Right-Wing Angst Over McCain

[Pangloss]

I thought it best in the interest of common ground and emotion that I start this thread myself, being a well-known right-of-center member here -- this way at least it doesn't look like the thread was started by a leftie as a "in your face" kind of thing. But of course this has become a major news story now, and it has interesting political implications, so I think it's a valid subject for discussion.

 

The far right is really beside itself over the front-runnership (for lack of a better term) of John McCain. Rush Limbaugh recently said that for the first time in his life he was considering not voting Republican! Ann Coulter reportedly said the other day that she would stump for Hillary Clinton before she would support John McCain! Holy cow!

 

The fracturing of the right wing of the conservative base is really quite something to watch. I think the social conservatives have become so comfortable with the notion that most of the country is behind them that they don't realize that that was never actually the case. They tout figures like "80% of the country is christian" while ignoring the slim margins that Bush won by (or didn't win by, if you look at the 2000 popular vote), or those charts that show red states to be really more of a "purple" shade. 80% of the country is NOT behind their agenda, any more than it's behind the far-left progressive agenda. Most people go issue-by-issue in their decisions and feelings.

 

Left-of-center Washington Post columnist EJ Dionne had a very insightful column on this on Friday, which received praise from conservative Cal Thomas on Sunday. He talks about how the conservative "base" over the last couple of decades has really been a coalition of social conservatives (religious right) and economic conservatives (the "country club" crowd).

 

Unfortunately it's subscription-only at the moment, but I'll hit ya with a couple of good quotes:

 

For those outside the conservative movement, such anxiety seems strange. McCain's voting record in the House and Senate has typically won high ratings from conservative groups. His positions on key issues (support for the Iraq war, opposition to abortion, his long-standing criticism of government spending) are those of an orthodox, conservative loyalist.

 

But staunch conservatives see things differently. They know that in primary after primary, McCain's base has been formed by moderates, liberals, independents, supporters of abortion rights and critics of President Bush. Conservatives -- who mistrust McCain because of his history on taxes, immigration, global warming and campaign finance reform -- were not his coalition's driving force. And Republicans who describe themselves as "very conservative" have consistently rejected McCain. In this week's Florida primary, such voters chose Mitt Romney over McCain by more than 2 to 1.

 

What surprises me most about this is this notion that they'd allow, or even support, Hillary Clinton over John McCain. Perhaps Ann Coulter's support is just a joke, but it's patently obvious that if McCain wins the nomination then they're going to have to support him or suffer a president who is decidedly left of their positions. And haven't they told us all along that they would do anything to "beat the b*tch"?

 

I for one am overjoyed at this rift. My party of general inclination has been ursurped and controlled by the far right for years, to my intense chagrin and dismay. Time and time again I've had to endure my side of the "aisle" going the wrong way on stories like Terry Schiavo and embryonic stem cell research. How badly I've wanted the right to be on the side of science and reason is beyond words. It's become impossible to tell people that being conservative doesn't mean being stupid.

 

Maybe this is the best thing that could happen to Republicans. Unfortunately the way politics goes, what is more likely to happen is that McCain's defeat due to lack of support will be seen as a failure by the party, and it will in reaction return to embracing social conservatives in 2012. (sigh) Sometimes you just can't win!

[iNow]

What is especially funny to me is that each time Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulture or whoever from the far right bashes McCain, they actually HELP him to get more votes in the general election.

[D H]

What is especially funny to me is that each time Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulture or whoever from the far right bashes McCain, they actually HELP him to get more votes in the general election.

I am a conservative economically and in terms of national defense. The highjacking of the Republican party by the religious right has caused me some angst, much relieved as of late by the strengthening in McCain's candidacy. That Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coluter, and their ilk are so troubled is an added bonus.

[Skye]

I was surprised to see conservatives say that they'd vote for Clinton over McCain. I've seen it in other discussions. I think the issue is that McCain is seen as a traitor to the cause. Aside from some 'liberal' social issues he champions, he's not well liked for seemingly trying to block the release of MIA/POW records. Shades of John Kerry. However with McCain there's a more significant military voting base in the Republicans.

 

Realistically these people wont vote for Clinton, they'll probably not vote at all. And that's probably the biggest issue for McCain, getting people to come and vote for him. He's done a good job so far though.

[D H]

Conservatives are particularly vexed that McCain

• Not only sided with the Democrats on "the anthropogenic global warming hoax" but had the audacity to be the co-author (with a Democrat!!) of the Lieberman-McCain Climate Stewardship Act
  
• Not only sided with the Democrats on campaign finance reform but had the audacity to be the co-author (with a Democrat again) of the McCain-Feingold Act
  
• Not only sided with the Democrats on immigration reform but had the audacity to be the co-author (this time with the worst Democrat of all in many conservative's minds) of the McCain-Kennedy Comprehensive Immigration Bill.
  

That many conservatives see problems with the way money corrupts our political institutions, believe in conservation and environmental protection, and are proponents of immigration reform is irrelevant. Working with the enemy is bad, bad, bad. Letting those evil Democrats get their way just once opens the door to human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together - mass hysteria.

[Pangloss]

He's also part of the Gang of 14, the group of 7 Democratic and 7 Republican congresscritters who worked out a compromise on appointment blocking that managed to annoy the extremists in both parties. (Hooray!)

[D H]

He's also part of the Gang of 14, the group of 7 Democratic and 7 Republican congresscritters ...

Gasp! That's even more apocalyptic than dogs and cats living together.

[Pangloss]

Mass hysteria!

[DrDNA]

Don't forget that he is also a member of the exclusive Keating Five club.

[ecoli]

It would be interesting to see the GOP splinter... it's something I wouldn't think could happen in this day in age.

 

But right now, the republicans seem to consist of the evangelical populists (Huckabee), moderates (McCain), economic conservatives (Romney) and libertarians (Paul).

 

It's interesting to see how the party is split among these candidates, and the guys with the overlapping principles largely dropped out.

[doG]

I'll certainly be voting against McCain myself but that's not saying much. I'll be voting against Romney, Hillary and Obama as well. With no one to vote "for" this season I guess I'm left to writing myself in. I sure wish someone would call a misdeal, this hand is terrible.

[john5746]

I'll certainly be voting against McCain myself but that's not saying much. I'll be voting against Romney, Hillary and Obama as well. With no one to vote "for" this season I guess I'm left to writing myself in. I sure wish someone would call a misdeal, this hand is terrible.

 

Is there anyone in particular you would like?

 

The evangelicals still are irritated at McCain for his disdain towards the likes of Falwell, Robertson and Bob Jones U during his last political run. They know he truly does not respect that wing of the party. Instead of getting behind the Mormon early, they went for their precious dream Baptist candidate and lost.

[doG]

Is there anyone in particular you would like?

 

 

Ron Paul supports the same Constitutionalist Libertarian ideology as I and Huckabee could be a possibility as well. I don't think either is viable and I'm not sure that either is what I would consider "Presidential" material. I would take either of these over any of the 4 front runners.

[Sisyphus]

I'm delighted at the rift, but not because I'm gloating. If McCain Republicans come out on top, that would be a great step forward for everyone, including and especially the Republican Party. It's not that he's a moderate, per se. I think he's pretty unambiguously "conservative." But he is, for lack of a better word, an adult. He is not beholden to the silliness of the Christian right. He is disdainful of pandering and cheap shots (McCain, stating simple fact: "Some of the jobs that were lost in Michigan are not coming back." Romney, ridiculous on at least four levels: "Well I will fight for every one of those jobs!") He does not automatically dismiss something because it is "liberal." (torture, campaign finance, global warming, certain scientific facts, etc.) And he has consistently shown that he can find common ground and work together with people he disagrees with, which means a McCain presidency would not mean living under a hostile regime for half the country. The fact that those attributes make the likes of Anne Coulter call him "not conservative" just highlight what "conservative" really means to that wing of the party. The fall of that breed of "conservatism" would be the best possible outcome for America.

[Pangloss]

Exactly. Now if we can just get the left to toss Al Franken off the Minnesota Senate ballot, we'll be on our way to doing the same thing for "progressives".

 

But look how far down the list I have to go to find an extreme case from the left to match what Sisyphus just said. A case like Al Franken, who is glaringly extreme even to people left of center. Obama certainly can't be called an extremist, even at his most eggregious efforts in pandering to the base (it's almost as if they know they're being childish and respect him for not stooping to their level!).

 

I think that's just another example of how Democrats have recaptured, and are continuing to recapture, the "big tent" -- the middle ground of American politics. And Republicans are throwing it away like hamburger buns on the 5th of July.

[D H]

Full disclosure: My opinion of Obama is more than a bit tainted by a campaign promise of his to take away my livelihood (I work in the field of human spaceflight).

 

I see Obama as very liberal. I'm not alone; the National Journal sees him as the most liberal senator in 2007. I see McCain as taking back the big tent, and the liberals being the ones who are giving it away. A commentator on CNN tonight likened McCain in 2008 to Clinton in 1992. The liberal wing of the Democratic party did not like Clinton and tried very, very hard to stop him. The conservative wing of the Republican party likewise does not like McCain and are doing their best to take down McCain. I hope it won't work.

 

The conservative Republicans most definitely worked very hard to get rid of the "big tent" concept, egged on by diehards like Limbaugh, Coulter, Hannity, and others. McCain's primacy indicates, to me, that these diehard blowhards are losing their grip on the Republican party. (Hooray!) At the same time, the diehard blowhards from the left have regained their grip on the Democratic party.

[ParanoiA]

I'm personally enjoying listening to the conservative pundits cry and whine "we don't have a candidate" - just after making fun of Ron Paulites for being weirdos. Well, at least we have a candidate. If their brand of conservatism is so "mainstream" then where's their guy? What? Can't even field a candidate? I guess their marginalizing is actually just envy.

 

Sorry, this is a worthless post. I think I just wanted to type it out...to vent.

[ecoli]

I'm personally enjoying listening to the conservative pundits cry and whine "we don't have a candidate" - just after making fun of Ron Paulites for being weirdos. Well, at least we have a candidate. If their brand of conservatism is so "mainstream" then where's their guy? What? Can't even field a candidate? I guess their marginalizing is actually just envy.

 

Well, I guessing the talk show personalities have even less influence than the news...

 

That's why I'm predicting that the Ron Paul type conservatism is going to spread while the Romney-type is going to die out.

 

The McCain type will probably move over to the democrats, and the anti-war liberals will realize that they're confused libertarians.

 

I think it may take someone a little bit more dynamic and a little more celebrity than Paul to eventually be elected to the Whitehouse.

 

It'll have to take the form locally first, voters in the midwest and elsewhere to elect libertarian/conservatives into regional and congressional seats.

 

Building up the 'freedom' coalition in Washington will be a good start.

 

It took 16 years for the Goldwater revolution of the republican party to take to the mainstream in Reagan.

Economic conservatives will eventually have to adapt to the anti-war or perish, because I honestly don't think the American people are going to take much more of the same from Washington... especially once they realize they have another option.

[Realitycheck]

I really think that underlying all of the issues, war is going to be the swing vote. I really do not understand why McCain has gained so much popularity, but that is the main reason why the Republicans will lose.

[DrDNA]

We have no choice any more!! Why? Because we can be satisfied without one..so we get what we deserve.

 

We're not sheep. We're worse.

 

We're like morphine addicts... dependant on our middle of the road, moderate, Jackasses and Elephants they're drug dealers....and we're all looking for a fix...a govt handout, govt backed initiative, tax rebate, or financial incentive....nothin but cough syrup.

 

If you IGNORE THE MEDIA and look closely at Mr McCain's, Mrs Clinton's, and Mr Obama's Senate voting records (see below), they appear to be mostly interchangable pieces.... they are POLITICAL HERMAPHRODITES...

distinguishable perhaps only by the following....

 

McCain has a hell of a lot of NVs in the last year (I suspect in a denial effort in order to play both sides this season), went completely against the will of his constituents in Arizona with his open border policy and is somewhat anti abortion (at least he had the good sense to go against partial birth procedures and has voted in favor of the right to lifers a few times).

 

Obama has a pretty decent record on the 2nd amendment (MUCH better than Hillary and the gun lobbyists give him more points than McCain) and was a no show for the two abortion votes he was in office for.

 

Also, Clinton has voted for partial birth abortion and is VERY adamently pro choice. She is right at the very top in the whole congress for bringin home the pork.

At the opposite end of the pork spectrum, McCain has brought zero (nada, zip, nuttin...) pork dollars home to his state of Arizona. WHERE IT COULD ACTUALLY BE USED. It's turning into Mexico and I don't mean the people...I mean the jobs, the wages, the conditions....especially in the school system which was 49th 10 yrs ago...is 49th .....and will contiue to be.....49th.

Meanwhile AZ's Gov Doubtfire (who continues to get re elected in spite of the education issue mentioned above) is almost certain to get at least a cabinet post (VP anybody?) if the dems win. I've got it....she could head the dept of education!

 

Everywhere else, the 3 choices from which our next president shall come appear to be very similar by my account.

 

As far as erroding the constitution and its amendments and foreign policy (as in W's ""war on terror"" against the US-created dictator in Iraq which never was a threat to the US) goes, they all, unfortunately, have followed W like sheep.

 

Please check out their records for yourselves and stop listening to the lying egg sucking dog media....

McCain

http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=53270

 

Clinton

http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=55463

 

Obama

http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=9490

 

Dr Paul is (was?) the ONLY conservative candidate in this election cycle:-( .

We are, unfortunately, left without much of a choice...except the left.

NONE of them, except Paul voted against renewal of the Patriot Act.

 

Paul

http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=296

 

Full disclosure: My opinion of Obama is more than a bit tainted by a campaign promise of his to take away my livelihood (I work in the field of human spaceflight).

 

 

I don't intend to be rude, but it is exactly that sort of narrow minded focus, and the politicians desire and willingness to please special interests, that got us in this mess and it is exactly what is going to keep us in the mess. What ever happened to lets ride the wave of good fortune created by doing something good for everybody?

 

 

 

 

I've gotta run, Brittany just got out of the looney bin and she isn't wearing any panties.

[ecoli]

I really think that underlying all of the issues, war is going to be the swing vote. I really do not understand why McCain has gained so much popularity, but that is the main reason why the Republicans will lose.

 

Looking over at some of the exit polls, McCain got a significant portion of the anti-War vote.

 

In New York, the exit polls showed that half of the anti-War folk voted for McCain. Those were voters that should have gone over to Paul... that's what happens when voters are uninformed. They assume that the "moderate" candidate would be best for them... which is obviously not the case.

[Pangloss]

Looking over at some of the exit polls, McCain got a significant portion of the anti-War vote.

 

In New York, the exit polls showed that half of the anti-War folk voted for McCain. Those were voters that should have gone over to Paul... that's what happens when voters are uninformed. They assume that the "moderate" candidate would be best for them... which is obviously not the case.

 

It most certainly IS the case.

 

First of all, voters aren't SUPPOSED to go ANYWHERE. They're human beings making up their own minds. It's a really, really bad idea to start saying where voters are supposed to go, and assuming they're "uninformed" if they don't go there.

 

Second, deciding that a candidate has no chance and voting for one who might make progress on issues they find important, even if it's not all the progress they were hoping for, is not an example of a voter being "uninformed". It's an example of a voter paying attention and thinking about the long term. It may also be an example of people stepping outside of their selfish little single-issue causes and pondering the bigger picture.

 

Those are things we need MORE of in this country. Not less.

[ecoli]

It most certainly IS the case.

 

First of all, voters aren't SUPPOSED to go ANYWHERE. They're human beings making up their own minds. It's a really, really bad idea to start saying where voters are supposed to go, and assuming they're "uninformed" if they don't go there.

 

Second, deciding that a candidate has no chance and voting for one who might make progress on issues they find important, even if it's not all the progress they were hoping for, is not an example of a voter being "uninformed". It's an example of a voter paying attention and thinking about the long term. It may also be an example of people stepping outside of their selfish little single-issue causes and pondering the bigger picture.

 

Those are things we need MORE of in this country. Not less.

 

Now, Pangloss, we both know the average voter isn't that intelligent... Especially since McCain's biggest issue, by his own admission, is the war in Iraq and is the candidate who has most supported a troop surge. Tell me again why an anti-war voter would vote for McCain?

 

Not voting for a candidate that agrees with you on an issue because you don't think he's "electable" is a self-fulfilling prophecy. Despite this, most voters still get their info from the mainstream media, and whoever they say has the best chances.

 

I have little faith in humanity right now.

[Severian]

Now, Pangloss, we both know the average voter isn't that intelligent... Especially since McCain's biggest issue, by his own admission, is the war in Iraq and is the candidate who has most supported a troop surge. Tell me again why an anti-war voter would vote for McCain?

 

I regard myself as quite intelligent, and would regard myself as anti-war (though I am not a member of the US electorate). However, I would probably agree with McCain's stance on Iraq, because as well as being anti-war, I am also anti-isolationist.

 

The US (and allies) invaded Iraq, which was a bad call in my opinion, but now they are there they need to do everything in their power to ensure a strong democratic government that can survive when they leave. The worst thing they can do is pull out now, because Iraq will go down(up?) in flames. And since I am anti-war, I don't want another war erupting in the middle east.

[doG]

Those were voters that should have gone over to Paul... that's what happens when voters are uninformed.

 

But informed voters know that Ron Paul favors turning a blind eye to the issue of Islamic terrorism which is not a quality they're looking for in a world leader....