Boots & Sabers - The blogging will continue until morale improves...

Mossad Disagrees With US Intelligence About Iran | Home | A New Republican

Tuesday, February 05, 2008

You’re A Republican….

...will you vote for McCain if he’s the nominee?

Posted by Owen at 2124 hrs

(0) Trackbacks

Politics + Politics - General

Add | Remove

Absolutely, positively.....NO!

That slime has taken way too much pleasure in ripping Conservatives to his liberal buddies in the mainstream media. He criticizes his own party more than the Dems.

I’ll certainly support other Republicans on the ticket, but McCain will NEVER get my vote.
Posted by on February 05, 2008 at 2239 hrs

Lenin had a great quote on how ideological purity must be enforced at all times.

Wish I could find it, seems appropriate these days.
Posted by on February 05, 2008 at 2245 hrs

I’ll just sit out the election in November if McCain is the nominee. He’s way too liberal for my taste on issues like immigration, gitmo, torture, campaign finance, tax cuts, gang of 14, etc. Nope, I’ll proudly stay home.
Posted by on February 05, 2008 at 2247 hrs

This has nothing to do with “ideological purity”. This is about McCain hating Conservatives more than the opposition. He’s never wanted our support and he won’t get it.

It’s very simple.
Posted by on February 05, 2008 at 2251 hrs

Yep, because I agree with McCain about 80% of the time and I agree with Hillary or Obama a whole lot less.
Posted by thoughtful conservative on February 05, 2008 at 2257 hrs

Nope. I could live with a certain level of apostasy. But he’s wrong on too many issues that I care about, and despite his incessant and incorrect assertion that he was the only Republican candidate who supported the surge, he doesn’t have a strategic view of the GWOT.

Sad thing is, he’s running as far to the right at this moment as he ever will. After tonight, he’ll take a gradual left turn towards his natural center of gravity. And something tells me he won’t be able to resist sticking it to the conservatives one last time by picking a moderate for his running mate.

The only positive outcome from all this is it probably keeps that gasbag Bloomberg out of the race.
Posted by Tony Turner on February 05, 2008 at 2259 hrs

This has nothing to do with “ideological purity”.

Yes, that’s 100% what it’s about.

Ideology is the same religion. McCain is an apostate.

At least for now. In a few months most of McCain’s harshest critics will be supporting him over Hillary or Obama, who represent much bigger threats to the emotional attachment ideology provides.
Posted by on February 05, 2008 at 2259 hrs

Hey, don’t be calling me a Republican! I’m a Conservative… unlike John McCain.

No, I will not vote for him, I will focus my efforts at fighting the liberal policies of President Obama / Clinton.

If McRINO were to win, who would we be able to count on to counter his liberal policies? The GOP wouldn’t buck their president and the liberals would also support way to much if his agenda.
Posted by Patrick on February 05, 2008 at 2300 hrs

I don’t think I’d vote for him even if he sponsored that immigration law last year. Maybe I’d go for Clinton or Obama.
Posted by Estela on February 05, 2008 at 2313 hrs

I’ll vote for him, but that’s it. No donations or signs or any work on the campaign. I just can’t get excited about him. Looks like a McCain-Huckabee ticket now.
Posted by on February 05, 2008 at 2318 hrs

Yes, and when we have the national debt get larger and we get a couple of liberal supreme court judges--I will blame the conservative puritans who allowed it to happen by handing the election to obama or clinton.

use your heads ppl. in a democracy you don’t get candidates you agree with all the time.
Posted by on February 05, 2008 at 2324 hrs

Undecided. Depends on whether I think congressional Republicans will be better off as an opposition party or in the minority in support of a somewhat anti-conservative Republican. I may not decide until fall.
Posted by Jib on February 05, 2008 at 2325 hrs

Undecided. Heck, I’m not even sure I’m a republican. It’s like the definition shifted while I wasn’t paying attention.
Posted by Brian on February 05, 2008 at 2327 hrs

Depends. If he picks a good conservative that I could get excited about in 8 years I might plug my nose and do it. But I won’t donate and I won’t take the day off to drive peolpe to the polls like I was planning.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 0002 hrs

No way am I voting for McCain! Oh, wait...this question is for Republicans? Never mind…
Posted by Mike Plaisted on February 06, 2008 at 0017 hrs

I agree with those who say we would be committing conservative suicide if we did not vote or voted for the Dems. I am not sure what I will do. I cannot STOMACH McCain. Where did all the conservative candidates go???
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 0017 hrs

Nope. I would rather have a crappy president be a Dem than a Republican and further put our name into the ground.
Posted by Brandon on February 06, 2008 at 0024 hrs

Not just no, HELL NO.

Especially with The Huckster on the ticket. After the corrupt deal McCain made with The Huckster to stay in the race to keep conservatives from uniting behind Romney — by the way, anyone who thinks Huckabee is a conservative is an idiot — the GOP ticket deserves to get thumped. Yes, rumors abound that McCain offered Huckabee the VP slot for helping thwart Romney.

Screw these RINOs. I may actually vote Democrat this fall. Or 3rd party. But I won’t stay home. If I don’t vote, I don’t feel I have a right to complain.
Posted by pdigaudio on February 06, 2008 at 0027 hrs

As a former Thompson staffer I’ll vote for McCain. I’m a conservative before I’m a Republican, but I’m an American before either. McCain would better lead the nation than either Obama or Clinton.

ACE writes:

I won’t donate and I won’t take the day off to drive peolpe to the polls like I was planning.

That’s what I’m feeling now. I haven’t approached the McCain campaign looking for a job, and I doubt I’ll donate to him.

I will keep an open mind. If he actually reaches out to conservatives and makes it feel like he doesn’t hate us I could change my mind. For now it feels like Dole ‘96 where I wasn’t inspired to do much for him.
Posted by Sean Hackbarth on February 06, 2008 at 0117 hrs

After mentioning that I am conservative and more independent than Republican, I will not vote for McRINO. I have never avoided a ballot, even when my entire ballot was write-in. I will write in Thompson.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 0143 hrs

I should mention that even if you can’t see yourself voting for McCain there’s sure to be down-ticket races that will need your votes. Don’t skip voting just because of your distaste for John McCain.
Posted by Sean Hackbarth on February 06, 2008 at 0229 hrs

Did anybody notice that the stock market did not signal it was going into bear market until Thompson retired from the race?
There was still hope until that point.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 0235 hrs

Yes, and when we have the national debt get larger and we get a couple of liberal supreme court judges--I will blame the conservative puritans who allowed it to happen by handing the election to obama or clinton.

Why do you think these things wouldn’t happen under McCain? I promise - PROMISE - that he would appoint Supreme Court justices that would favor limits on political free speech and would overturn the decision rendered in the WI Right to Life (consider THAT if you are pro-life).

And if his nominations to the Supreme Court can’t support free speech, why would they be inclined to support any other conservative views on jurisprudence??? His opposition to tax cuts and his professed belief in the global warming hoax won’t do the free-market any good or do anything to spur job growth.

If you want to go ahead and help castrate the Republicans in Congress and the brand name across the country, then feel free to do so, but don’t ask us conservative puritans to be a party to that crime!

My ideals are bigger than the GOP (which makes them look like Jupiter to McCain’s pea sized ideals).
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 0301 hrs

It’s not about ideological purity. I can tolerate disagreement with core conservative principles if they decision is sincere and based upon a true belief in the position.

McCain’s differing positions aren’t based on any true belief on his part. McCain’s positions are based on what’s best for McCain at the time. It was in his best interest for years to deviate from the party in order to establish himself as a “maverick,” so he did. Campaign finance was done not to clean up Washington, but to try to to make people forget his involvement in the Keating Five. And on, and on, and on.

No thanks.
Posted by Jed on February 06, 2008 at 0605 hrs

when we have the national debt get larger

Just a point of order: The national debt was shrinking under the last Democrat, and skyrocketed under the last three Republicans. Bush’s new budget pushes deficits back to near-record territory.

Congressional Democrats have returned to pay-as-you-go rules to try to stem additional red ink as much as possble, and Republicans have gone so far as to filibuster things like the AMT revision because they can’t stand PAYGO.

I don’t think you can claim “debt” as a Democratic characteristic, Ryan.
Posted by folkbum on February 06, 2008 at 0707 hrs

Of course, but that’s not exactly news to y’all.

The more important question is whether or not voters like my parents, who have voted Democrat more often than not, would cross over and vote McCain rather than one of the two the Democrats put forward. After all, that’s how Reagan won.

What if those labeling themselves “true conservatives” (which makes me laugh because I’ve always considered myself one, too) are not as necessary as you would like to think in determining national policy?
Posted by Cindy on February 06, 2008 at 0708 hrs

In a word, HELLNO.

The legislative record of a McCain Presidency would be worse than either Bush. If we are going to get crap government, let the Democrats take the blame. I never thought I would sit out an election, but I will be this year. Future nominees will hopefully learn the lesson that they need to be a real Conservative, not a RINO or CINO.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 0735 hrs

I highly doubt that I’d vote for him. And I won’t vote Democrat Party either. I’ll vote the down ballot races. Yet, things are still early. How McCain will reach out to conservatives, whether he offers any mea culpas, whether he enthusiastically endorses any conservative ideas, will determine my support for him. Given his humongous ego, I doubt that I’ll vote for him.
Posted by Jim the Fireman on February 06, 2008 at 0744 hrs

McCain is a moderate Republican, not a conservative.

McCain is a maverick Republican, not a lockstep party loyalist.

McCain is not a liberal.

McCain is not a Democrat.

You don’t like him, fine. Works for me and helps me and my Democratic candidate. But for the sake of intellectual honesty, I wish we could at least get it right about what kind of politician McCain is.
Posted by scott on February 06, 2008 at 0844 hrs

For all the Liberals out there that are weighing in on this and passing judgement on Conservatives who are struggling with bringing themselves to voting for McCain ... I’m just curious ...

Would you vote for Joe Leiberman if he were the Democratic Nominee?

How about Zell Miller?
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 0858 hrs

Aboutely Positively NOT!!! If I actually show up at the polls I will write in Romney!
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 0912 hrs

Would you vote for Joe Leiberman if he were the Democratic Nominee?

How about Zell Miller?

I think you’re overstating things here. There’s no way John McCain is in the same league of apostasy as Zell Miller or Joe Lieberman. Miller backed Bush over his own party’s nominee, and Lieberman literally left the Democratic party to run as an independent. If you think McCain is even in the same ballpark, you’re confused about something.
Posted by scott on February 06, 2008 at 0928 hrs

Rush has it right on target-"If we are going to destroy the country, I want the right party to get the credit”. As a true conservative, I could not vote for McCain under any circumstances.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 0930 hrs

Yes, I will, because of all the candidates on the ballot, he’ll be the one who most closely represents me. And then I’ll stay in touch with my congressman (or, rather, I’ll stay in touch with Paul Ryan’s office - Baldwin is mine) to try and influence the national government onto a conservative path.

McCain is odious on some issues, but he’s very good on the war. That’s issue #1.

It’s tempting to vote Democrat, or to not vote for President (we should still all go to the polls for the down-ticket races - good point Sean), to put the Dems on the defensive and maybe have a better shot at Congress in 2010. But that’s too cute - like trying to sink the 7-ball AND set yourself up for the 8-ball at the same time.
Posted by Lance on February 06, 2008 at 0931 hrs

I find it interesting that a lot of people think McCain is not a “true conservative” or lacks “core conservative values”. I must have missed the meeting where these terms were defined for the entire country.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 0947 hrs

Thanks for answering the question ... why is it so hard to get a straight answer to a simple question?

I will grant you that Miller is probably not a good comparison, but I think Lieberman is spot on. The Democratic party threw Lieberman under the bus because they disagreed with him on his views on the war in Iraq. He was villified by the Democrats and forced out in order to get re-elected to the Senate. All this despite being the Party’s VP candidate for the Dems in 2000 and an otherwise strong Liberal voting record. Dems couldn’t stomach him anymore because he held a view on Iraq that Liberals couldn’t stomach. How is that different from Conservatives disillusioned by McCain’s betrayal of Conservatives on critical issues such as the Bush Tax Cuts or Immigration?
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 0947 hrs

Yes.

Yesterday, Michael Reagan said his Dad would never come out for a candidate in a primary, but as soon as the GOP had the nominee, he would rally around him, regardless of who it was. Michael said that was the true legacy of his father and unfortunately, many conservatives have forgotten that.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 0950 hrs

Of course I’ll vote for McCain, he’s against abortion and he’s for the war. I personally don’t like the guy or think very highly of him but there’s no way in Hell he could possibly be worse than Clinton or Obama. There’s no way any honest conservative can argue that Obama or Clinton would better represent them as President than McCain would.

Yes McCain sucks, get over it. Clinton and Obama suck worse, socialized healthcare? Iraq withdrawl? get over your little hissy fit and look at the situation objectively. Yes it would have been nice to have Thompson as the nominee, but that didn’t happen. Life sucks. Deal with reality and stop acting like spoiled children about this.
Posted by Matt on February 06, 2008 at 1005 hrs

Yeah, Matt, he’s so pro-life he sued to have pro-life groups silenced during an election year.

Or what about his remarks in 2000 saying he wouldn’t support overturning Roe v. Wade? Whether you are pro-life or not, isn’t that a pretty good litmus test of where he really lives on the issue?

If he was pro-life to the degree you want to believe he is, then why didn’t he get NRTL’s endorsement?
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1018 hrs

I should add that he and Governor Doyle agree on embryonic stem cell research.

Awesome!
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1021 hrs

I just don’t know - I think he is the better candidate (over Clinton, Obama) on national security but I wonder if that is just to court conservatives. Tax cuts, immigration, waterboarding, McCain-Feingold and a potential Huckabee running mate might just tip me over to the no side.
Posted by Rich2 on February 06, 2008 at 1021 hrs

“If we are going to destroy the country, I want the right party to get the credit”.

Don’t worry, the right party got the credit. That’s why you Republicans are going to lose so spectacularly in 08.

I will grant you that Miller is probably not a good comparison, but I think Lieberman is spot on.

I don’t see how. Lieberman was so odious to the Democrats in his home state that they ran an alternate against his incumbency. Has anything even remotely like that ever happened to McCain in Arizona? Have Republicans in his state been so dissatisfied? They seem to have had no problem reelecting him for the last 20 frickin’ years.
Posted by scott on February 06, 2008 at 1022 hrs

I also don’t think Lieberman is an apt comparison at all. Lieberman, like, say, Rudy Giuliani, could not muster the support among Democrats to win his party’s nomination for president. Had he run for the nomination in 2000, even absent Al Gore in the race, he wouldn’t have won the nomination. Gore tapped him to be VP, in fact, precisely because Lieberman had stood with Republicans during impeachment, and Gore thought he could appeal to enough voters who’d grown weary of Clinton. The problem with that was that Gore overestimated Dems’ dislike of Bill Clinton (Bill Clinton remains one of the most popular national Democrats) and overestimated even then the appeal of someone like Lieberman.

In other words, it took a popular figure like Gore to eleveate Lieberman to a national role, and once in that national role, Democrats rejected him.

McCain, on the other hand, has risen to where he is on his own and has shown that there are enough Republicans (or Republican leaners) who will support him nationally.

A more apt comparison is whether Obama supporters will support Clinton, and vice-versa. Exit polls have been saying yes.
Posted by folkbum on February 06, 2008 at 1023 hrs

Publis, so you think that McCain would be less pro-life than Obama or Clinton?
Posted by Matt on February 06, 2008 at 1034 hrs

Yes the choices suck, but if you decide not to choose then someone else will choose for you. Remember that.
Posted by Matt on February 06, 2008 at 1037 hrs

NARAL rates him at zero. If that isn’t good enough for you, I don’t know what is.

But I guess I should shut my mouth! Go on hating your nominee. It’ll only mean good things for my own nominee.
Posted by scott on February 06, 2008 at 1038 hrs

Considering his penchant for capitulation on pro-life issues and judicial nominees, why would you suspect he’s better than either one of them?

After all, as President, his only chance at affecting the pro-life cause would be via his judicial nominees/SCOTUS appointments; with a Democrat-controlled Congress, he is more likely to appoint people than can get approved, not ones that reflect a pro-life proclivity.

You ask me if I think McCain would be less pro-life than Obama or Hillary… I don’t think he’d be better. At least Obama and Clinton are devils we know versus McCain, the devil we don’t.

Look, he revels in being a maverick, and that usually means a degree of unpredictability…
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1042 hrs

It is nice to see Jay engaged in the mid-day fray.

If you conservatives don’t like the Republicans candidate you should start supporting campaign finance reform. The type of conservative you guys want likely is not going to win the Republican nomination anytime soon. Even if a Fred Thompson-like candidate was the nominee he would get trampled in a two party race against Obama or Hillary.

The only way to get the type of conservative you want into power would be through a 3 or more party race. The only way to make that happen would be through campaign finance reform (yes there is a way to do it constitutionally).
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1043 hrs

Choosing not to choose is still a choice.

NARAL? NARAL?

NARAL won’t be happy until the streets run red… They represent the most extreme pro-abortion positions of the left. Whereas most on the Left are pro-choice, these people are simply pro-abortion.

Planned Parenthood (their profit seeking aside) I can accept and live with as an organization, but NARAL is the left’s Ruby Ridgers…
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1046 hrs

3rd Way -

And McCain would probably support that, too!
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1050 hrs

Publius, you’re only proving my point above. This group you hate so much? Rates McCain a ZERO.
Posted by scott on February 06, 2008 at 1052 hrs

Choosing not to choose is still a choice.

Yeah, and in an election it is choosing to let others choose for you.

Every presidential election I’ve been eligible to vote in has always been a choice between the lesser of two evils. ALWAYS. This election is no different. If you want to be childish and not vote then you give the election to the worse of two evils. Of course you are free to do so but I urge you not to be so foolish.
Posted by Matt on February 06, 2008 at 1056 hrs

Scott -

I’m actually surprised at that, if for no other reason than it was John McCain and Russ Feingold who tried to shut down the collective free speech and organization rights enjoyed by NARAL.

But then, THAT, proves my point on how NARAL is a fringe group with no grasp on the context of politics because their myopic view on their issue prevents them from seeing the real threat to their issue - the desire of some to rein in their right to assembly.

But your suggestion that your point is proven isn’t entirely accurate: that the GOP should consider NARAL’s viewpoints on the issues.

That is the same as you considering a Dem’s stance based on what the NRA says about them. Are you inclined to listen to the Brady groups’ information or NRA’s?

Or are you so enlightened that you consider “both sides” without assigning weight to either side’s argument?
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1101 hrs

And McCain would probably support that, too!

I should probably shut up right about now. Convincing conservatives that supporting campaign finance reform is the best way to forward their cause might bring some of them to support McCain. Forget I ever mentioned it.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1103 hrs

Actually, Matt, in Milwaukee County, their exists the chance that even if I didn’t vote, someone would actually cast a ballot for me anyway.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1104 hrs

There’s no way any honest conservative can argue that Obama or Clinton would better represent them as President than McCain would.

Exactly…

The guy in #18

He’s either trolling or just flapping his jaw.

What conservative would change their mind and vote for a liberal???? because the republican candidate wasn’t ‘conservative enough’?

That’s like a tree hugger saying “well since this car only gets 40 mpg instead of 50, I’m going to go buy a 1-ton pick up instead”

Good grief.

For all you republicans that have your panties in a bunch because McCain isn’t conservative enough, vote 3rd party. Vote libertarian… If this is the year to ‘throw your vote away’ why don’t you make a statement with it.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1109 hrs

xxpilot -

If you consider the damage that conservatives believe could be caused to their movement, then it makes complete strategic sense to vote for a liberal.

Limbaugh is a gas-bag, but he is correct when he states that the damage to the brand and the difficult position that a President McCain could put congressional Republicans in isn’t worth voting for.

They, in all likelihood, would become a de facto third party (which would geek up 3rd Way...)
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1115 hrs

Publius, and do you think the fraudulent vote attributed to you would go to the republican candidate or the democrat one?
Posted by Matt on February 06, 2008 at 1117 hrs

Publlius,

all this bluster is comical. distort mccains record all you want. you and the rest of your wing of the gop were completely marginalized last night. You stand with a very small minority on your unfavorable opinon of McCain.

Just a point of order: The national debt was shrinking under the last Democrat, and skyrocketed under the last three Republicans. Bush’s new budget pushes deficits back to near-record territory.

Didn’t start shrinking till the Contract with America and the 1994 midterms. President Bush clearly is a big government republican and John McCain has clearly been for fiscal responsiblity.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1117 hrs

I should add that to see this dynamic in play, see the current Wisconsin legislature…

Doyle is a moderate who thwarts the will of the much more liberal Democrat-controlled Senate. And the Assembly is controlled by the GOP.

The Senate Dems are a de facto third party with competing interests to the Governor of the same party. See Healthy Wisconsin, budget proposals, etc…

Doyle drives the liberal members of his party NUTS!
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1119 hrs

What difficult position would a President McCain put congressional republicans in? In the position of disagreeing with McCain? How many times has that happened before?

Even if you say they’d be put in the position of disagreeing with the president, how is that different than if Clinton or Obama are elected? Other than they won’t be disagreeing all the time.
Posted by Matt on February 06, 2008 at 1121 hrs

Ryan -

I don’t need to distort McCain’s record. He does just fine on his own.

Are you really suggesting I check my principles at the door and just moderate by beliefs because somebody in New York has a different view on what conservatism really is.

Then we all should just pack up and go home, because then why even try to have a vigorous debate on the issues and the merits of a candidate’s record if the goal is to just win.

Why call ourselves Republicans or Democrats and just instead call ourselves Team A and Team B and play a round a tennis for rights to govern the country...?
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1123 hrs

Didn’t start shrinking till the Contract with America and the 1994 midterms.

Which part of what the Republicans did eliminated the deficits? The Contract with America was a joke and none of it made it out of committee.

See, I can point to the 1993 budget--passed without a single Republican vote--that changed tax policy, set spending limits, and ushered in a decade of unprecedented economic growth. The Republicans in the later 90s shut the government down and tied up manpower and millions of dollars chasing the Clintons--their priorities instead of governing.
Posted by folkbum on February 06, 2008 at 1126 hrs

Publius, true or false: McCain is more conservative than Clinton or Obama?
Posted by Matt on February 06, 2008 at 1130 hrs

Without wading into the tall grass of Congressional dynamics, suffice to say that congressional Republicans have settled into a groove as the minority party and finding their core principles again (most of them).

They are working to show the American people the distinction between their beliefs and the Dems’; a distinction that had been blurred during the Bush presidency and what contributed to their ass-whipping in 2006.

With a moderate like McCain, it will be harder for them to draw a distinction between themselves and Democrats as a matter of party loyalty. The same party loyalty you expect from those of us who oppose a McCain presidency…
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1130 hrs

Also, reducing the debt doesn’t matter as long as our ability to service the debt (aka the economy) grows faster than the debt. How many of you don’t have any debt? how many of you saved up for a car or a house before you bought it?
Posted by Matt on February 06, 2008 at 1134 hrs

Matt -

That’s a false dichotomy; rephrase the question.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1135 hrs

Ok ... since you won’t provide a straight answer to the question, I’ll boil down all your obfuscating comments and provide the answer you refuse to. Of course you liberals would be torn in knots trying to decide if you would support him if he was your nominee. In fact what happened in Connecticut is proof of it ... and it shows what you would do. You’d throw the guy under the bus like they did there.

Without casting judgement on it, the Democratic party decided that they could not abide a long standing respected Senator being elected as a Democrat because they felt he betrayed the party on the most important issue of the day to them in 2006 ... support of the war in Iraq. Quit acting like Conservatives who are struggling with the same basic quandry of deciding about supporting a candidate for President that they feel has betrayed them on critical issues central to their belief system are being petty or misguided. Principles matter to us as much as they do to you Liberals, wheather you think those principles should be important to us or not.

Lets face it ... the only reason you really care, is because you WANT McCain to get the nomination, knowing that no matter how things turn out in November, you’re going to have at worst, the most Liberal of the Republican candidates taking office. If Romney were the leader today, and large chunks of Republican voters were willing to sit it out rather than vote for him, you’d be applauding thier deep convictions and professing admiration that they were willing to put their principles before short term political gain.

What a bunch of phoneys!
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1143 hrs

Publius, convince me why it is better to have a president who I disagree with 90% of the time vs a president who I disagree with 30% of the time.

And don’t give me party brand dilution bullshit. Anyone is free to disagree with president McCain anytime they want, I would even expect mr maverick to, if not encourage it, at least expect it. Having McCain as president won’t change how I think about his free-speech infringing campaign finance reform law. It’s not going to change the idealogical purity of the party, whatever that is…
Posted by Matt on February 06, 2008 at 1149 hrs

Which part of what the Republicans did eliminated the deficits?

Curbed and in some years reduced federal spending.

Are you really suggesting I check my principles at the door and just moderate by beliefs because somebody in New York has a different view on what conservatism really is.

New York, Oklahoma, Missouri, Arizona…

I’m suggesting that a real conservative would want to elect a president who’s conservative on defense and spending over a candidate who’s conservative on nothing. Call me crazy.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1156 hrs

I think everyone needs some persepctive here.

First, the internet, and the partisans who inhabit it, are a poor representation of the country as a whole. Most people who vote aren’t reading any blogs and could not care less about the arbitrary labels people have chosen to apply to various candidates. The tubes of the internet don’t go everywhere.

Second, people have been applying the label conservative to positions that have not traditionally been labeled conservative nor associated with the Republican party. Bush’s massive social spending , for instance, is a throwback to LBJ, not Ronald Reagan. The fascination with building a wall around the country is another position utterly at loggerheads with a large portion of historical Republican voters.

John McCain may not be a social conservative. He is, however, a traditional Republican from the Western USA.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1159 hrs

Matt -

I can’t convince you of anything in the context in which you ask. You’re assigning equal weight to all variables.

I don’t practice my politics that way.

Party brand dilution bullshit? That’s not a legitimate concern? I’ve got thousands and thousands of dollars in the GOP and an equal proportion of blood, sweat and tears. I’m just trying to protect my investment.

You really believe that the president can’t change the ideological makeup of a party? Then why have primaries (see my remarks about Team A, Team B, and a tennis match)?

Reagan didn’t craft it to something different from Nixon/Ford? Bush 2 and DeLay didn’t craft it to something different from Gingrich/Armey?

I don’t begrudge anyone who casts a ballot for McCain… They are doing what they see as right. I wish they wouldn’t, and as a Republican, I have an inherenct right to try to dissuade that. What that ISN’T is a hissy fit.

However, I take extreme offense that I should just get in line out of party loyalty based on some sort of false dichotomy of Clinton vs. McCain or McCain vs. Obama.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1202 hrs

In fact what happened in Connecticut is proof of it

In fact, what happened in Connecticut proves why he would never be the nominee, and why your original hypothetical is stupid.

McCain clearly enjoys the support of a significant enough swath of the Republican party to get the nomination and to put you in the position you’re dancing around now. It shows that you are the fringe, and not the mainstream of the party as you might suppose.

Lieberman does not have enough support among Democrats to win the nomination--making Lieberman the fringe of the party, not me and Scott.
Posted by folkbum on February 06, 2008 at 1205 hrs

Alright, I give.

I was going to hold fast at New York, but since Missouri now is in the mix, I realize that perhaps what I believe to be right for my party and country is silly and outmoded.

Ryan - are you the final arbitor of what the aggregate conservative definition should be?

Frankly, judge not, lest ye be judged. I have not sat in judgement of anyone here except NARAL and John McCain, however, many on here seem hell-bent on questioning my motive and suggesting I’m not a conservative unless I support McCain.

All I’m saying is be careful, you’ll alienate the people who write checks, walk wards, and vote like it’s Church.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1213 hrs

All I’m saying is be careful, you’ll alienate the people who write checks, walk wards, and vote like it’s Church.

Which is ironically what McCain has been doing his entire political life…
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1215 hrs

This is a good example of two dictums:

1) The perfect is the enemy of the good.

2) Where you stand is where you sit.

This is fun to watch from my sideline.

Here is someone running for president who will keep us in the Iraq boondoggle because he is as egotistically tied up in this as Bush; will pump out more tax cuts for the rich despite a crumbling infrastructure and evaporating research dollars; will allow companies like Blackwater to build private; outside of scrutiny private armies and pack the courts with more corporatist/screw the public judges—and still you are unhappy.

Despite the sullen faces now if Hillary gets the nod the trumpet will sound and you will all rise from the graves.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1219 hrs

I have not sat in judgement of anyone here except NARAL and John McCain, however, many on here seem hell-bent on questioning my motive and suggesting I’m not a conservative unless I support McCain.

I’m not questioning if your a conservative. I’m questioning your common sense.

You can have pure ideological candidates, but if you don’t win elections it doesn’t matter much. If the Dems control the legislative and executive branches of the federal government it would not be a good thing for conservatives--that’s pretty simple to see.

Who did you vote for in ‘04?
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1226 hrs

Ryan,

Would we have gotten Ronald Reagan if Ford had won in ‘76? Was the conservative movement ultimately advanced in the long run by Ford’s defeat?
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1236 hrs

Would we have gotten Ronald Reagan if Ford had won in ‘76? Was the conservative movement ultimately advanced in the long run by Ford’s defeat?

the problem is we can’t count on hillary or obama being jimmy carter. Its an awfully big gamble.

Also, there’s no Reagan waiting in the wings unfortunately.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1239 hrs

Only a liberal educated in the ‘New Math’ could conclude that someone getting, at best, 40% of the popular vote in the strongest Republican states (you know, the ones that actually deliver electoral votes in the General Election)be “Mainstream’ and the 60% who voted against him be labeled the ‘Fringe’.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1247 hrs

Go ahead and find your Reagan, but be thankful you don’t.

The public has pretty much wised up to what Reagan was all about, which was income distribution upward. And we’ve seen what that has done for the middle class over the past generation. Young people have noticed what has happened too opportunity in this country as a result and will be voting Democratic for the rest of their lives.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1247 hrs

Only a liberal educated in the ‘New Math’ could conclude that someone getting, at best, 40% of the popular vote in the strongest Republican states (you know, the ones that actually deliver electoral votes in the General Election)be “Mainstream’ and the 60% who voted against him be labeled the ‘Fringe’.

That theory is all well in good. The problem is that exit polling indicates Huckabee voters’ second choice is McCain.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1253 hrs

I haven’t read all the posts, but NO! I will not vote for McCain. I am conservative before republican and pro life.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1255 hrs

I wonder if in ‘76 Republican’s knew they had a Reagan waiting in the wings? Of course they didn’t ... they rejected him for Ford that year. It was from 4 years of unchecked Liberalism that the Country turned to the right, found Reagan, and gave the Senate to the Republicans. It wasn’t just Jimmy Carter that led to the Republican triumphs in 1980.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1256 hrs

But there are Reaganesque figures waiting in wings. Sanford comes to mind… Allen comes to mind (despite his macaca remarks)… Jeb Bush comes to mind… Watts comes to mind…

I would never suggest that Clinton or Obama are Jimmy Carter, but with the Congress they’d be given, their natural instincts would be on display. As Jimmy Carter led to Reagan, so would Obama/Clinton create the next generation of Republican leaders.

Schmitz - more straw men out of you. Do you know how to have an actual intellectual argument or do you simply rely on hyperbole?

will pump out more tax cuts for the rich despite a crumbling infrastructure and evaporating research dollars; will allow companies like Blackwater to build private; outside of scrutiny private armies and pack the courts with more corporatist/screw the public judges—and still you are unhappy.

Is there anything in McCain’s record to suggest any of your predictions? Have you read any of the comments above?

McCain opposes torture and wants pork spending rerouted to domestic programs. He is almost guaranteed to appoint justices that are moderate (like himself). Your points on the war are probably correct. And I don’t have a problem with that.

Your argument is the same as labeling all Republicans neocons, which I know you’ve done, suggesting that somehow we are monolithic in our beliefs. In which case, you’re posting here contradicts any previous points you’ve made.

You either believe we are monolithic or you rejoice in our differences. Which is it?
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1257 hrs

All I know is this ... voters in the South when given the chance to annoit McCain the nominee with convincing victories instead went to someone else. They went to Huckabee because they didn’t want to vote for McCain (or Romney for that matter). All I am saying is that despite some people trying to paint the portrait of McCain as a mainstream candidate, he is still not able to capture better than 35-40% of the vote in most states, least of all those that have been the strongest Republican states the last 20 years. He is unliked by more than he is liked. Its hardly a fringe position to be questioning his candidicy, his conservative credentials, and his electability when he can’t poll past 40% in the most conservative states.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1308 hrs

Young people have noticed what has
happened too opportunity in this country as a result and will be voting
Democratic for the rest of their lives.

Well, ya. Until they become slightly older people and notice that it’s their income that is being redistributed and that the business they want to start incur transaction costs they should not, and that as their income rises suddenly they’re the ones having their wealth redistributed.

A conservative is a liberal that’s just been mugged. That saying is not just talking about crime ...
Posted by Brian on February 06, 2008 at 1312 hrs

I wonder if in ‘76 Republican’s knew they had a Reagan waiting in the wings? Of course they didn’t ... they rejected him for Ford that year.

didn’t reject him till the convention. the party was much more divided that year then this year. Reagan firmly established himself as the next in line.

It wasn’t just Jimmy Carter that led to the Republican triumphs in 1980.

not just, but fair to say mostly.

But there are Reaganesque figures waiting in wings. Sanford comes to mind… Allen comes to mind (despite his macaca remarks)… Jeb Bush comes to mind… Watts comes to mind…

Allen is done (unfortunately, Jeb Bush has many McCain like leanings, Watts has been out of politics for awhile now.

I would never suggest that Clinton or Obama are Jimmy Carter, but with the Congress they’d be given, their natural instincts would be on display. As Jimmy Carter led to Reagan, so would Obama/Clinton create the next generation of Republican leaders.

Or because of the lack of a Reagan like figure could lead to another 4 years of dem control. Its a crazy gamble to take just to hand the dems the whole federal government
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1313 hrs

He is unliked by more than he is liked.

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/02/th e_big_picture_republicans_li.php

among all republican supporters 72% favorable.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1319 hrs

Macaca… Gooks…

Lest anyone forget, McCain will be reminded of his baggage throughout the campaign and he will not react well when he realizes that the same press that has idolized him for years turns on him.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1322 hrs

On the other hand a liberal is conservative who has woken up to the reality that he is being screwed by corporations and that his income is being redistributed—upward—therefore breaking away from the sheep herd.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1325 hrs

That had to be one of the most labored rebuttals I’ve ever read. Brevity is the soul of wit.

Fight the power, Schmitz!
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1327 hrs

despite some people trying to paint the portrait of McCain as a mainstream candidate, he is still not able to capture better than 35-40% of the vote

So does that mean all your candidates are fringe candidates?

Or are you going to accept Matt’s point that the majority of your party is lining up behind McCain (or at least willing to) and you’re the one in the tiny, tiny minority?
Posted by folkbum on February 06, 2008 at 1327 hrs

Lest anyone forget, McCain will be reminded of his baggage throughout the campaign and he will not react well when he realizes that the same press that has idolized him for years turns on him.

that’s fine. I have my doubts that will McCain will win, but he certainly has the best shot out of the current GOP field.

I just don’t like republicans eating their own. Support the guy the party picked this time and fight like hell 4 years from now for the candidate you perfer in the primaries.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1333 hrs

Or are you going to accept Matt’s point that the majority of your party is lining up behind McCain (or at least willing to) and you’re the one in the tiny, tiny minority?

Jay, you’re trying to project shame on the people who don’t go mainstream per your subjective definition of it. You are as guilty as many of the McCain supporters are of suggesting that principle be damned.

That’s the same attitude that gave your team John Kerry over known, reliable Democrats like Edwards, Gephardt, Biden, and Dodd.

And it’s the same attitude that gave our team Ford, Bush 1, and Dole.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1337 hrs

I just don’t like republicans eating their own. Support the guy the party picked this time and fight like hell 4 years from now for the candidate you perfer in the primaries.

We should eat our own versus letting Dems do it. When they do it, it is construed to the public as a repudiation of our entire belief structure. And frankly, our best ideas usually sell better than theirs when presented honestly and fairly.

Unfortunately, McCain isn’t the guy who should be carrying our banner of limited government and individual rights. Even if he believed it, he doesn’t have the ability to sell it. And it is a hard sell because it takes time, patience, and honesty.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1342 hrs

And it’s the same attitude that gave our team Ford, Bush 1, and Dole.

Did you vote for any of them. More imporantly, who did you vote fore in ‘04?
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1342 hrs

We should eat our own versus letting Dems do it.

Dems are going to try to tear down McCain either way. Its not like they are gonna leave McCain alone if the far right tries to pull a mutiny.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1346 hrs

I voted for Bush in 2004.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1347 hrs

Dems are going to try to tear down McCain either way. Its not like they are gonna leave McCain alone if the far right tries to pull a mutiny.

Mutiny? Really? Is that really how you feel about conservative efforts to derail McCain? A mutiny? (See my remarks re: Dole, Bush 1, and Ford)

Moreover, you touch on a good point: the Dems are going to rip into McCain and castrate him before the public. At which point, your core values, my core values, and everything that we should stand for will be mocked and ridiculed.

I guess I would rather have a candidate that actually is conservative be out there fighting for my beliefs rather than one who will have them assigned to him (see my remarks to Schmitz).
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1353 hrs

Jay, you’re trying to project shame on the people who don’t go mainstream per your subjective definition of it.

So far I think I’ve tried to define mainstream in two ways: The guy more voters vote for than anyone else or The guy that 72% of your party approves of. Those may be subjective as any other definitions, sure, but I think they are more reliable metrics than anything you’ve offered so far.

I was a Dean supporter in 2004, and as broken and pissed as I was at what happened to him, eventually it got through my thick skull: If Howard Dean couldn’t get a majority of Democrats to vote for him, how could he get a maority of Americans? John Kerry was the reliably liberal--if tepidly uninspiring--center of the Democratic party in 2004, and to suggest that somehow he was not the mainstream of the party is to deny reality.

The same holds for McCain. He’s not the most liberal or conservative Republican in the senate. He is routing the other candidates in votes garnered and delegates pledged. If you call him fringe, then how the hell can anyone else in your primary be more mainstream?

Look, I hope McCain is not your nominee. He will simply be the most difficult Republican to beat in November. Romney or Huckabee would have rolled over like dogs against an energized and optimistic Democratic machine. But to suggest that the small portion of your party witholding your vote on princile is somehow more mainstream than the vast majority of Republicans who will smile as they cast their vote for him is absurd.
Posted by folkbum on February 06, 2008 at 1403 hrs

I voted for Bush in 2004

During his first term, President Bush wasn’t conservative on spending or education. He started a massive nation building project in Iraq. Farm subsidies, medicare expansion, no child left behind...yet he was conservative enough to vote.

Yet McCain is just too much to stomach. How can I take you seriously?
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1406 hrs

I’ve never suggested that I’m mainstream. I’ll be the first to admit that I fear my beliefs are no longer mainstream. Hence, my concern over McCain’s seeming popularity and his open repudiation of ideas I hold.

I have, however, suggested that I have an obligation to make my case to other Republicans that my beliefs can and should be mainstream. I’ve yet tried to define mainstream, except to say the term is highly subjective and overused - primarily by members of your party.

It’s really campaigning just at a different level.

BUT, I applaud you for your honesty and intellectual arguments on this - your team would do well to emulate your reason. You really should post more at your place - I miss going over there and reading your stuff.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1411 hrs

Ryan -

Then don’t and move on.

Go vote for McCain and be sure he at least gives reach arounds.

As for Bush… I do feel rather used and cheap. I didn’t get my reach around.
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1415 hrs

On the other hand a liberal is conservative who has woken up to the reality that he is being screwed by corporations and that his income is being redistributed—upward—therefore breaking away from the sheep herd.

There is some truth to both positions. But it is still true that people become more conservative as they age.
Posted by Brian on February 06, 2008 at 1422 hrs

As for Bush… I do feel rather used and cheap. I didn’t get my reach around.

Aw, Publius - you’re just bitter, is all.

Besides - you’re a guy - you know how selfish we can be.
Posted by Brian on February 06, 2008 at 1426 hrs

Will I support McCain? No.

Instead, conservatives across the country should devote their energies towards conservative Congressional candidates, to find those most likely to stand up to the liberal policies of the next president, regardless of who it happens to be.
Posted by Calvin Freiburger on February 06, 2008 at 1446 hrs

xxpilot -

If you consider the damage that conservatives believe could be caused to their movement, then it makes complete strategic sense to vote for a liberal.

First, I haven’t had the chance to read every post in this thread, just too many (people must be home on snow day) so if someone has mentioned what I’m going to, then I apologize for the duplication.

The american public by and large has a shorter attention span and memory than a 4 year old with A.D.D.

Considering that the “swing voters” aka the percentage of the population who have NO idea what the parties stand for, who make their decisions from television commercials during the current political season, have little to no logical justification for who they vote for. No factual basis for understanding the nature of public policy and its REAL effect on the country (only the nature of public policy as it plays out in the news media)

I’m not as worried about this segment of the electorate (from whom the people who DO know what they want from government and do undestand the fundamental differences) forming some long-lasting opinion of “the brand”

I don’t listen to Rush Limbaugh, but if he’s trying to tell the story about how McCain will damage “the brand” good god. The Brand couldn’t be more damaged.

Knowing how people become dependant on government, and once you lose freedom its TEN times harder to get it back once you lose it. I’m more worried about the growth of government (socialized healthcare etc) becoming entrenched than I am about “the brand” republicans think they have (which is a joke)

And I suffix this by saying I’m a libertarian and don’t give a shit about the republicans “brand” (rolling my eyes)

The republicans lost me because their brand was all talk and no action.

Jay Leno might have people believe that the democrats have
Posted by on February 06, 2008 at 1529 hrs

I have one question for conservatives who say they will never vote for McCain:

Are you willing to give up all of the gains in Iraq over campaign finance reform?

Are you willing to let Hillary Clinton appoint the next Supreme Court justices over immigration?

Are you willing to let earmarks go on as usual over the fact that McCain has worked with Democrats on some issues?

Are you willing to hav