulaic responses to them will become a national joke, much like kerry in the last election. Those two are pretty tight at the moment. That’s good for us, bad for the bamster.
And hopefully, when the dem voters are in that booth this November, I think they might just not take the tasty hopium Obambi’s offering them.
As has been said here before, time will ultimately tell.
techno_barbarian on May 25, 2008 at 12:42 AM
I’m not very confident that that would be the end result. Again, it comes back to party loyalty. If the McCainiacs and HoldYerNosers are correct that a significant share of the Republican base will turn out to vote for McCain in the end, it will once again demonstrate that when people are backed into a corner they will consistently reward the lesser of two evils. This only encourages more evil.
If the Democrat and Republican Parties haven’t learned their lessons yet it’s because the balance of power hasn’t been upset too awfully much. If the Democrats lose in a Reaganesque landslide then they might swing back to the right, (and might even cross over to the right of the Republican Party), but short of a spectacular loss such as that they will probably continue their swing to the left along with the new and victorious liberal Republican Party.
FloatingRock on May 25, 2008 at 12:48 AM
Techno-
Yes, Thank you too for the good discussion.
I’m not quite sure that I understand your 12:15 question. Not sure I could even answer it well if I understood it anyway. But I’ll try:
I base my strategy on my better than average understanding McCain’s personality (which has 33 years of history behind it) and an average to slightly above average grasp of the ‘inside the beltway’ system.
Sometimes snark is all I got! ;-)
I’m not sure at all what the ramifications of a Democrat loss would be. It would be easier to call if it were a genuine Conservative that beat them, rather than someone that previously considered defecting to their party a few times.
With just about anyone but McCain, you would probably be right on target with the end of the Rad. Left as a significant political power.
To be honest (and I always am ;-), I’m not too concerned with the results of a democrat loss.
What I am concerned with is what McCain will do to the Republican Party and the American Economy if he wins.
It is easier to fight against an ‘honest’ enemy with a definable set of core values than it is to fight against a putative ally who has no set core values and is more likely to ’stick a knife in your back’ than he is to ‘have your back’.
LegendHasIt on May 25, 2008 at 12:49 AM
Sorry, I didn’t communicate very well. That ‘no snark’ comment was me letting you know that I wasn’t being snarky, not that I expected snark from you.
I agree that the ramifications would be different and vastly favorable if a real Conservative was doing the defeating. That’s not what we’ve got, however.
I still think that regardless which RINO beats them, the very fact that they got beat sends a very important rippling message across the political spectrum. By all acounts they should be winning this one in a landslide. If they win it will most likely be by razor margins, (purchased for them by a compliant msm and a gotv effort that more resembles a mob organization than anything else).
But if they lose this historic election… they implode. Their base revolts, probably literally, and the world gets to see the tender dems rend themselves into political obscurity.
Is that not even a remote possibility? They’ve been breathtakingly stupid for a really long time now. At some point there comes a time to pay the piper, I would think.
techno_barbarian on May 25, 2008 at 1:01 AM
Well said.
Thanks for ‘having my back’, and being able to express concepts that elude my expression at present.
LegendHasIt on May 25, 2008 at 1:03 AM
First of all, the quote you attributed to me was paraphrased, which I don’t appreciate without it being specified in some way. Your version is inaccurate insofar as you make it sound like my remarks were a prediction whereas in reality they described a fantasy scenario. Second of all, you’ve already condemned me to the “lake of fire”, and I’m in too much agony here, guzzling my devils brew, to respond to you. :P
Seriously though, I think Dems will vote for McCain because he’s the best Democrat in the race and Obama in particular is one of the worst candidates in the history of this country. He reads a pretty speech but that’s it, and frankly his prepared orations bore the hell out of me. My entire career has involved listening to or reading peoples words and discerning the few relevant facts from the chaff, and when you’ve weeded everything out of Obama’s speeches and nothing is left, it’s just a big boring waste of time.
There may be a lot of loyal, guilt ridden Democrats, but many are very intelligent if misguided. I think a lot of Democrats are going to vote for McCain, probably not as many as Republicans, but we can hope.
FloatingRock on May 25, 2008 at 1:07 AM
I just don’t see an Obama win. He’s worse than Gore or Kerry. You can put lipstick on a pig but at the end of the day it’s still a pig.
Raised a Muslim
Pro abortion
Pro killing live born babies from botched abortions
A racist
An anti-Semite
A newbie
A Marxist
…and on and on
There are just too many strikes against him. Obama fatigue will set in as his gaffe machine winds up through the campaign.
Mojave Mark on May 25, 2008 at 1:08 AM
See, that’s not what I think is going to happen. I think a lot of Republicans and Conservatives are going to sit this one out. I think McC is going to win because the dems vote for him.
He doesn’t give a damn for us. He’s clearly courting the middle, and the middle is normal-person dems. Not particularly politically active or informed, it won’t take a lot of Obambi’s nonsense to turn them to McC.
I’m fully aware that the more stalwart among us are definitely not going to vote for McC. On principle alone I have to respect that, even though the consequences resulting from those actions will impact virtually all of us in an extremely negative way.
As to the points of your second paragraph, you may well be correct. But I’m thinking that simply having to actually listen to and evaluate what Obambi’s selling will cause those thinking dems out there to question just how far to the left they personally actually are. That might be a useful exercise all by itself.
I still think, at some point, Comrade Obambi is going to screw the pooch in a spectacularly soon-to-be classic way, and in the process open a lot of formally blind eyes.
techno_barbarian on May 25, 2008 at 1:15 AM
Don’t sell yourself short. You’ve done an excellent job expressing your points of view.
techno_barbarian on May 25, 2008 at 1:17 AM
Yo, Rock! Those were my words he was quoting. He cut and pasted and clipped out what I said in a response to you, and in so doing attributed my words to you.
But be advised, you’ll get nowhere productive with the saint.
techno_barbarian on May 25, 2008 at 1:23 AM
I strongly agree. This seems closest to reality on the ground for me. The fringe is loud, but the normal people are out there and thinking about all this. The story’s huge. The msm is actually helping debunk the fraud in spite of itself. Some of the things Comrade Obambi says can’t be waved away.
And little slips like the “this liberal… this liberal would be about socializing… uh..” type statements out of a greatly overconfident and pretty much stunningly incompetent base all but beg for an ultimate dethroning.
techno_barbarian on May 25, 2008 at 1:28 AM
:) And I notice that you weren’t paraphrasing me in that quoted portion but expressing your own opinion.
Our views are very similar techno_barbarian, although we’ve, so far, come to somewhat different conclusions, but one thing is certain: this will be a very interesting election.
Thanks, all, for an enjoyable discussion. I think I’m going to watch a show now before it gets too late. I’ll probably check back from time to time so might be back later. Have a good night.
FloatingRock on May 25, 2008 at 1:40 AM
techno_barbarian on May 25, 2008 at 1:01 AM
I don’t know… None of us really does; All we can do is guess and Hope ;-)
My guess is that they won’t implode if they lose to McCain. The biggest chance for an temporary implosion of the dem party is if Hillary manages to finagle the nomination and Denver 08 turns into a more violent Chicago ‘68.
McCain winning will probably move the far left third or half of the party even further left, and the center will be off the hook completely, because the McCain agenda is pretty close to their own, with the possible exception of earmarks and Iraq.
Only a major disaster will result in a real long term democrat implosion… And then, only if there is a leftist Dem at the helm when it happens, will it cause them to sincerely examine their basic premises. If it is a guy that has an (R) next to his name, they will move further left, even if it is a liberal policy that causes the disaster.
You gotta approach this sort of question as if you had only a 2 digit IQ and the MSM for your only source of information to figure out what the average Democrat voter will do. You, Techno, are just too smart, too rational, too well informed to come up with the right answer to this question….
Hmm… I wonder what that last paragraph says about me…. Maybe I AM as stupid as I look. ;-)
LegendHasIt on May 25, 2008 at 1:41 AM
Enjoyed it. Best discussion in a long time. Thanks.
techno_barbarian on May 25, 2008 at 1:46 AM
Thanks, and your welcome, but like Techno said, you were doing fine on our own.
FloatingRock on May 25, 2008 at 2:00 AM
Dunno about smart on my part. Maybe I’m too optimistic and hopeful because I need to be to survive. And because that, (and working really hard), has worked best for me.
You raise valid points. I don’t think the American People are that dumb, dispite having to live and move among them and admitting I see a lot more really dumb ones than I’d like.
I really think a majority of people on both sides will wind up rejecting Obama, force themselves to vote for McC, and try to limit him as much as possible for four years.
In four years we’ll do it all again. A lot can happen in four years.
techno_barbarian on May 25, 2008 at 2:04 AM
You’re a lot of things. Stupid, however, is not one of them.
Enjoy the rest of your Memorial Weekend, Legend. It’s been a pleasure.
techno_barbarian on May 25, 2008 at 2:06 AM
While I like to be more optimistic than most conservatives about things in general, I am not going to hold my breath on the Dems getting a clue at the national level any time soon. It’s been 40 years now since they’ve nominated anything resembling a centrist and not a single candidate of theirs in that time has ever gotten more than 50% of the vote. Yet they continue to nominate the worst of the worst.
NotCoach on May 25, 2008 at 3:12 AM
Figured I better go double check what I posted above and it turns out I was wrong. Carter received 50.08% of the vote in 1976.
NotCoach on May 25, 2008 at 3:16 AM
Gracias, Techno, Y usted.
(I’m taking Vinny Foxy’s advice and brushing up on my Spanish.)
LegendHasIt on May 25, 2008 at 3:51 AM
Ive been mulling this one over. Do you think that there is a possibility that, much as we often dont even bother courting blacks because of their loyalty to the Dems, McCain has just given up on the TC’s because they keep saying that they are so principled and cant vote for them because of those principles (even though they ponied up for Bush both times which I think is funny as hell).
Squid Shark on May 25, 2008 at 8:09 AM
I think that’s a distinct possibility. I don’t think his strategy is to depend on TCs, but rather centrist dems. The same kind of dems that voted for Lieberman rather than the far leftist choice.
I also can not understand why we don’t openly and actively court the African American vote more than we do.
Folks tend to poor mouth AAs and look more to their permanent victim status, but I have never seen more affluence and success in the black community as I am right now. I live in a very ethnically diverse neighborhood and my excellent neighbors and their children are doing quite well at every level. They’re perfect candidates for a Conservative message, especially as they, like me, genuinely feel the impacts of higher taxes and more socialist policies.
Wouldn’t surprise me a bit to see a shift in the AA community away from the party of the KKK and back toward the party of Lincoln at some point in the near future.
Putting Michael Steele on as McC’s VP would be a smart move on several levels.
techno_barbarian on May 25, 2008 at 10:05 AM
jerrytbg wrote:
From browsing your posts you seem a bit trollish so I’m probably foolish to try to defend my words. I suppose these are offensive to you:
Paul-Cincy wrote:
One thing on my mind was the recent exit poll showing race was important to some 20% of WV democratic primary voters. I was meaning to explain, even excuse their supposed racism.
One may take any comment of the form “Person X seems to be Y first, and American second” as mean and ugly. This was the rationale for putting Japanese-Americans in internment camps in WWII. In 1960 people wondered if JFK was Catholic first, American second. This year people asked about the importance of Romney’s Mormon faith.
For the WV dems who said race was an important factor in their vote, they may be saying what’s important is the attitude Obama has towards his color. It’s a question of how he defines himself. I didn’t hear any complaints about Colin Powell and his race. Al Sharpton, on the other hand, there’s an argument to be had his identification as a black person greatly influences his politics. People might vote against him for that reason, not due to his “race” per se, though close enough to be answered “yes” in a WV exit poll question. To see that Sharpton’s identification with his skin color influences his politics isn’t racism, it’s just seeing what’s there. And it does have to do with “race”.
According to his autobio, Obama has had trouble finding his identity, especially his racial identity. It’s a central issue for him. We don’t talk about identity much, because it relates to embarrassing and even shameful feelings. It’s close to us. And Obama is a pretty touchy guy. He has sensitive feelings. That’s part of his charisma.
Why did he go to Wright’s church? Partly to establish his black bona fides. When asked about “black liberation theology”, Obama looked down and said “I’m not a theologian”. Good answer. I’d look down too then if I were him. His church is based on a racist ideology.
Obama is supposed to transcend race. If he did, and he was a moderate, and more experienced, I might vote for him myself. But I think he’ll make bad decisions as he’s already made bad decisions due to unresolved issues he has with his own racial identity, and a lot of people can see that and will vote against him for that reason. It doesn’t have anything to do with his race, it’s about how he deals with his race. It didn’t have to be this way. Maybe he will resolve in it the next 5 years. But as of now it seems to be a problem for him despite his Philadelphia “speech of the century” on race which honestly left me cold.
The black conservative Shelby Steele made a similar argument in his recent book “A Bound Man: Why We Are Excited About Obama and Why He Can’t Win”. A summary of his thesis is “[Obama]’s still mired in an ideology of racial victimhood and separatism”.
That’s enough feeding the trolls.
Paul-Cincy on May 25, 2008 at 1:16 PM
We thought McCain got it on Immigration. He told us he got it. Turns out, he didn’t get squat. He got that he couldn’t get his way right now is all. McCain has told us that Alito is too Conservative, wears his religion on his sleeve. He’s going to give us nominees that make us long for the days of the eminently qualified Harriet Myers.
McCain is no Conservative, and every time you think you can trust him, he’ll stab you right in the back. Pulling the lever for McCain is literally a pull and pray in November. It’s the worst way to prevent pregnancy, and the worst way to select a President. Just bought my Obama supporters pack since Hillary is really out of it for now. It should be back in stock soon. Down with the jacka$$ John McCain.
Snake307 on May 25, 2008 at 3:33 PM
Problem with the “least damaging Dem” gets the vote argument is that the next president will almost certainly replace Buzzy Ginsburg and Stevens. Souter may decide he’s too lazy even to cancel his paychecks and “retire” should anyone be able to notice much difference.
If the Socialists pack the Supreme Court for a few decades, control a Congress where the GOP’s current lackadaisacal (or sold out) opposition barely appears on radar, and with a Hillary or Obambi telling the ignorant masses gummint knows best… then be careful of what you wish for pulling that lever out of spite.
For those thinking a vote for increasing the Socialists power will “show them” I suggest they keep a brown shirt uniform neatly pressed for when the Socialist dress-code and conduct-code edict gets the bully pulpit with press adulation, passed into law, then casually declared Constitutional by a revised Supreme Court majority.
viking01 on May 25, 2008 at 3:43 PM
I don’t get it. Somebody explain this to me.
Why is the “Republican brand” so badly damaged?
I completely understand why Republicans themselves are sick of their own party not upholding its standards. That, I get.
But what’s that got to do with independents and moderates of both parties?
Good grief, the Democrats have been caught in as many scandals as the Republicans, the Democrats leading the Congress are less effective than a team of high school debaters trying to run the country would be, Democrats have gone absolutely bat$hit crazy over 9/11, Diebold, and a dozen other touchstones, and now we’ve had, what, FIVE Democratic governors/mayors in a row indicted and removed from office? This is all not to mention that Democrats have less than zero credibility on budget issues. They don’t want to cut the budget, and everybody with the slightest historical sense knows it. They want to RAISE TAXES.
Don’t tell me about Democrat control of the press; Democrats controlled the press from 1980 through 2004, and the Republican brand did just fine, thank you very much.
What we’re looking at here is a Republican national party that is so absolutely, completely freaking INCOMPETENT that it has no idea how to present itself, let alone how to capitalize on a deluge of Democrat corruption and buffoonery.
Either that, or the populace of the US wants to chuck self-government in the trash and turn themselves over to the Marxists in the UN.
Ideas?
(Unrelated to this topic, please visit my political blog, “Plumb Bob Blog: Squaring the Culture,” at http://www.plumbbobblog.com. Thanks.)
philwynk on May 25, 2008 at 8:22 PM
Wise move Gringo as Juan el Vengful is on his way.
VinyFoxy on May 25, 2008 at 9:47 PM
The Republican brand has suffered because rather than defining themselves they have allowed the opponents both political and media to define them. That comes across as reacting instead of leading. Frist’s “nuclear option” was smacked down because Frist waited and waited and waited while the Gang of Fourteen had time to coalesce. Hastert didn’t win any friends by defending William Jefferson’s special rights as part of the Congress club. The GOP Congressional leadership produced few accomplishments so the voting public in 2006 had little they could point to as voting for. Many in the GOP whom were removed in 2006 presumed they were in safe districts and paid for that presumption. They stood for staying in Washington not for representing their constituents and got booted out. Consider the choice to endorse Specter again despite Specter’s moves to impede the platform or the push by many in the GOP for handouts giveaways and pharmaceutical subsidies. I credit the quality of the approved Supreme Court Chief Justice and Associate Justice nominees for their confirmation than any RNC activity. Whether one likes Harriet Myers she was clearly left holding the bag by the RNC.
One can readily see from the 2004 election and the media’s attempt to redefine Swift-Boating how effective those Navy veterans were in helping sink Kerry’s pompous posturing. Yet I see that mostly as grass roots America choosing to illuminate Kerry’s defects rather than the GOP leadership. Of the political advertising in 2004 the SwiftBoat ads stood out as a shining example of defining the opponent and why Kerry didn’t belong. The RNC of 2004 probably owes more to those Navy veterans who stood their ground, upheld their consciences and risked the media attacks than anything the RNC headquarters chose to do.
The key seems to be regaining why the public should vote for the GOP. When I saw Grassley grinning at the State of the Union address like the Cheshire Cat over the prospect of corn futures and ethanol loot the shallow impression he gave was “I got mine.” No worries in his mind about the food crunch now resulting. Meanwhile the RNC leadership keeps sending out the envelopes while giving no indication of willingness to lambaste the Pelosi / Reid damage to the economy or the Dems pandering to Syria and Iran. There’s a gold mine of political ammunition such as the ANWAR and coastal drilling solutions if the RNC would simply take a stance. To learn that Frist and Hastert have failed because they appeared too willing to get along and too content with business as usual.
I still think it boils down to if the GOP leadership fails to define themselves and assail the opposition’s damaging policies no one else will. The Old Media certainly will not as befits their Leftist traditions and subservience.
viking01 on May 25, 2008 at 9:56 PM
Your rebuttal proved my original assertion ….long winded and rehashing that which has already been stated time and time again…and it wasn’t that I completely disagreed with you. That is what I meant.
BTW, … you’re the first to call me a troll. Which tells me you were just referencing some of my flippant remarks on this thread and not others. I have to admit I was excited about doing some night sailing and I was having some fun and if I truly offended you, sorry . If you won’t hold it against me I won’t hold it against you.
Take care.
jerrytbg on May 25, 2008 at 10:46 PM
It’s not that the brand is damaged. Really it isn’t. It’s that our elected leaders of the Republican Party began to ignore campaign promises. They would return home and beat the conservative drum. Then they get back to Washington, and ignore the Conservative principals that they just finished beating the drum over.
Conservative idealism means you have to educate the public to your ideas. You have to show them the truth regardless of the media spin. Reagan was called the Great Communicator. Not because he delivered a great speech, but because he could and would communicate his ideals to the public. He used analogy, logic, and intelligence to educate the people into understanding his view of tax cuts. They demanded that the congress, a Democratic Congress run by a Political Legend Tip O’Neil, pass Reagan’s tax cuts.
Reagan educated the public as to what he wanted, and why he wanted it. Our modern Conservative Leaders claim to be cut from Reagan’s cloth, but they are weak and pale imitations who don’t really hold the conservative ideals close to their hearts. They are realists, involved in real politics, and they don’t bother to try and educate the people. Instead, they try and figure out how they can fool the people.
We weren’t fooled, and we got tired of Conservative being redefined to mean bigger government instead of a less intrusive and less interfering government. We started to stand for reduction of freedom of speech instead of encouraging honest political debate. We started looking for the answer that sounded good in a sound bite instead of telling the people what we thought, and why.
Conservative values are logical, and make sense, and they work when applied to a problem. Liberal solutions, which is all our elected shadow masters give us anymore, never work in real life. Yet, we try to increase them instead of fighting them.
Our battle cry went from we can do it if given half a chance, to it’s just too hard. It’s just too hard to secure the boarders. It’s just too hard to get a balanced budget. It’s just too hard to keep from screwing the average citizen regarding bankruptcy while we protect our powerful cronies right to eliminate debt. It’s just too hard to honestly defend the nation against the terrorists who want to slaughter the people. It’s just too hard to get a warrant to examine records, we have to use national security letters, the ticking time bomb scenario which has been used how many thousands of times?
Well, speaking for myself. It’s just too hard to vote Republican. If we’re going to submit the same asinine answers as our socialist brethren, then why should I support the party? Not because they’re going to use common sense and conservative idealism. They aren’t going to do that.
The only reason would be if I am nothing more than a yellow dog Democrat for the Republican Party. I for one would not rather vote for a yellow dog, than vote for a Democrat. The Democrats who are beating us in these special elections aren’t running as liberals. They’re running as Conservatives. Fiscal, and Social conservatives. The very pattern that our elected leaders ran on, and didn’t deliver even once.
I’m willing to hire you for a job, but after a while, if you don’t deliver anything except excuses, then I’m not going to renew that contract when I have the chance. That’s conservative value applied. We expect something for our time, and money. That’s the problem with McCain. What we hope to get, and what we really get, are so far apart as to be a bad joke.
Snake307 on May 26, 2008 at 7:36 AM
I agree that we certainly could use another Reagan about now but we don’t have another one, yet. After the Ford years we could have abandoned all and voted for Peanut Carter. Some did and the nation paid dearly for it. We’re still paying for it considering how Peanut gave the Panama Canal away and pulled the rug out from under the Shah of Iran.
The alternate candidates are reminiscent of Carter. Lots of smiles, empty promises, big government solutions, regulation and taxes, change somehow necessarily better. Very tempting on the surface. A lot can happen in four years such as people saying they should have voted for McCain instead of Obambi just as many saying they should never have voted for Carter over Ford out of spite for Nixon. It is fortunate that Carter was unable to do much damage to the Supreme Court during his only term (despite majorities in his favor). We may not be so lucky with Smiley or Clinton’s doormat. A repeat of a simpleton Stansfield Turner undermining National Security for the next four years in a post 9/11 world could be devastating. Which major city should be written off to really show it to our political leaders?
There are some in Congress who do fight the fight and deliver when they can. Jeff Sessions, for example. You may not hear much from him nowadays because Frist failed to lead then undermined his own when Sessions and a few others were sticking their necks out for Conservative policies and principles. Frist and Hastert squandered their majorities because they would not fight for them and to retain them.
We live in interesting times. Let’s not make them unnecessarily interesting by firebombing and clearcutting away those whom uphold our principles as hoping vengeance against those who don’t. I’m not thrilled with McCain but he has a concept of war in a time of war and he’s dealt with and endured its savagery first hand. Neither of his opponents have that valuable perspective as they go from town to town cleverly promising the moon to those whom seek to avenge the sun.
viking01 on May 26, 2008 at 6:50 PM
Here is the problem my friend. Our candidate is liberal too. He’s proposing huge government programs. His environmentalist wacko cap and trade proposal will decimate our economy. Any thoughts on how we talk him out of something? No one has ever been successful at that. Once he has an idea, he thrusts it upon us, and we’re stuck with the problems. Even when the problems become apparent, McCain won’t back down from what he wants no matter how much it hurts the rest of the nation. We’re still paying for his objections to drilling in ANWR twelve years ago. Just because we could have gas at about half the cost it is now is no reason for him to back off his current environmentalist lies.
He’s just been quoted all over as being heart sick over the war in Iraq. How long before that heart sick feeling, coupled with a bi-partisan proposal in congress, cause him to back off his sort of staunch feelings in the war on Terror in Iraq?
I’ve watched McCain for years, and I am absolutely sure of one thing. I can’t trust him. We can’t trust him.
McCain has already done tremendous damage to the Conservative movement by having his defenders out there redefining conservative to mean all the negative things, like bigger government, more government interference, higher taxes, and punitive class envy. These are liberal traits, liberal beliefs. Government is not the answer, Government is the problem. That is our basic core belief as Conservatives. We want Government to leave us the hell alone, and he wants Government to increase oversight on everything from home loans to energy usage.
McCain makes Jerry Ford look competent and Conservative by comparison. He makes Bob Dole look like a dream candidate by comparison. He makes Bush look like a knee jerk conservative by comparison.
I don’t want to sit here in four years with a recession in full effect and have a Ford/Carter election going on. If four years of Obama or Clinton is more than we can afford now, how will four years of the new Jerry Ford in the form of McCain and then four years of Obama or Clinton feel?
McCain was one of those leaders who pulled Frist and Hastert to the left, and dumped on Conservatives like Sessions. He was one of the Moderates who dumped on Conservatives every single Sunday on the talk shows. I won’t reward him by voting for him this November.
Oh, in another post, I asked how it would feel if McCain lost Georgia, a state which Bush won by something like twenty percent. McCain is down to leading this state by something like thirteen percent now, and it’s steadily falling. When the press really starts to hammer McCain, don’t you think that will drop even more? I think it will plummet when McCain starts to growl at people who dare question him.
McCain is the punk who would be king. I won’t help him do that. I can’t think of a single domestic policy that Obama or Clinton would implement that McCain wouldn’t. Sorry, I’m going to avoid checking the McCain block this November, and I honestly hope he gets blown out in a 49 state landslide.
If Clinton runs this November, she’ll carry Florida, and we’ll have her in the White House. I even think Obama can beat McCain.
Snake307 on May 27, 2008 at 2:31 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3