The McCain Thread

Who will be McCain's runningmate?

  • Mitt Romney (former Governor of Massachussets)

  • Mike Huckabee (former Governor of Arkansas)

  • Rudy Giuliani (former mayor New York)

  • Charlie Christ (current governor of Florida)

  • Fred Thompson (former US Senator of Tennessee)

  • Condaleeza Rice (Secretary of State)

  • Colin Powell (former Secretary of State)

  • JC Watts (former Republican chairman of Republican House)

  • Rob Portman (Director of Office of Management and Budget)

  • Tim Pawlenty (Governor of Minnesota)

  • Bobby Jindal (Governor of Lousiana)

  • Mark Sanford (Governor of South Carolina)

  • Lindsey Graham (US Senator of South Carolina)

  • Sarah Palin (Governor of Alaska)

  • Kay Hutchinson (US Senator of Texas)

  • John Thune (US Senator of South Dakota)

  • Haley Barbour (Governor of Mississippi)

  • Marsha Blackburn (US Tenessee Representative)

  • Joseph Lieberman (US Senator of Connecticut)

  • Sonny Perdue (Governor of Georgia)

  • George Allen (former US Senator of Virginia)

  • Matt Blunt (Governor of Missouri)

  • some other US Senator, congressman

  • some other Governor

  • some dark horse like Dick Cheney


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dorky, Norman is, for the most part, one of the more fair and level-headed conservative posters on these boards. I rarely agree with him on much in terms of politics, but I do respect his opinion and ability to try to stick to the facts and not get sucked into the hype and slander that both candidates sling around (most of the time, anyway).

jag
 
if it looks like a duck...



...you don't want to be painted as Right-Winger? then don't post like an elephant.

I wouldn't have agreed to run with Norm in the HYPE Presidential election if he were a "right-winger". Painting him as such, is a gross mischaracterization.
 
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080711/POLITICS01/807110375

Of course you can criticize McCain for his association with Gramm - but to say HE CALLED AMERICA a nation of whiners would be like saying Obama was personally responsible for bombing various American sites. Something no one here has certainly done.

But Gramm has been one of McCain's key economic advisors, Norman! How can we be sure he hasn't tainted and affected McCain's perception of the economy negatively and permanently? And Gramm absolutely DID call America a nation of whiners who's economic problems were all mental.

jag
 
Dorky, Norman is, for the most part, one of the more fair and level-headed conservative posters on these boards. I rarely agree with him on much in terms of politics, but I do respect his opinion and ability to try to stick to the facts and not get sucked into the hype and slander that both candidates sling around (most of the time, anyway).

jag
:heart:
 
But Gramm has been one of McCain's key economic advisors, Norman! How can we be sure he hasn't tainted and affected McCain's perception of the economy negatively and permanently?

jag

John McCain doesn't care about poo' people :csad:
 
I consider a lot of the "negatives" on Obama irrelevant - including his vote on the abortion bill, the fact his middle name is Hussein, the flag pin, the flag saluting, the 57 states, etc.

I find Michelle Obama's lack of patriotism more troubling than some misstatements. Elitism isn't a life style - its an attitude and I haven't seen any real elitist attitude from McCain in all honesty. My favorite President is Nixon - so me not caring about Liddy isn't a shocker.

You should ask McCain's neighbors in Arizona if he's an elitist. From what I've read, he treats them like dirt.
 
I'm really sick of this "elitist" label being tossed around by both sides.

Apparently, Obama is an elitist because he went to Harvard and worked as a lawyer and somehow "lost touch" of the roots he had growing up in poverty... never mind the fact that he has worked, consistently, to better the lives of lower-class individuals in both his careers before and after he took elected office. No, he's an elitist because he talks with big fancy words and comes up with new ideas rather than the same nonsense which has been tried again and again but doesn't seem to work for this country. God forbid we have a President who is educated and doesn't act like he's simple country folk who grew up in dem dar small towns all 'cross da U.S. of A.

Also, McCain isn't an elitist, either. He spent several years in the military, became known as a renegade throughout the majority of his tenure in elected office, and has worked on issues which matter for every American. Campaign finance reform, illegal immigration, opposing the GOP on issues which define their "base"... that isn't elitism at all, as far as I'm concerned.

Shades of elitism may brush both campaigns from time to time, but none of them are true elitists. Neither of them look down on the people they are running to represent, neither of them act as if they're better than everyone else in this country (except for the opposite political parties). A person's career or the way he talks or the amount of money he has is not an accurate reflection of elitism. And I really detest that label now, because it is inaccurate and just another term being thrown around to make people afraid of something which doesn't exist.
 
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/08/21/politics/politico/main4369062.shtml

No Single-term Pledge For McCain
LAS CRUCES, N.M., Aug 21, 2008(The Politico) This story was written by Jonathan Martin and Mike Allen.
John McCain stated unequivocally in an interview with Politico Wednesday that he would not pledge to serve only a single four-year term, rejecting a suggestion that some allies believe would allay questions about his age and underscore his non-partisan message of putting country first.

“No,” McCain said flatly, “I’m not considering it.”

There has been speculation that McCain, 71, could couple a single term promise with a untraditional running mate such as Democrat-turned-Independent Sen. Joseph Lieberman to make the case that he would shove political interests aside and run a consensus-oriented government with the Democratic-held Congress.

McCain did, though, sketch out in a half-hour conversation in this college town not far from the Mexican border what his presidency would look like, drawing implicit contrasts with President Bush in the process. Speaking to Politico just after finishing a town hall meeting, the Arizona senator vowed closer relations with Congress, a more open dialogue with the American people and a commitment to address some of the thorniest issues facing the country.

But he declined to outwardly criticize Bush and flatly stated that he wouldn’t do anything as president to underscore his difference with the unpopular incumbent.

“I don’t have any need to show that I’m different than President Bush,” McCain said when asked if he’d take any steps after being elected to demonstrate where he’d diverge from his predecessor.

McCain made plain, however, that he would aim to take a far more transparent and consensus-oriented approach than Bush, whose promise to be a uniter, not a divider, was unfulfilled.

“First thing I’d do [as president] is to go to see the Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of the Senate - I assume that that would be Sen. Reid, I hope not, but I think that’s probably the reality of this election - and I would say let’s have an agenda, let’s work together, we know what the solutions are and we know what the options are - Social Security, on restraining spending, on Medicare, on all of these, energy independence, on all of these issues,” McCain said when asked how his approach to governance and politics would differ from Bush.

He promised he’d give the Democratic leaders “all the credit” and cast the bipartisanship as a win-win for all parties.

“Let’s show the American people…that there are opportunities for us to work together for the good of the country,” McCain said. “And I think that they would benefit as much or more as I would.”

McCain added: “I’m not being elected dictator - I’m being elected president. And you have to work with Congress. And they know the priorities as well as I do.”

As for those priorities, and specifically what the two parties could accomplish together in the first 100 days of a McCain presidency, he touched on spending cuts and entitlement reform before talking in more general terms.
After the interview, his traveling press secretary sent an email message clarifying what the Republican’s goals would be after being sworn in.

"Senator McCain's priorities during the first 100 days of his administration include ensuring a safe and secure nation, implementing a plan of action to get the economy moving, and reforming Social Security and Medicare for the sake of future generations,” said Brooke Buchanan.

McCain made no specific mention of the economy in his initial answer, only speaking of making “the country safer both from domestic and foreign challenges.”

Discussing the public image of his prospective administration, McCain promised to take a series of extraordinary steps to increase his access to citizens.

He said he’d do “Question Time” along the sme lines of the British Prime Minister’s regular appearances before Parliament in the House or Senate chamber “once every couple weeks.”

Further, he reiterated a campaign pledge he made during the primary to hold weekly press conferences and expanded upon that proposal.
McCain said he’d take to C-SPAN “all the time” to offer “a full and complete explanation of what I’m doing and why I’m doing it.”

It was something that would have been valuable in recent years, he noted.

“During the war in Iraq, once the surge started anyway, if I’d have been president, I would have gone on C-SPAN once a week,” McCain noted. “I’d say, ‘Here’s Iraq, now here’s what’s happening, here’s why Basra is so dangerous, here’s what’s going on in Ramadi.”

McCain has, however, severely limited access to reporters during this election campaign - a radical shift from his freewheeling, anything-goes approach to media relations in his 2000 presidential run and during the primary earlier this year.

Reminded that he had remarked unfavorably this year about the sort of guarded and on-message approach that he’s now taking - deriding as 'unfun' a campaign in which he was sequestered from the press behind a curtain on an airplane - McCain was tight-lipped.

“We’ll continue to try to get more access to the media,” he said, tightly.

As for where the “old McCain” was, the senator hinted that he preferred being competitive to offering the sort of open exposure that delights reporters but often drowns out the campaign’s preferred message of the day and can also lead to embarrassing gaffes.

“I think there’s a lot of excitement, particularly in the last couple of weeks as we’ve come up in the polls,” he said, reminding that “the object of it is winning.”

McCain also suggested that, had Obama taken him up on his proposal to hold joint town halls, the increasingly negative contest would have been more high-minded and journalists would not be frustrated with the well-packaged campaigns.

“You would have, as the media, been happier because you’d have seen us together,” McCain said. “And when you’re standing on a stage with somebody, this is my political experience, it’s hard to be quite as tough on them when you’re looking them in the eye. It’s when one of your surrogates is out there, et cetera.”

jag
 
Welcome back to the political forums Firebird! :yay:
 
Storm, like me, is a Libertarian. Which means not Left or Right.

Dorky, Norman is, for the most part, one of the more fair and level-headed conservative posters on these boards. I rarely agree with him on much in terms of politics, but I do respect his opinion and ability to try to stick to the facts and not get sucked into the hype and slander that both candidates sling around (most of the time, anyway).

jag

I wouldn't have agreed to run with Norm in the HYPE Presidential election if he were a "right-winger". Painting him as such, is a gross mischaracterization.

Want me to talk about gay marriage, abortion rights, legalization of drugs, religion in general, etc. etc. etc.?

I do not post as a "Republican" because I am a right winger, but because of the two parties its the closest to my views.

thank you for the clarification but it's easy to think that way when all i ever see is you attacking Obama while defending McCain. after all, i've been accused many a time of being a lefty even though i'm not very enthusiastic about Obama....i just despise McCain.

admittedly, i have not made it a priority to seek out all of your points of views, however, it's pretty clear that you lean right. i'm not saying that you ARE a Republican (i've seen enough of your other stances to know you're not), but that is the vibe that i often get from you. so once again...not saying that you ARE a Republican, but if it's important to you that you not be viewed by others as a right-winger then you might not want to make posts that could be seen that way.

sorry for the misunderstanding and getting off topic.
 
Because the he is ancient as is. I honestly don't see him living through four years, if he does he won't live through eight.

If McCain pulled out the one term card - I think he would of won this election by 10 points.
I don't think he wants to limit himself to one term. What if he gets elected and the Economy swoops up, Gas prices fall to record lows, the Job is done in Iraq, and his Approval Rating is a 99%? He wouldn't want to leave.

He didn't rule out a single term, just not saying it is definate.
 
Because the he is ancient as is. I honestly don't see him living through four years, if he does he won't live through eight.

If McCain pulled out the one term card - I think he would of won this election by 10 points.
While I generally agree that it might have gotten him more votes, I also wonder if he wasn't told to say no because it would remind people that he is, in fact, old.
 
I don't think he wants to limit himself to one term. What if he gets elected and the Economy swoops up, Gas prices fall to record lows, the Job is done in Iraq, and his Approval Rating is a 99%? He wouldn't want to leave.

He didn't rule out a single term, just not saying it is definate.

If he does that he SHOULD away because its not going to stay that way and he would go in the books as one of the greatest POTUS of all time.

And if he still wanted to be President - he should stage it so that he plans on leaving, but at the overwhelming request of the American people, he stays in.
 
If he does that he SHOULD away because its not going to stay that way and he would go in the books as one of the greatest POTUS of all time.

And if he still wanted to be President - he should stage it so that he plans on leaving, but at the overwhelming request of the American people, he stays in.

But that last part runs the risk of coming off a little like Giuliani wanting to stay on as Mayor at a time when most people would've been alright with it. (Minus the anti-democratic ideal behind it)
 
thank you for the clarification but it's easy to think that way when all i ever see is you attacking Obama while defending McCain. after all, i've been accused many a time of being a lefty even though i'm not very enthusiastic about Obama....i just despise McCain.

admittedly, i have not made it a priority to seek out all of your points of views, however, it's pretty clear that you lean right. i'm not saying that you ARE a Republican (i've seen enough of your other stances to know you're not), but that is the vibe that i often get from you. so once again...not saying that you ARE a Republican, but if it's important to you that you not be viewed by others as a right-winger then you might not want to make posts that could be seen that way.

sorry for the misunderstanding and getting off topic.

I do not attack Obama because he is a Democrat - but because I fundamentally disagree vehemently with his policies and ideology. I have had no problem praising Democrats - I have said several times that I think posters like Marx, jman and Matt are some of the best posters on this board. I frequently attack Republican party as a whole. My most frequent "defense" of the Republican party is saying that they are as bad as the Democrat party.

I am not "offended" by being called a Republican or even right-wing any more than I would be offended if someone said I was Irish, Muslim or Black. I do not find "Republican" or "Right Wing" to necessarily be a bad term, simply incorrect in regards to me.
 
But that last part runs the risk of coming off a little like Giuliani wanting to stay on as Mayor at a time when most people would've been alright with it. (Minus the anti-democratic ideal behind it)

Well considering the only downside WAS the anti-democratic ideal, I don't see how that's a bad thing. :huh:
 
Because I think in the end, it'd still come off bad. History would judge him more favorably if he left after one term even if he came back for another as a result of overwhelming support. As you pointed out, it's not going to stay that way and he'd be blamed by some if things fell apart after the next four years. I think at some point in a second four year term, his approval would plummet (as I believe often happens even to popular presidents).
 
I find Michelle Obama's lack of patriotism more troubling than some misstatements.

:whatever:

I need to vent my feelings on this subject once and for all.

Michelle Obama said, "For the first time in my adult life, I am proud of my country."

Now, Michelle Obama was born in 1964, which emans she technically became an adult in 1982. Since 1982, aside from maybe the Gulf War conflict and our initial takedown of the Taliban (whose victory has since been tainted by our deviation to Iraq), what has really happened in America to make us proud of it the way the Civil Rights Act or women winning the right to vote did?

People point to the end of The Cold War and pin it on Reagan when in fact the Soviet Union was going to collapse regardless of who was president. Bush and Clinton were a mixed bag who accomplished some minor successes but were also marred by the failing of the economy (well, Bush was, Clinto kept it strong) and in Clinton's case, a series of damaging personal scandals. I won't get into Bush Sr. except to say he has been an overwhelming disaster for the most part.

And before you pull the 9 / 11 card, consider this. 9 / 11 was a good time to be proud to be an American, but I'm not sure if anyone with a decent knowledge of the then current political climate would be proud of America, considering the country A) had been thumbing its nose in Middle Eastern business when we didn't belong for years and B) our country had prior knowledge that an attack was likely to happen. Had I had the proper thought capacity and knowledge of the political scene when it happened, I probably would not have been to happy about the way my government,

And before I'm deemed unpatriotic by anyone, I would like to point out that I love my country and what it's supposed to stand for, but I'm also highly critical of it. Patriotism is more than just a lapel pin or waving a flag outside your door or singing a song. It is, to me, being keenly aware of your country's issues and having the balls to bring them to other people's attention regardless of how harsh you have to be to expose them. If people who criticize the war or president are deemed unpatriotic and are ignored and stifled and are told to just pretend to be proud and supportive, than we begin to lose our democracy. The last seven years have been especially detremental to the vision of our Founding Fathers.

Lastly, I suggest you read The Audacity Of Hope. In it, Obama recalls their trip to Africa. In it, he writes that the first thing Michelle said when she returned was that being in Africa made her so thankful and proud to be an American and to have the freedoms she had. How's that for unpatriotic.
 
:whatever:

I need to vent my feelings on this subject once and for all.

Michelle Obama said, "For the first time in my adult life, I am proud of my country."

Now, Michelle Obama was born in 1964, which emans she technically became an adult in 1982. Since 1982, aside from maybe the Gulf War conflict and our initial takedown of the Taliban (whose victory has since been tainted by our deviation to Iraq), what has really happened in America to make us proud of it the way the Civil Rights Act or women winning the right to vote did?

People point to the end of The Cold War and pin it on Reagan when in fact the Soviet Union was going to collapse regardless of who was president. Bush and Clinton were a mixed bag who accomplished some minor successes but were also marred by the failing of the economy (well, Bush was, Clinto kept it strong) and in Clinton's case, a series of damaging personal scandals. I won't get into Bush Sr. except to say he has been an overwhelming disaster for the most part.

And before you pull the 9 / 11 card, consider this. 9 / 11 was a good time to be proud to be an American, but I'm not sure if anyone with a decent knowledge of the then current political climate would be proud of America, considering the country A) had been thumbing its nose in Middle Eastern business when we didn't belong for years and B) our country had prior knowledge that an attack was likely to happen. Had I had the proper thought capacity and knowledge of the political scene when it happened, I probably would not have been to happy about the way my government,

And before I'm deemed unpatriotic by anyone, I would like to point out that I love my country and what it's supposed to stand for, but I'm also highly critical of it. Patriotism is more than just a lapel pin or waving a flag outside your door or singing a song. It is, to me, being keenly aware of your country's issues and having the balls to bring them to other people's attention regardless of how harsh you have to be to expose them. If people who criticize the war or president are deemed unpatriotic and are ignored and stifled and are told to just pretend to be proud and supportive, than we begin to lose our democracy. The last seven years have been especially detremental to the vision of our Founding Fathers.

You mention Kuwait already, you mention the Taliban and the removal of a government that treated women as second class citizens, how about the billions and trillions of dollars America has spent on AIDS and other medicine in Africa? How about the fact that America is the most philanthropic country in the history of the world?

If you are actually going to use the argument that America hasn't done anything to be proud of since 1984, then there is no reason for me to waste time debating the issue. Its a ludicrous claim.

Lastly, I suggest you read The Audacity Of Hope. In it, Obama recalls their trip to Africa. In it, he writes that the first thing Michelle said when she returned was that being in Africa made her so thankful and proud to be an American and to have the freedoms she had. How's that for unpatriotic.

I am going to take the words of Michelle Obama over the words of her husband who wrote a book with the fact he had much higher political aspirations on his mind. Of course Obama is going to whitewash everything he can in that book - as he should.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,395
Messages
22,097,037
Members
45,893
Latest member
DooskiPack
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"