Conservatives Push Back Against McCain

[Lubbock]

Conservatives push back against McCain

By: David Paul Kuhn (http://www.politico.com/reporters/DavidPaulKuhn.html)
Feb 1, 2008 05:30 PM EST

As the Democrats debated Thursday night, Ann Coulter was on Fox’s “Hannity & Colmes” declaring that if John McCain faced Hillary Rodham Clinton in the general election, she would vote for Clinton.

“She’s more conservative than he is,” Coulter said.

[snip]

“It's immigration. It’s limits on free speech. It's not supporting tax cuts,” host Sean Hannity said, listing just a few of the issues where conservatives draw swords with McCain. “These are not small issues to conservatives."

Indeed, they are not. Across the spectrum of conservative media there has been a forthright pushback against McCain as the party’s potential standard-bearer.

And immigration, taxes and campaign finance reform (the McCain-Feingold Act is viewed as an abridgement of free speech by many conservatives) are some of the points of contention.

McCain also faces a conservative insurrection over his opposition to interrogation techniques that border on torture and opposition to drilling in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

From The Politico: (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8268.html)

[Rhino]

I doubt he can win. Too many conservatives won't vote for him.

[The_Elucidator]

I doubt he can win. Too many conservatives won't vote for him.

They wouldn't vote for FRED!

If conservatives couldn't be convinced with FDT I don't know what they will be happy with!

[Kathekon]

I have low expectations of the electoral process, especially this year so I guess that makes me a less demanding voter. I have a simple checklist listed in order of relative importance:

1) Is the candidate not a slimeball or moral defective?
2) Is the candidate not going to screw up national defense?
3) Is the candidate not likely to appoint people I hate as federal judges?
4) Is the candidate not likely to push programs I think are stupid?
5) Is the candidate likely to win if nominated--(I am not into symbolic candidates)?

**************************Clinton.....Obama....McC ain.....Romney
Not a Slimeball.............................No!!........ .Yes.........Yes..........Yes
Won’t screw up National Defense.....No............No.........Yes!......... Yes
Won’t Nominate activist clowns.......No............No.........Yes?........ .Yes
Won’t push stupid programs............No............No..........No?. ........Yes
Can Win if Nominated....................Yes?..........No?.... ....Yes..........No?
Current Unweighted Score...............1.............1.............4. ............4

Ties go to higher ranked questions.
! --may be weighted extra as election nears
? --not sure, may have to discount or change later

McCain has ticked me off often but the notion of Romney as the Voice of the True Right rather than a moderate paragon of the Rockefeller wing he always used to be is also a bit hard to take. I had already steeled myself to face an election menu that ran from Conspicuously Imperfect to Disastrous so I am hesitant to get real picky or negative about the GOP nominee either way.

Go Team! Onward, you Imperfect Bastards! Beat Hillary!

[Rhino]

They wouldn't vote for FRED!

If conservatives couldn't be convinced with FDT I don't know what they will be happy with!They are indeed fickled.

[Lubbock]

The vast, vast majority of us never got a chance to cast a vote for FDT.

Whether anyone realizes this or not, the LeftStream Media, the Drivebys, are chosing our candidate for us.

We don't stand a chance.

[Suzie]

I have low expectations of the electoral process, especially this year so I guess that makes me a less demanding voter. I have a simple checklist listed in order of relative importance:

1) Is the candidate not a slimeball or moral defective?
2) Is the candidate not going to screw up national defense?
3) Is the candidate not likely to appoint people I hate as federal judges?
4) Is the candidate not likely to push programs I think are stupid?
5) Is the candidate likely to win if nominated--(I am not into symbolic candidates)?

**************************Clinton.....Obama....McC ain.....Romney
Not a Slimeball.............................No!!........ .Yes.........Yes..........Yes
Won’t screw up National Defense.....No............No.........Yes!......... Yes
Won’t Nominate activist clowns.......No............No.........Yes?........ .Yes
Won’t push stupid programs............No............No..........No?. ........Yes
Can Win if Nominated....................Yes?..........No?.... ....Yes..........No?
Current Unweighted Score...............1.............1.............4. ............4

Ties go to higher ranked questions.
! --may be weighted extra as election nears
? --not sure, may have to discount or change later

McCain has ticked me off often but the notion of Romney as the Voice of the True Right rather than a moderate paragon of the Rockefeller wing he always used to be is also a bit hard to take. I had already steeled myself to face an election menu that ran from Conspicuously Imperfect to Disastrous so I am hesitant to get real picky or negative about the GOP nominee either way.

Go Team! Onward, you Imperfect Bastards! Beat Hillary!

Romney does remind me of the Rockefellers, I am still still living with Jay :sad:. Welcome to the forums. I agree with you.

[Nutrider99]

The vast, vast majority of us never got a chance to cast a vote for FDT.
I won't get a vote in any case. Our primary is May 20.

[Suzie]

I won't get a vote in any case. Our primary is May 20.

Since we vote late our delegates are somehow committing on Super Tuesday. I am not sure how they are doing this, but I assume it's because the Republican leadership knows McCain has the best shot at winning here and they are going to commit to Romney without the vote of the people.

[Naturalized-Texan]

In order for me to vote for any Republican candidate, other than Romney, I would have to seriously compromise my conservative principles.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

In order for me to vote for any Republican candidate, other than Romney, I would have to seriously compromise my conservative principles.

Ditto

[Beowulf]

Too many people are obsessed with electability and are willing to bend on their conservative principles on this one. I won't. I said I would support Fred Thompson. He is now gone. I will begrudgingly support Romney if he gets it. If he doesn't, I WILL vote Constitutionalist. I will not give in!

[MrSanity]

In order for me to vote for any Republican candidate, other than Romney, I would have to seriously compromise my conservative principles.:yeahthat:

I hate to admit it, but I think Ron Paul is the second most conservative candidate left in the race.

Huck and McCain are two of a kind.

[MrSanity]

Too many people are obsessed with electability and are willing to bend on their conservative principles on this one. I won't. I said I would support Fred Thompson. He is now gone. I will begrudgingly support Romney if he gets it. If he doesn't, I WILL vote Constitutionalist. I will not give in!I'm leaning in that direction as well.

[Chris]

Too many people are obsessed with electability and are willing to bend on their conservative principles on this one.

I absolutely agree, and I think it will definitely come back to haunt conservatives, because this will just keep happening until we take a united stand.

[The_Elucidator]

Too many people are obsessed with electability and are willing to bend on their conservative principles on this one.

I understand and respect that point of view... even thought you cheat at football picks!! :evilgrin:

But if a family that only believes in faith healing opts for Chemo for their daughter because they ultimately believe that it is the only alternative; are they really bending on their principles? Just asking??? :question:

[BarkleUSA]

5+1, half a dozen, six...

Sky Blue, periwinkle, (RGB: 135, 206, 235)...

Clinton, McCain, Obama...

It's all synonymical as near I can tell.

(I'm waiting to see what 3rd party candidate emerges)

[Venus de Smilo]

They wouldn't vote for FRED!

If conservatives couldn't be convinced with FDT I don't know what they will be happy with!
Fred didn't inspire voters with the confidence that he would do the hard work needed to win in November. It's that simple. Everyone was excited when anticipating his candidacy. The disappointing reality of his campaign candidacy was a different matter.

[Venus de Smilo]

Too many people are obsessed with electability and are willing to bend on their conservative principles on this one. I won't. I said I would support Fred Thompson. He is now gone. I will begrudgingly support Romney if he gets it. If he doesn't, I WILL vote Constitutionalist. I will not give in!

Voting third party is exactly that - giving in. The vanity and ego behind one's vote should remain separate from the pragmatism of doing what is best for the country.

[Venus de Smilo]

I absolutely agree, and I think it will definitely come back to haunt conservatives, because this will just keep happening until we take a united stand.
What's going to haunt us is HillBilly's legacy, part of which will be giving driver's licenses and the right to vote to illegals as well as very far left federal judge and SCOTUS appointments. Once that happens, the GOP will be locked out of the WH for years to come, perhaps forever; same for congress, state legislatures, the rest of the down-ticket offices, etc..

There's a great deal more riding on the November election than the vanity of cutting off our noses to spite our faces just because it satisfies our principles. Apparently there are a lot of conservatives for whom pragmatism and digging in to make the best of a less-than-satisfactory result is not a principle. Maybe they should look up the definition of what to "conserve" means.

Or maybe it's just tantrums and theatrics. One can hope.

[DoctorDoom]

Q for the third-party vote-wasters: assuming the occurence of a miracle, and the victory of a 3P candidate on 4 Nov, then what? S/he will be an outsider, a lame duck on Inauguration Day. S/he will get zero cooperation from the RATs and Pubs. The DBM will go on a 24/7/365 campaign to destroy him/her. And at the end of 4 years, that bold experiment will conclude in disastrous defeat.

So, when 11/4 rolls around the only options are Clinton and McCain. Do we really want another 4 (8) years of those loathsome communist bastards, the Clinton co-presidents, in the White House? And do not be deceived: if HC is elected, BJ Billy WILL be the effective president for a third (and fourth) term. She's there to get him back into power.

If the Bitch Queen is elected, kiss your country goodbye.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Too many people are obsessed with electability and are willing to bend on their conservative principles on this one.

I absolutely agree, and I think it will definitely come back to haunt conservatives, because this will just keep happening until we take a united stand.

Make that three :thumb:.

[The_Elucidator]

:thumb:Q for the third-party vote-wasters: assuming the occurence of a miracle, and the victory of a 3P candidate on 4 Nov, then what? S/he will be an outsider, a lame duck on Inauguration Day. S/he will get zero cooperation from the RATs and Pubs. The DBM will go on a 24/7/365 campaign to destroy him/her. And at the end of 4 years, that bold experiment will conclude in disastrous defeat.

So, when 11/4 rolls around the only options are Clinton and McCain. Do we really want another 4 (8) years of those loathsome communist bastards, the Clinton co-presidents, in the White House? And do not be deceived: if HC is elected, BJ Billy WILL be the effective president for a third (and fourth) term. She's there to get him back into power.

If the Bitch Queen is elected, kiss your country goodbye.

Pretty much everything the good Doc said and a smidge more... :thumb:

[CONSERVATIVE HERO]

Meh, people just have to face facts. The Pubs have really screwed us, and themselves, this time around. I would love to be wrong, love it, but it looks very likely that the Dems will prevail.

The Pubs have been very stupid on many levels. They also clearly either don't understand, or care, what their own constituency wants. The candidates we've been given are a joke. We should all be on here complaining that we can't decide for which candidate to vote, because being they're all so very conservative, we just can't make up our minds. Instead the Pubs have offered up an assortment of wishy washy centrists (if not leftists) that have completely demoralized the base. The fact that damage control, in regard to our own side, is the rationale behind a candidate choice illustrates that the both the system, and party, are completely broken right now.

These moderates, expecting us to buy their absurd claims to be Reagan 2.0, clearly believe we're complete idiots. Even Fred was a disappointment. He entered too late and left too early. Why? Why pull out when the majority of people have not spoken yet, and when Giuliana and Paul who are doing far worse, decide to stick it out? The least he could have done was waited until yesterday, and if it didn't work out withdraw, and then throw his influence against McCain.

I think some people may have to face the possibility that true conservatives have also become marginalized, and that given the way we're too timid to do much of anything to fight back, we're only going to continue to decline as time goes on.

Then there's the libertarians. Their existence basically serves only to facilitate the success of the left. They'll never be anything more than a fringe minority so what they want will never come to fruition. They're like the flaming homosexual cousin neither side of the family wants to claim because they act inappropriately in public. Being that they claim relation to only one side of the family (conservatives) however, the libertarians are really siphoning more votes from our side than the dems, aiding them to ultimately outnumber us at the polls. Instead of trying to bring about reform within the party, they create their own with no chance in hell of accomplishing anything, and screw us both in the process.

[ThomasMore]

[W]hen 11/4 rolls around the only options are Clinton and McCain. Do we really want another 4 (8) years of those loathsome communist bastards, the Clinton co-presidents, in the White House? And do not be deceived: if HC is elected, BJ Billy WILL be the effective president for a third (and fourth) term. She's there to get him back into power.

If the Bitch Queen is elected, kiss your country goodbye.

I am in 100% agreement, Doc. But it is already all but a fait accompli if McCain is the Republican nominee.

Meh, people just have to face facts. The Pubs have really screwed us, and themselves, this time around. I would love to be wrong, love it, but it looks very likely that the Dems will prevail.

The Pubs have been very stupid on many levels. They also clearly either don't understand, or care, what their own constituency wants...Instead the Pubs have offered up an assortment of wishy washy centrists (if not leftists) that have completely demoralized the base. The fact that damage control, in regard to our own side, is the rationale behind a candidate choice illustrates that the both the system, and party, are completely broken right now.

These moderates, expecting us to buy their absurd claims to be Reagan 2.0, clearly believe we're complete idiots. Even Fred was a disappointment.

:yeahthat: