Redstate

That's one of the nicest compliments you could give. I will be continuing my McCain on The Issues series (so far, abortion and taxes) but it will depend on when I have time to do the research. Those take more time.

I really do believe McCain can unite moderates, center-right, and conservative voters. Some "very conservative" types may only vote for him because they hate Hillary (see Rush) but the vast majority of the party will support him.

I will not do the details here. But he will win the war, attack pork, cut spending, and appoint good judges. And if he doesn't, primary him. I'll be with you.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

You are very selective - narrow-minded even - in the issues you think are important when it comes to governing the country. And if you believe conservative principles are important for successfully steering the country, do you ever stop to wonder why moderates and liberals alike love John McCain so much?

Maybe it is because they know where he stands and it is not with conservatives - as evidenced by his Hispanic Outreach Director being Vicente Fox's former Mexican ambassador to illegal immigrants in the United States.

And as for judges, you will support primarying him only after he has put another David Souter on the court that we will have to wait 25 years to replace?

How brave of you.

just when I am feeling depressed from the outcome of the FL primary, along comes a JACK*** like you to make me realize that I have just as much to fear from my allies as my enemies.

DUMB***** who come in here and leave little brown droppings all over the carpet are NOT appreciated.

-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

because no admin read them.

___________________________________________________________

Molon Labe!

If you don't, it's kinda like "PDFTT" but named for our esteamable David Hinz - though he seems to forget his own rule from time to time.

-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

don't be taking my name in vain :-)

Been a long night for at least a few of us, aye?

-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

I kept waking up, reading the returns, drop off again, wake -read-sleep - wake -read.

Then again, it could have been either the antibiotics or the thunderstorm outside that made me sleepy -- not just a McCain win.

like treating each other kindly. the poster he criticized is a 30 minute wonder who has said those who vote for mccain are immoral and stupid. I call for the Moe Lane, "blam rule". I am pretty good at guessig this stuff even though I have no power, I would put it at 90 percent.

___________________________________________________________

Molon Labe!

Not even close, Doc!

Glad we got that cleared up.

Chow -

-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

not even close and glad we got that cleared up does not compute.

___________________________________________________________

Molon Labe!

I was trying to reply to two comments (the first, not even close - the second, please don't feed the trolls) at the same time and made a meal of it.

Mea culpa - it's been a long and not particularly chearful night in the docj household.

Just so we're clear - Hinz Rule is along the lines of "please don't feed the trolls". Savvy?

-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

___________________________________________________________

Molon Labe!

trolls".

___________________________________________________________

Molon Labe!

.

he'd pick a Souter. Even his alleged muff on SC justices was about how he would appoint a Roberts but not an Alito who "wears his conservatism on his sleeve." I think everyone is more than satisfied with Roberts.

The guy has a high ACU rating, big national defense guy, socially conservative in substance if not style etc. His voting record is quite conservative (yes I know .. immigration, but there just IS no monolithic conservative position on that.) What he isn't is a "movement conservative." That explains the preference for a Roberts over an Alito. He doesn't seem to feel personal loyalty or even much like for many of the conservative "big players", but that aside, his voting record is quite solid. The people on this blog, talk radio etc. almost by definition are movement conservatives. You all care enough to participate in the grassroots of it. McCain isn't going to very emotionally satisfying for you all, because he doesn't seem to really, care about that *base*, but I suspect you will end up being happy with his performance if elected. Staying home for the sake of purity is insane.

Hell is other people - Sartre

So when McCain pledges that he would appoint judges in mold of Roberts and Alito, he's really lying? Are saying he has a hidden agenda to appoint Souters?

1. McCain, 2. Thompson, 3. Giuliani, 4. Romney

a tough negotiator with Congressional democrats.

you don't understand John McCain.

Think about his JUDGMENT over time. Start with the Keating 5 and move forward.

How would you like it if Romney would have won and the supporters of other candidates said the same thing about Mitt Romney? It is not healthy for our party to do this, no matter who the nominee is.

I respect your right to vote or not vote for whoever you like. Everyone has to make up their own mind.

I am not a big fan of McCain either, but out of love of my country I can't support making the nation suffer under the Democrats just to prove a point that they are unfit and their policies are doomed to fail.

I understand your post, and you may well be correct in the end. I just can't go along with allowing Hillary to take more power for the Federal Government and away from the individual for at least 4 years.

It's a difficult choice for me. But I have considered history.

Republican presidents forced to work with Democrat Congresses usually end up losing when it's time to run for reelection. Gerald Ford in 1976; George H W Bush in 1992.

So, as I see it, we are going to have to suffer under simultaneous Democrat control of both Congress and the White House either beginning in January 2009 or in January 2013. The difference is that if the GOP wins the White House this fall, the GOP could end up discredited due to being forced to deal with a Democrat Congress that (a) is off its rocker ideologically and (b) has a political motivation to see a Republican president fail in the eyes of the public.

Any Republican president would believe that in order to win reelection, he must have "accomplishments," even if they are of the inside-the-beltway/deal making variety, shorn of any conservative features.

So, as much as I don't like the situation we are in right now, I am prepared to swallow hard and hope the Democrats win the White House this fall and then gear up for another 1994 midterm and/or a 1980 presidential election. That's the benefit of losing the White House. In two to four years, the voters are ready to give you Congress and perhaps the presidency too.

for 1-3 SCOTUS justices, and yes, I'll even take Kennedy and O'Connor clones in trade for Stevens, Breyer and Ginsburg ones. At worst that's what we get in the next 4 years with McCain, at best we have the chance to shape the court for decades. A Hillary presidency guarantees a couple of openings as the more liberal members of the court step down and their replacements will be Ginsburg clones.

McCain over the democrat nominee also means staying on offense in Iraq and the greater WOT. We've seen what a Clinton presidency will do to our national security, we can't afford to take that chance again.

___________________________________
Two thirds of the world is covered by water,
the other third is covered by Champ Bailey.

The problem I see with that is that a McCain victory might mean bad possibilities:

Ginsberg and Stevens retire. McCain appoints an O'Conner or Kennedy type. McCain loses a bid for reelection in 2012 for the reasons I stated already (after 12 years of Republicans in the White House, the voters would be anxious for "change" anyway, as in 1992).

Then with a Democrat in the White House in January 2013, Antonin Scalia is 76 years old and retires. So does Kennedy who is about the same age. The Democrats have 61 Senate seats at this point (for the reasons alluded to above), so the Democrat President appoints a far-lefty to replace them.

You end up with the following US Supreme Court (not even mentioning the federal court of appeals):

Conservatives (3)

Alito
Roberts
Thomas

Moderates (2)

Both replacements for Stevens and Ginsberg

Liberals (4)

Breyer
Souter
Two replacemnets for Scalia and Kennedy

And this assumes that McCain actually picks an O'Conner or Kennedy. He might pick one but have them voted down or filibustered by a Democrat Senate. And then have to pick someone more to the Left.

I don't see McCain as being willing to battle Democrats. Most of McCain's high profile battles have been with Republicans (over waterboarding, over immigration, over the Bush tax cuts, over campaign finance). Eventually Republicans caved in to McCain's pressure and, for example, Bush signed McCain-Feingold and the interrogation bill.

But this was only because Republicans were in a weak media position to fight McCain because the media would always side with McCain and so would the Democrats.

So, I see conservatives being very marginalized in a McCain White House. And in 2012 when people want "change" they will elect a Democrat president, not a more traditional Republican in McCain's place.

So, I would rather take my medicine now and just accept Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama as president for 4 years and hope for Republican victories in Congress in 2010 and 2012 and a Republican presidential victory in 2012.

...in charge of our armed forces while our nation is at war? Do you really hate McCain that much?

1. McCain, 2. Thompson, 3. Giuliani, 4. Romney

For strategic reasons, yes.

Look at it this way. In 1992 the GOP lost the White House. But it was a victory in disguise. 2 years later, the GOP won its first Congressional majority in 40 years.

For too long Republicans have believed that the nation will move in the correct direction if we have a GOP president. But what is really needed is a GOP Congress and President working together.

That's what I want. The only way I can get that is by first seeing the Democrats win the White House (as in 1976 and 1992) and then a Republican counter-play (as in 1980 and 1994).

I admit that I don't like "divided" government where one party holds the White House and the other holds Congress. I especially don't like it when a Republican is in the White House and the Democrats hold Congress.

That's the worst form of government imaginable, in my opinion. I prefer one party holding both the White House and the Congress. At least then there is no doubt as to which party is responsible.

We weren't at war in '92 and our nation had the luxury of electing a president who fled to England rather than serve his country. We don't have that luxury today. We are a nation at war and the stakes are much higher. Also, don't think that because it happened in '94, therefore it'll happen again in '10. We could be in the wilderness for longer than that, and in the meantime Hillary would have a appointed a liberal judge or two, and fubar'd Iraq and Afghanistan. I understand your strategy, but I think it's greatly flawed, all because you hate McCain.

1. McCain, 2. Thompson, 3. Giuliani, 4. Romney

"I didn't vote for him."

I may vote Libertarian or Constitution Party or something. But not for John McCain if he is the GOP nominee unless I have just an effusive amount of love for whoever he selects to be his VP.

Enjoy your four years alone in your cave.

that Clinton is tanking in California and everywhere else. So you might be forced to vote for the Republican or Obama. he seems to be a nice guy but I am very concerned about his voting record and his complete lack of experience in Foreign Policy.... Your choice...

I still hold out hopes that Republicans voters will carry the day Super Tuesday and actually have influence over their own primary..

are the ones McCain has to deal with as he needs them in November. So will he get actual conservatives to vote for him? Hasn't so far in large numbers.

--roxer

"Where I stand does not depend on where I'm standing."
--Fred D. Thompson, 2008

I suppose you can still vote for Tancredo...

there is no distinctly native American criminal class except Congress
--AuH2O--

Go join the democrats, dude... its where you belong. conservatives who care about this country will vote for romny.

. . . after they learn to spell his name.

LOL.

I mean, think about it! In 2050, Burritos might be more popular then hamburgers!

John Bolton for President
"FEAR THE 'STACH!!!"

That doesn't mean that they like McCain.

Romney ran to the left of Ted Kennedy, his whole record is to be a liberal, then all of a sudden go conservative in the Primary for votes. Romney has already proven he will cave on the conservative issues when the pressure is on. 50 dollar co-pays for abortion. Telling the people he will maintain pro-abortion laws, six months after he supposedly went prolife. Nominating liberal judges.

One day he makes a solid statement, the next day he goes in another direction.

Republican who tried to push Romney as a conservative and even the most conservative just plain and simply insulted the intelligence of people and their ability to do a few seconds of research.

Yup, it sure is.

Founder and contributor to The Minority Report and Editor for The Hinzsight Report

Move to Canada? Move to Canada?

Poor selection. Germany has Merkel and France has Sarkozy. I recently visited both. Canada is nice, but its no Europe. If you gotta go, go in style.
absentee:
plugged on Limbaugh and The Corner ... what did YOU do last week?

with a nice coast line. Who cares about taxes if you decide to stop working?

mmmm ... Monte Carlo!
absentee:
plugged on Limbaugh and The Corner ... what did YOU do last week?

Me, I just don't want to have to learn a new language. I tried taking French in college and it was the only course I dropped my whole college career.

---
Finrod's First Law of Bandwidth:
A picture may be worth a thousand words, but it takes the bandwidth of ten thousand.

I got to hear you being plugged on RL- congrats!
_________________
Thou art the Great Cat, the avenger of the Gods, and the judge of words...-Inscription on the Royal Tombs at Thebes

I had two thoughts of running away, If Clinton won I would move to Canada because I don't think she'd be too crazy with things. She knows how things work, shes crafty and she wants everything to be best for her, so we wouldn't have sweeping reform over the world.

If Obama won I'd be off to Australia, it has nice weather, pretty girls, beachs and Kangaroos.

Now with us having a choice between McCain, Mitt, or Huck I might ship off to Sicily, get back to my roots, maybe i'll see if Rudy wants to come by. I can live on a villa, reclaim the Olive groves my familly owned, and sit around like the big fat guy in Godfather II who got shanked.

All in all, i'm gonna need some money and a moving plane.

Europe and Canada have essentially been run by Hillary Clinton clones for the last 40 years. I wouldn't buy the plane tickets just yet. On the other hand, Australia had a conservative government for over a decade (and 16 consequtive years of economic growth, what do you know?) and is definitely sunny and friendly enough. If I could get my family and a couple friends to move to Australia if Clinton wins that might not be such a bad plan.

He is the preacher after all. I'm sure some folks held Romney's faith against him but I don't buy the "Romney lost because Christians are bigots" talking point.

I'm not saying Christians are bigots; I'm a Christian. I just think too many voters are holding Romney's faith against him, which is a pretty lousy reason not to vote for somebody. Too many voters are not delving deep into the issues and they're going with what's on the surface. On the surface you have McCain who's a war hero and Romney, who most people know little about except that he's Mormon and that helped turn the Olympics around. People are being too naive if they think this isn't an issue. My staunch Democrat grandparents voted for Nixon because Kennedy was a Catholic. Believe me, this does enter people's decision making processes.

Romney's problem is not his religion; it's that he comes off as a big phoney. He has been on both sides of every major issue. Relatedly, he seems to be willing to say anything to get elected.

In Iowa, it was the ethanol pander. In Michigan, the auto industry pander. Today in Florida, the AARP robo-call.

Is he really this grand conservative, or just a guy who wants to be President real bad?

Exit polls evangelicals broke even. I'm sure it accounts for some but didn't determine the outcome.

I'm a lapsed-Catholic agnostic who regards Mormonism as only a step or two removed from Scientology, and who thus seriously questions the judgment of its adherents. To put that another way, I have a very hard time taking seriously anybody who takes Mormonism seriously.

Now, that's certainly not the only or even the most important reason why I won't vote for Mitt Romney -- and in fact if he weren't so awful or untrustworthy on other issues of importance to me, I might be persuaded to support him in spite of his faith -- but it is nonetheless a reason.

...

Would you vote for someone who insisted that the earth was flat or that the sun rotated around the earth? How about someone who told you their deity was the Flying Spaghetti Monster?

I've posted before that I could never vote for someone who denied evolution or who was a believer in a young (6000 years old) earth. Those are just unreasonable and unintelligent points of view. Does that make me a bigot in your eyes?

If Romney was a Mormon preacher I would certainly not vote for him, but I don't have any fear of electing a run-of-the-mill businessman/government Mormon.

I don't think your view is bigotted as long as you aren't hateful towards people that happen to have that point of view. There are an incredibly amount of athiests who seem to be obsessed with their hatred of Christians, so I hope you're not one of them.

The "Flying Spagheti Monster" thing pisses me off so much. I don't even go to church every Sunday like I probably should, but this "joke" is unbelievably offensive to anyone with religion. It is worse than insulting MLK Jr. to black people, insulting the Founding Fathers to Americans, or insulting someone's mother. We may hold them in high regard, but we don't hold them in as high a regard as God at least. It's just mean-spirited, insulting, and an unbelievably person insult.

I'm not saying you would say you believe in a "flying spaghetti monster" to piss off Christians (which is the only reason to do so, other than looking clever in front of fellow athiests), your mentioning it just reminded me of it. Btw, most of my friends are agnostic or atheist, so I'm not some kind of radical I just expect basic respect for anyone regardless of their religious beliefs.

I'm a Christian. I'm Roman Catholic. I go to mass about twice a month and of course on Easter and Christmas. I am not equating Jesus to the FSM at all. The FSM is not supportable by any historical or scientific evidence. I was merely stating that if a candidate did believe in the FSM or in a flat earth or a young (6000 yr old earth) then he/she could be accused of suspect intelligence and judgement.

In America, everyone is entitled to their beliefs however "odd" them may seem to me or anyone else. However, if someone is an adherent of a belief that is historically or scientifically falsible, then it is not bigotry to not trust them with elected office.

"can't take any one seriously that takes Mormonism seriously"

Equating Jesus Christ to the Flying Spaghetti Monster?
Bigotry and blasphemy.

To both of you from Jack Nickleson (sic) line in "Bucket List"

"Nobody cares what you think"

While you and I might call this blasphemy, billions of people on God's green earth do not. Moreover, millions of our fellow Americans don't either. That's why there is no religious test required for public office in this country.

Centerfire mocks the LDS faith by insinuating that the doctorine is crazy and unbelieveable and anyone who does believe it is unfit for public office.

That is a religious test.

As to bigotry, what he said was both in poor taste and bad manners.

If it is somehow "bigotry" to question the judgment (and thus the fitness for public office) of people who maintain a belief in the patently ridiculous in the face of overwhelming contradictory data, then I am a proud and unrepentant "bigot".

I prefer the term "critical thinker", personally, but to each his own.

I now return you to your regularly-scheduled whining about "blasphemy".

Who are you going to vote for if anyone who doesn't believe as you (agnostic) and does believe that Jesus Christ is their Saviour and thus unfit for office?

I didn't say anything about belief in Jesus Christ as the Savior.

Look, there are some matters of religious doctrine that are unfalsifiable. The existence of God and the divinity of Christ are examples of these things, and there are plenty of others. I don't have an issue with this stuff: the basic purpose of religious faith is to give meaning to the universe in the face of all the things we don't know or understand.

But there are also some matters of religious doctrine that are not only falsifiable, but have been falsified: situations where people are trying to give meaning to the universe in the face of things that we do know, and that we do understand. For example, we know, as a matter of scientific fact, that the creation myth in Genesis is not literally true: the Earth and everything on it were not created in a single week, and man did not spring fully-formed from the mud. And yet there are people -- Mike Huckabee is one -- who steadfastly subscribe to Biblical literalism.

I cannot take somebody who insists on the truth of this sort of dogma, despite it having been conclusively disproven, seriously. They are no different than those who maintain that the Earth is flat, or that the moon landings were staged: they may be perfectly nice people in every other aspect of their lives, but if they are unable to distinguish myth from fact about relatively unimportant matters, then I don't want them in a position of public trust where they can really do some damage.

Blam.

------------
The Red Sox Republican: Burkeanism, Baseball, and Sundries.

I am respectfully requesting a rebuke from the moderators through the contact form. Would it be acceptable for me as a Mormon to write similar commentary about other religions?

"I think the American public wants a solemn ass as a President, and I think I'll go along with them."
------------- Calvin Coolidge

I agree with you completely.

the emetic. LOL.

Maybe he should run for the Democratic nomination in 2012. :p

Founder and contributor to The Minority Report and Editor for The Hinzsight Report

If conservatives want to win nominations, we need better candidates. I backed Fred, but frankly, for most of the race he campaigned poorly. The earliest conservative candidate, Brownback, floundered his way out of the race first. Romney has not been able to win hearts and minds despite his intensive deep pockets, turning into a more palatable version of Steve Forbes.

It's never too early to start thinking about 2012. Go Jindal!

will be a HUGE STAR in our party.

--------------------
Vista really sucks!

It's a state that seems to bring out the worst in politicians (see David Vitter for an example). I'm hopeful, I'm optimistic, but I also don't want to see Bobby stay on the vine too long and overripen in the Louisiana hothouse.

Two, when you're not spambotting, use Reply To This.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

she is.

Half of the crap McCain has pulled in the last 8 years has been payback to Bush.

sure.

That, and not much more, I can promise for McCain.

I'd rather have a Democrat ruin this country than a phony like McCain with a R behind his name. And that’s just what’s going to happen. There is no way he will win with conservatives like me staying home or voting 3rd party. I’m so pissed I actually joined this board to post and vent.

What's wrong with being a "yankee"? This isn't the Revolutionary War or the Civil War. You know 40% of "yankees" vote Republican right? It's not like we need any help in the South anyway. If a northeastern runs in our party he'll still win every southern state except possibly Arkansas and Florida, which he will still be favored in.

(with apologies to the late Douglas Adams)

42 rock-solid conservative Senators in the mold of Tom Coburn who can filibuster until the cows come home. Talk about "hoist on his own petard!"

(True, 41 is sufficient, but a reserve of one wouldn't hurt.)

"42 rock-solid conservative Senators in the mold of Tom Coburn who can filibuster until the cows come home. Talk about 'hoist on his own petard!'"

Tom Coburn who, by the way, is stumping for McCain. I saw him speak about McCain in SC. He is fired up about how McCain would clean up spending and bring sanity back to the budget.

absentee:
plugged on Limbaugh and The Corner ... what did YOU do last week?

I can live with McCain.

...in his own words:

"He [Michael Graham] also mentioned my abridgement of First Amendment rights, i.e. talking about campaign finance reform....I know that money corrupts....I would rather have a clean government than one where quote First Amendment rights are being respected, that has become corrupt. If I had my choice, I’d rather have the clean government."

but it will be his version of spending sanity, because he doesn't want us to have any say in it.

Remember the: "I'll Build The Da**ed Wall" comment? He doesn't like it if the little children annoy him with their wishes.

Get ready for it, but that is just how I see it. I am sure you feel differently.

Wubbies World, MSgt, USAF (Retired):
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println("An argument is a sequence of statements aimed at demonstrating the truth of an assertion.); }

That's vintage McCain right there.

Here's hoping the Democrats hit McCain harder in 2008 than Bush did in 2000. If they get McCain good and mad, he'll go Chuck Norris on them for the next 4 years and we won't have to worry about those 90% D/10%R "bipartisan" compromises.

You nailed it - there's no compromise with libs. They have no honor.

PS Newbie here and glad to be here.

*That's* not nice.

I meant what I said and I said what I meant. An elephant's faithful 100 percent.

Was going to make this same point. With our choices slimming down for even a glimmer of conservativism I'm hoping we can work to get the house in a good position and maybe in 2009 work some real governors into power, here in NJ we need Speedy McCorzine out qickly. If we can work the house and hopefully when the time comes the Senate , out with John "Barbaro" Kerry, we can have things set up for a nice 2012 with a Repub House, Senate and for all the asses in HuffPo and Moveon. President Petraeus, He can be our coolest President to date, his old news photo had him looking like a frikken GI Joe with his Green Beret on.

Reagan recruited people to run BEFORE he was elected. I have a story about one of them.

Wouldn't it be great if Petreus turns out to be a solid conservative and decides to run? What an incredible candidate he would be. He's already shown that he can handle the Democrats. If we succeed in Iraq he's going to be legendary.

He was rated the #2 conservative in America, not sure who was first, mighta been McCain so there would go the value, but he looks like a guy who could do lots of good, and as stated, look snazy in that beret.

how do you know they wont try to move more left, such as the Tories in the UK? Did the party learn from the crushing loss in 2006? Winning isn't everything, but losing isn't anything.

___________________________________________________________

Molon Labe!

Remember them? Probably not. Wasn't there plan: "Let's loose a few elections and surely the people will rally to our cause!"

"learning" --- at least nothing that lasted.

While I don't think McCain would be anywhere as bad as either Dem just think if House, Senate and Pres. all form a major majority and can grow past filabuster numbers. We'd have 12M illegals who become citizens, thus killing the chances of ever getting a republican in office. This is the best use of "Cutting off your nose to spite your face" you may send a message to the Republican party, but you might also create the end of the party.

And you don't think we'll have 12M illegals become citizens with a Democrat congress and John McCain as President?

If he wins, he will re-introduce a more liberal amnesty bill and it will be passed and signed.

-----------------------------------------------------------

"It is the American sound. It is hopeful, big-hearted, idealistic, daring, decent, and fair. That's our heritage; that is our song. We sing it still." RWR - Jan 21, 1985

By choosing to not vote for McCain in November, conservatives can send a clear signal to the political intelligentsia that changes are needed in the GOP

Someone needs to explain to you that there is no "political intelligentsia" to whom you need to send a message. McCain is winning primaries by getting more votes than the other guys. You may or may not want to be part of a political party in which someone like John McCain is highly popular with the other members of the party. But don't go looking for any secret Masters Of The Universe behind the curtain.

Drink Good Coffee. You can sleep when you're dead.

About 1.5 million Floridians voted for a Democrat - obviously as a protest against a McCain candidacy. Then there were millions of more eligible voters who didn't bother to vote at all because they obviously didn't like McCain. Finally, millions of children stood up for solid Conservative principles by not voting for McCain either.

How dare those of us who support McCain hail this obviously hollow victory?!?!

and obviously the state party moved Florida up because they didn't support McCain either..they wanted him to only get half of Florida's original delegates.

"Fred's my conservative guru, but McCain's my President."

“.....women and minorities hardest hit”

Do you live in Ohio? Do you know just how wildly popular conservatives and Republicans are there at the moment? Governor Strickland, as liberal a Dem as you can find, has an approval rating of over 70% at the moment, and is a leading candidate to be VP of the Democratic ticket assuming they avoid a brokered convention. Whoever the Republican nominee is, they will have to win the Presidency WITHOUT Ohio ... and to do that, PA, MI, OR, MN, WI, will become darned important.

MOlsen6
Proud supporter of McCain '00 and McCain '08

between 1976 and 1980?

--------------------
Vista really sucks!

Excellent point.

Coincidentally I personally wasn't alive between 1976 and 1980. I hear it sucked.

Jobs were pretty scarce, even with an accounting degree.

Ever hear of stagflation? How about odd/even days for gas rationing? Needing to wear heavy sweaters INDOORS? Imagine double-digit home loans. They created the misery index just to create some context.

Reagan lost a close primary. His second loss BTW.
It was a tough period but it was also the beginning of the Reagan conservative movement.

We need to do it again.

What makes 2008 so painful is that we haven't learned the lessons of the past, and that we are wasting good opportunities.

Hitlary won’t pull out of Iraq or Afghanistan, its all talk to the far left nuts. But McCain is all ready to fight global warming. Good luck to him he can do it without my vote.

I think there is more to gain than the status quo.

Hillary wins the White House. So be it. She'll be very measured and careful during her first term to not look too extreme in order to preserve her re-election chances. (Bush did this too with the steel tarrifs, farm bill, signing McCain-Feingold, etc.)

She won't pull out of Iraq precipitously due to the certain ramifications.

Sure he'd veto a few pork bills, but would side with the Dems on everything else.

I don't think she would be much worse than John McCain.

Letting Hillary win to retake the White House in 2012 is not completely unsavory.

----------------------------------------------------------
"It is the American sound. It is hopeful, big-hearted, idealistic, daring, decent, and fair. That's our heritage; that is our song. We sing it still." RWR - Jan 21, 1985

For all of the aforementioned reasons.

but, we will!

especially in a race against Hillary.

I don't know if Huckabee's numbers will remain propped up even in southern states now that his electorate undoubtedly sees that he has no chance of winning the nomination.

And what are the other choices? McCain?

I'm telling you McCain only won SC because of Fred Thompson.

Now there is no Fred Thompson.

Mike Huckabee is much more common of the South than John McCain.

Mike Huckabee winning in the South will make a good statement, and raise hopes for winning in Texas and other west and midwest states too.

and not cast votes tactically or for whom the MSM says is electable.

I hated it when people were telling me to give up on Fred. I don't see why Huckabee supporters should give up now.

The more delegates Huckabee gets, the better of the pro-life movement will be. Without Huckabee around, McCain will not care at all about a pro-life platform.

I don't see how Huckabee stays in the race much longer. He already lost a southern state to McCain (South Carolina). He'll probably win Arkansas, but that's about it.

Sure McCain, you can have my #$&&^%#@$ vote
Fred Thompson's Principles
==== 13 ====

just to hurt Romney. He is McCain's lap dog and will stay there as long as needed.

**"The issue of economics is not something I've understood as well as I should." - John McCain"**

We like Mike Huckabee.

BTW John McCain only won SC because of Fred Thompson. Fred Thompson knew he had no chance of winning SC just like everyone else knew it, so he based his whole campaign off of taking votes away from Mike Huckabee so that John McCain would win.

Now there is no more Fred Thompson. McCain could not have won without him.

I highly doubt gay marriage McCain will win Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, or most of the South.

I could be wrong, but I have lived here all my life and to be honest it just doesn't seem too likely.

Sure, Huckabee will get some votes, but he has no shot at the nomination. All he'll do is keep Romney from winning any southern states. So I guess now all the Romney supporters will be whining about Huckabee taking their votes, just like you continuously whine about Fred Thompson. Looks like Huckabee is just staying in to make sure his buddy John McCain wins the nomination.

Sure McCain, you can have my #$&&^%#@$ vote
Fred Thompson's Principles
==== 13 ====

at stopping McCain than Romney does.

Romney will probably win Massecusetts and Utah, and other than that, thats probably it.

Mike Huckabee unlike Romney actually has a chance in the South and hopefully will win many of those states if not all of them.

Since Romney has little chance elsewhere and no chance at all in the South, I think he is pretty much out and irrelevant. I know Romney supports don't like that, but it is what I think and just honest.

Mike Huckabee after winning some if not the rest of the Southern states could go on to other states like Texas and hopefully get a chance at winning there, which hopefully will not accept gay marriage McCain or Amnesty McCain or whatever you want to say about his positions.

At best, he can bring a block of delegates to the convention that could make life interesting.

so we don't wind up with an even weaker ticket.

It's weaker. So weak in fact that I doubt they could beat Edwards.

Sure McCain, you can have my #$&&^%#@$ vote
Fred Thompson's Principles
==== 13 ====

they live in different worlds

I think the point is that this block would keep Giuliani off the ticket.

conservative box possible. Owing a debt to the pro-life movement is one way to do that, since nobody thinks McCain is attracting much of the dedicated pro-life vote.

Unbelievable. How many stupid down right Liberal laws did stupid McCain pass? Get ready for more taxes, global warming regulations, and Amnesty Bills. Just stop and think for a second, with radical Mexican nationals on McCain's stupid campaign, get a damn clue and realize that another Amnesty is coming. Who controls the Senate? Liberals. Who controls the House? Liberals. How many times did stupid McCain side with Liberals? You stupid people are going to get every stinking Liberal law and regulation and you idiots deserve every last one of them. This country is going in the toilet, and all you can do is vote for an Idiot Liberal like McCain who sides with Ted Kennedy, and gets endorsed by the New York Times. This country is done.

..then you should *really* refrain from calling regulars idiots, stupid, and liberals.

Then again, I should learn not to feed the trolls. But seriously.

-signed: a proud member since summer 2004
"Fred's my conservative guru, but McCain's my President."

All states you have for Romney minus Utah and MA have shown a lot polls to be in favor of McCain

Oklahoma just had poll where McCain is leading and he is way ahead in Illinois

Missouri has McCain ahead

Where are you getting your info?
Oklahoma, W Virginia, Tennessee, georgia, Minnesota, Alabama, are not going to Romney...

It's doubtful Romney will win a single southern state. He lost South Carolian and Florida...remember? Huckabee will probably take Alabama and Georgia, McCain Tennessee and Missouri as well as Oklahoma, where he's ahead. Romney will take Utah and some western states, probably Mass. Illinois? I don't think so.

Look. After Super Tuesday McCain will have 800-900 delegates, Huckabee and romney will have 2-300 each. You need 1200 I think to win the nomination, McCain will have it by spring. It's over. Romney needed to win Florida to keep it open and he lost. McCain is the nominee. And while a brokered convention would be entertaining, I would rather spend time & energy on a winning platform and VP choice.

This is kind of sad, and I don't like to kick someone while their down but Romney isn't winning in any of those Southern states that you listed.

Right now those states are a two man race between Mike Huckabee and McCain and hopefully Huckabee will win and McCain will lose.

We have been trying to tell Romney people this for a while but it apparently was ignored.

Remember Romney was fourth in SC?

Use the MI stradegy, pull out of all states and focus on a few. Probably CA and Massachusetts. Thats probably Romney's best shot if he is going to win anything else other than Massachusetts and Utah.

I probably shouldn't even say that as I am no supporter of Romney and don't want Romney to win though a win in California might take some of McCain's delegates away and spread them out some.

Otherwise, McCain will ignore social conservative concerns after approximately 1.4 seconds after accepting the nomination.

He needs to know that those concerns are shared by many.

(conservatives, that is) approximately 1.4 nanoseconds after accepting the nomination and then do whatever they heck he wants. This is regardless of what any of the other candidates do or don't do.

Sure McCain, you can have my #$&&^%#@$ vote
Fred Thompson's Principles
==== 13 ====

He may actually be trying to get a tachyon com system going so he can start before he actually gets the nomination.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

I was trying to be generous in a mode of party unity and healing.

Sure McCain, you can have my #$&&^%#@$ vote
Fred Thompson's Principles
==== 13 ====

would be a Huckabee sweep in the South and a strong showing by Romney in states where Giuliani was strong. This would probably require tactical voting - Huckabee supporters in NY, NJ, and CA pulling the lever for Romney and Romney supporters pulling the lever for Huckabee in the South.

These people are already defensive, you think they are going to vote for the guy who ran the negative ads ?
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

I voted for Fred in Michigan, and would have done so even if he had withdrawn before then.

I was annoyed when Romney supporters were talking about trading votes with SC votes, or how Fred needed McCain to lose Michigan.

where do you think his voters would go? Despite Huckabee's kind words for McCain, his voters are pretty much the same people that rejected McCain for Bush in 2000. I think we'd see the same 2/3 Romney -- 1/3 McCain split that we're seeing from Giuliani voters.

Now ask me why we're seeing that split from Giuliani voters and I honestly cannot answer that question. As I saw it, McCain = Giuliani + war hero + pro-life, while Romney was farther away from Giuliani's base of support.

...Huck's supporters would surprise you by splitting exactly the opposite way: 2/3rd for Johnny Mac and 1/3 for Mitt.

Don't get me wrong, that kind of surprises me too.

Someone needs to step back from the bong.

...

you will be banned immediately.