McCain, Whats so Bad About Him?
- Thread starter CobrayCommando
- Start date
CobrayCommando
Moderator
Wow and Bush is so real. Like, I was totally expecting him to flip flop and be pro-choice, betraying 90 percent of his voter base, but man he really stuck to his guns. And Hillary Clinton, she just projects an aura of truthy trustworthyness. Must I mention John Kerry and his overwhelming non-phonyness?
2nd,
Point is that the whole "throw your weight behind the Republicans and hope they throw you some scraps" strategy is useless. The only way to guarantee support for your cause is to present a credible threat of throwing your weight behind the other guy.
Get involved in the primaries and vote for the best ->candidate<- regardless of party.
You mean like George H.W. ?
Not true. Kerry wouldn't have been able to sign it because it wouldn't have been presented. Which is the only reason we don't have an AWB II right now. Dubya said he'd sign it.
Point is that the whole "throw your weight behind the Republicans and hope they throw you some scraps" strategy is useless. The only way to guarantee support for your cause is to present a credible threat of throwing your weight behind the other guy.
Get involved in the primaries and vote for the best ->candidate<- regardless of party.
While I still commend McCain for his past service and actions for our country, I will not vote for him unless the other poisions are worse.
he is like a ball in a pinball machine who bounces back and forth. What happened to that guy who was a POW? Bush and the Republican party dogged him out yet there he was speaking at the convention.
he is like a ball in a pinball machine who bounces back and forth. What happened to that guy who was a POW? Bush and the Republican party dogged him out yet there he was speaking at the convention.
You were expecting what from any of them? Everybody over 11 years old knows that voting is often just a choice between the lesser of the two evils. When it comes time to vote, we'll see what we've got to pick from and make our choices. McCain's a bozo. I'm just having a pretty hard time visualizing the scenario where he's the 'better bozo'.
seeker_two
New member
invssgt said:
Amen....hence my sig....
NedreckSavant
New member
When I started reading this I'd had a slight fondness for Mr. McCain, remembering when I got that feelin that he was just DYING to take bush to town...heard a good soundbite here and there...but now? He's been comprimised, time to get him outta there. SOMEONE (god, how I'd love to know who) gave him a sitdown, let him know how the cow's gonna eat the cabbage, and it seems ever since then there's been this tremendous void behind his eyes. He's no longer running things, if he ever was. (it's in his eyes! now just another talking head in a suit)
While I respect Mr McCain for his military service I would not vote for him
if he ran for local dog catcher. Right or wrong if we can't find anyone better,
(any ticket) I will set it out i grow weary of voting in people who care more
about the money train then the direction America is going.
if he ran for local dog catcher. Right or wrong if we can't find anyone better,
(any ticket) I will set it out i grow weary of voting in people who care more
about the money train then the direction America is going.
Scott Conklin
New member
Exactly. Our economy is better, unemployment lower, taxes better and regulation less than under Clinton. This is not an endorsement, since things are a long way from right, but it is a statement that things are far better than they could be.
That's silly, and shows a lack of understanding of how this event in particular and politics in general works. The AWB died because Shrub failed to push for it or twist arms and refused to call in favors. Meanwhile the Dems lacked cohesive leadership on the issue. If John Kerry had been POTUS he would have twisted every arm in DC and the Dems would have been in lockstep to achieve their agenda. AWBII would have gotten through and you can bet your ass John Kerry would have signed that sucker.
We dodged the bullet purely as a result of a lack of effort on the part of the Pres, nothing more.
Another example of lack of understanding. Of course he said he'd sign it. And he would have, too...if it got to his desk. That's playing the game of politics. But see above for the ONLY reasons it did not.
Really? then present a better alternative. Here. Now. Otherwise I'll simply dismiss that statement as either gross niavete or partisan rhetoric.
Once again, a silly statement. The threat of throwing your support behind someone or some party that specifically opposes your cause is NOT going to guarantee anything except maybe raised eyebrows and muttered questions about whether we have lost our collective minds.
I do, and thus 95% of the time or more I wind up voting Repub. NOT because the Repubs are usually any great shakes, but because the Dems are almost always pure anathema to responsible views. Sadly, that's all the choice we have and it seems impossible to motivate most people to seek more than that.
2nd,
Even better, pay attention to the house/ senate race when picking your president so that you don't end up with the same party controlling everything.
I said George HW and I was referring to to firearms specifically. You know....expanding GCA '69 just like Reagan did? The economy...is another subject altogether; one that is a diversion from this subject.
Right back atcha. You see Kerry would have had no favors to call in or arms to twist when both houses are controlled by Republicans.
Which means precisely nuthin' when they're the minority.
I have already presented it but I will do so again. Research who you're voting for and pull the lever for the least gun-grabby one. Don't just pull a party lever and think that they're your friend because they talk a good game.
Even better, pay attention to the house/ senate race when picking your president so that you don't end up with the same party controlling everything.
No it's not. Declaring one party uniformly friendly and the other uniformly hostile is silly, particularly in light of the track record. I'll thank you to keep the discussion civil.
Something we agree on.
Scott Conklin
New member
Pardon me for missing the distraction. But, still, yes Herbert Walker was better than the alternative, Dukakis, and demonstrably better than Clinton. So my point still stands, thx. Also, I didn't see anyone limiting the topic when discussing "better/worse", so the economy is a perfectly acceptable subject here.
Again, silly. First off, the Dem minority with decent leadership stirs up more of a public outcry and makes better use of the media than they did without leadership. Next, Kerry makes certain Dems at all levels stay in lock step with the favors that any POTUS can offer. Then he entices moderate and left-leaning Repubs with promises of assisting them in gaining Dem votes for pork projects and getting them needed Dem support on pet legislation.
That's how it works in DC. That's how it is always done and has always been done. Being without a congrssional majority is not a guarantee of failure, especially on such a hot button issue.
Utterly wrong. See above.
So you don't actually have an alternative? The Repubs are consistently the least gun-grabby, the least tax-happy, the least infanticide-crazed, the least detrimental to small business, the least likely to push stupid enviro regulations, etc. While they may not measure up to their words and may be merely a slower road to hell they consistently beat the Dems on these issues.
With that fact in mind how does one vote one's agenda AND not vote the same party into office across the board? It's not like the Dems EVER offer an alternative.
The Repubs track record consistently puts the vast majority of them and the Party as a whole in a much more acceptable position than the Dems. They ARE uniformly more friendly and the Dem that steps outside that reality is a rare minority and generally is bullied back on to the plantation by other Dems(or he doesn't last in office very long).
Your statements ARE silly. I don't know if you don't really get how they play the game or if you have a partisan agenda but silly is silly. If honesty is uncivil then i am, certainly, not a civil person. OTOH I will always be honest with you...
Governors tend to do better in primaries and presidential elections than Senators do. As a free spirit in a polarized time, I figure McCain will again fade quickly. Hillary is overrrated for the same reason, but some Dem wannabes like Biden are backing off before it starts. John Edwards is still around. Kerry will be back, but I can't imagine him getting very far. Edwards may do better than Kerry. Kerry's failure will hurt the Dems badly. My money is on George Allen (R-VA), both a Senator and former Governor. Governor Warner of SC, a libertarian Republican, would be great as a running mate.
Nonsense, but even if it were true it takes *votes* to pass legislation, not 'public outcry'. Partisan politics always trumps deals and hot-button issues. Spin it all you like, but it didn't matter who was president. AWBII was dead in the water regardless of who was in the white house.
Apparently not one that you're willing to acknowledge as such. If you're all willing to be the Republican party's toady for no gain than so be it, but be forewarned that they don't give a rat's a$$ about you and have shown themselves more than willing to betray you.
I'm going to flex my muscles to try to get what's mine as an American citizen.
Once again you try to derail the discussion with these other topics? We're talkin' guns here, not the rest of that stuff. If you agree with the Republican party line 100% then by all means vote Republican. But not all of us agree with you. IOW, don't speak for me.
News flash: We don't all share your agenda. We are independent thinkers who draw our own conclusions and have our own agendas.
I'll tell you what my agenda is: The Constitution. I believe in limiting the government and I believe in the BoR. *All* of the BoR.
Which party do I vote for across the board? Neither one because they're both out to control us.
This evidently isn't a problem you share.
As for the rest of your post, I won't dignify it (or any subsequent personal attacks) with a response. I'm more than happy to carry on a reasonable debate should you decide to engage in one.
FirstFreedom
Moderator
No, No, No, No, No! Don't be suckered into using *their bogus words & phrases* - we must repeat what they really are:
1. McCain-Feingold, AKA 1st Amendment Speech Bans
2. Gunshow closure bill (there is no gunshow loophole)
3. Advocate of UnPatriot I and II.
Scott Conklin
New member
Outcry influences votes. Partisan politics is defined by deals and deal-breakers. AWBII was barely dead under Bush, let alone a leftst hack. I'm sorry but have you ever dealt in politics, beyond reading about it in the paper or online?
You keep repeating yourself. You keep implying that disagreeing with you is somehow foolish. So can you cite Dems that have consistently better track records on a national level on the 2A then Repubs in general? On other freedom issues? And how does this manage to affect the offical Dem party stance? Or are you saying you'll vote Third Party? Which one? Can you show one that has an actual chance? Can you show the benefit of voting such if none does have a legitimate chance?
Before I can acknowledge your alternative you have to HAVE one. Bashing the Repubs is not an alternative, it's just bashing.
So you're a single issue voter? There aren't many of such a creature and you don't have the numbers to influcence much of anything. Meanwhile, if you're single issue then it becomes even more of a clear-cut choice: The Dem Party officially endorses gun control and supports gun-control groups. A single-issue gun voter can not vote Dem, even if the individual Dem is supportive of the 2A, because each Dem office holder by inference lends weight to the offical party stance.
If you are NOT a single-issue voter then stop griping about a discussion that includes a variety of issues. That IS how it works and that IS how people are chosen by the Electorate. The only it such derails may, possibly, be your concentration.
Hmm, did I say "MY" agenda? I said one's agenda. Each individual. Clear as mud?
Well, no. Most are lemmings who vote a straight party ticket because Dad, Gramps and the union said so. Or they believe whatever comes running out of their idiot boxes, courtesy of the MSM. Independent thinkers are thin on the ground and really always have been.
I believe this is probably the last time I'll bother with you, 'cause you just don't seem to be keeping up very well. Nevermind that there you go derailing the discussion with all those general constitutional considerations you implied...
We have a Two Party System. One or the other WILL be in control all the time. Nobody has offered an alternative and those of us who have tried to motivate people to create an alternative have failed, usually miserably.
So which party do you vote for? You hold your nose and vote Repub, because the Dems aren't hiding their anti-freedom agenda. It's right there for you to read in their party platform and the majority of actions from them for the past 50 years. Even your local Dem who talks the talk will change his walk if he ever goes national, as evidenced by Al Gore, for instance. In the meantime you start trying to organize an opposition. Another party, a melding of existing parties, whatever. But you don't sit there and show you don't understand how politics works while waiting till the last minute to say "VOTE FOR THE OTHER GUY!!"
There is no other guy. You didn't create one. You didn't help anyone else create one. You aren't offering any solutions, only more of the same tired rhetoric that helps you feel good while the worst of the bad choices gets in office thx to your wasted vote. Yes, it IS a wasted vote. The opportunity to make a difference comes LONG before election day and if you've done nothing before that then you might as well be practical when the last moment arrives.
That's why I am done. There hasn't really been any debate here. You either don't have a clue, or you can't express your point and I am bored with rehashing the same tired arguments that have floated around for the last 8 years or more. The next office holders at most all levels will be Repubs and Dems. One party is at least slightly more friendly to freedom than the other. Pick one. Or pick some other non-player and the rest of us, including those you oppose, will make the decisions for you. That's just how it is.
I don't. I vote for candidates. And honestly I would have to hold my nose to vote for the Dems (all the reasons you mentioned) *or* the Repubs (who also don't hide their anti-freedom agenda).
Look, you have pledged the Republican party has your unwavering support and as a result they're taking you for granted. You have empowered them to detain Americans indefinitely without charges, spy domestically, disseminate propaganda in our press, balloon the federal government, do whatever the hell they want without fear of reprisal because checks and balances have ceased to be.
Ultimately the pendulum's going to swing the other way and it'll be the Dems' turn to rape the constitution. Who made it possible? Why, you did. You became so wrapped up in voting for your party you didn't even notice that the conservatives aren't in charge of it anymore!
When I was speaking of 'we' in my last post I was referring to people on this board, not Americans in general. If we all agreed with you....there wouldn't be a legal & political forum now would there?
And throwing around additional issues merely confuses the discussion. You see, I'm not a single-issue voter and I disagree with about half of your positions in that list.
So here we are. You clearly don't see where I'm coming from and vice-versa. Rather than stooping to personal attacks I won't bother trying to discuss this matter with you anymore. Have fun with president Clinton. :barf:
Scott Conklin
New member
One last effort...
Here's where we're talking past each other...
Really? Where did I pledge unwavering support to a Party? I tried to get people together, for years, to build a decent opposition party. I don't like the Repubs. I just don't have a better alternative. So I vote for the best of a bad lot and keep trying to get something better. There's nothing better from the Dems and even on the very rare instances a decent Dem does come along they are offset by the systematic abuse the Dem party is built on.
BTW, what have you actually done? Forget the vote. If there are no good options then it doesn't matter.
Here's anoher disconnect:
Of course I realize the Repubs are a moderate party. And of course the pendulum will swing back. But you have yet to offer an alternative. Voting for the one "good" Dem that coems along is not an alternative and it sends no message. Or, maybe worse, it sends the message to the idiots leading the Repub Party that they can continue to go left cause, hey, look, there's another Dem getting votes.
And yes, even if we all agreed there would STILL be an L&P forums, so we could lambast all the lemmings and thier annoying desire for "safety".
I'm sure we all will. But I'll vote for the other one(unless it's McVain, at which point I'll just stay home and mourn). I'll also lament the fact that nobody was willing to organize to offer any real alternatives. What are you going to do at this late date, other than the same thing?
Wipe yourself off, I think you got some on your shirt...
Here's where we're talking past each other...
Really? Where did I pledge unwavering support to a Party? I tried to get people together, for years, to build a decent opposition party. I don't like the Repubs. I just don't have a better alternative. So I vote for the best of a bad lot and keep trying to get something better. There's nothing better from the Dems and even on the very rare instances a decent Dem does come along they are offset by the systematic abuse the Dem party is built on.
BTW, what have you actually done? Forget the vote. If there are no good options then it doesn't matter.
Here's anoher disconnect:
Of course I realize the Repubs are a moderate party. And of course the pendulum will swing back. But you have yet to offer an alternative. Voting for the one "good" Dem that coems along is not an alternative and it sends no message. Or, maybe worse, it sends the message to the idiots leading the Repub Party that they can continue to go left cause, hey, look, there's another Dem getting votes.
And yes, even if we all agreed there would STILL be an L&P forums, so we could lambast all the lemmings and thier annoying desire for "safety".
I'm sure we all will. But I'll vote for the other one(unless it's McVain, at which point I'll just stay home and mourn). I'll also lament the fact that nobody was willing to organize to offer any real alternatives. What are you going to do at this late date, other than the same thing?
Wipe yourself off, I think you got some on your shirt...
Wow...now we're getting somewhere.
I'll tell ya. My vote for president is going to be heavily influenced by the projected makeup of both houses. If one party has too much influence then I'm going to split the ticket for the president. If the congress & Senate are cross-dominated or evenly split I'll be looking at the most libertarian candidate between the two.
But if I'm presented with two equally abhorrent choices (Clinton vs. Giuliani) Here's what I'm doing: I'm going to start finding people who are voting the lesser of two evils (one Repub and one Dem) and see if I can't get them to agree to both vote Libertarian instead.
As you correctly point out, there isn't a whole heck of alot we can do, but I submit that having these two parties battling each other instead of dominating us is in our best interest.
I'll tell ya. My vote for president is going to be heavily influenced by the projected makeup of both houses. If one party has too much influence then I'm going to split the ticket for the president. If the congress & Senate are cross-dominated or evenly split I'll be looking at the most libertarian candidate between the two.
But if I'm presented with two equally abhorrent choices (Clinton vs. Giuliani) Here's what I'm doing: I'm going to start finding people who are voting the lesser of two evils (one Repub and one Dem) and see if I can't get them to agree to both vote Libertarian instead.
As you correctly point out, there isn't a whole heck of alot we can do, but I submit that having these two parties battling each other instead of dominating us is in our best interest.