When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
DisagreeAgree
Connect with
I allow to create an account
When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
DisagreeAgree
25 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
bbartlog
16 years ago
I see a report that Paul’s people also defected to Huckabee in exchange for three of the national delegates. See here. The defection(s) must have been incomplete in both McCain’s and Paul’s camp, but clearly it was enough.
bbartlog
16 years ago
Seems like Paul also defected to Huckabee in exchange for three delegates to the national convention. I was wondering what happened there – it wouldn’t have made sense to just do nothing when there was clearly an opportunity for some sort of bargain. I wish he’d struck his bargain with Romney, but maybe that wasn’t possible for some reason.
David
16 years ago
So much for an honorable campaign that McCain pledged.
And David says: “So much for an honorable campaign that McCain pledged.”
I remember McCain talking about how proud he was of the positive campaign he ran in SC. Then of course he pulled every dirty, negative trick in the book to win against Romney in Florida.
So let’s think again when he tells us how conservative he is. Do we believe him?
David
16 years ago
A quick update from Colorado … the Denver Post is reporting there’s some confusion about the caucuses. Some people apparently believed there is a primary here. The full article can be found here: http://www.denverpost.com/ci_8175601. With the media, for the last two weeks, saying the state would play a crucial role in Super Tuesday, I suppose some believed a primary was to take place.
A similar scenario took place eight years ago when George W. Bush had a solid lead going into the GOP caucus. After the night was over, McCain finished closer than expected. Gives rise to wonder whether history is repeating itself with Romney holding a solid lead this time around.
Centfl said: “Admit it – it is personal for you (and many others on this site) because McCain told you he was not going to change to please individuals.”
If the issues I had raised with McCain were issues of concern solely to me, or even a small cadre of “individuals” you would be right Cent!
But the issues I raised have long been the tip of the McCain thorn in the conservative side.
Trying to suggest otherwise would be about as dishonest as McCain bragging about waging a “positive campaign” then using every dirty trick in the book, inclulding the infamous robocalls, to win against Romney in Florida.
let’s just say I believe Romney before I would believe McCain.
bbartlog
16 years ago
Ron Paul sold out? What a shocker!
The setup being what it is, I would expect the losers in the early rounds to try and cut deals – I wouldn’t describe that as selling out. I just wish Paul had made a deal with Romney rather than Huckabee.
So keep pulling for the Varmit hunter I guess. Anyone who has flip-flopped this much and pandered and spent his way thus far to only win 1/3 of the amount of votes as McCain certainly deserves your support. “
Philadelphia Steve
16 years ago
As an intgeresting question, if John McCain were to ask Mike Huckabee to be his Vice Presidential candidate, would that heal some of the rifts?
Steve, the “rifts” on the right aren’t as deep as you think. MSNBC’s got an analyst, Chuck Todd, who put it perfectly well after NH, “The Republicans will unite around a ham sandwich if Sen Clinton wins the nomination.” I don’t deny at all that there are deep differences between the far right and McCain, but the differences are not only exaggerated in depth, but ignored in importance:
Hillary nomination=no lack of party unity.
Far right conservatives hate her as much as far left liberals do Bush.
Jan
16 years ago
Collusion is an agreement, usually secretive, which occurs between two or more persons to deceive, mislead, or defraud others of legal rights, or to obtain an objective forbidden by law typically involving fraud or gaining an unfair advantage and can involve “wage fixing, kickbacks, or misrepresenting the independence of the relationship between the colluding parties.”
via Wikipedia
Some call it politics….I call it evil. Two against one is how evil gains advantage over truth. Go McCain and Huckabee. Your collusion is now public even though you will still deny it. It appears that our votes didn’t even matter last night. (steeling elections….oh never…Ha) I will be sitting this election year out because of the stench of the Republican collusion. No wonder Washington is so broken. But we shouldn’t be surprised. McCain has been in collusion with the dems for years. Huckabee may be new to the collusion concept but he is excelling now. Class envy and mormon hatred is taking away the best hope we have for the future of this country. I hope your pocket books and your conservative values sustain you through the next 8 years of Hillary/Obama. You fools.
Philadelphia Steve
16 years ago
Re: “Steve, the “rifts” on the right aren’t as deep as you think. ”
I agree with your point about Republican Party unity. I attribute the “rifts” to be media talking points to fill a 24-hour news cycle with fluff rather than real facts and information, which requires research and checking.
No Republican, right up to James Dobson himself, will fail to vote for the Republican nominee, regardless of who the Republicans nominate, or the Democrats nominate. Unlike the network airheads (we’re talking about Chris Mathews now), I do not see any Republicans voting for Obama if he is the enominee any more than they would vote for Senator Clinton.
No Republican, right up to James Dobson himself, will fail to vote for the Republican nominee, regardless of who the Republicans nominate, or the Democrats nominate. Unlike the network airheads (we’re talking about Chris Mathews now), I do not see any Republicans voting for Obama if he is the enominee any more than they would vote for Senator Clinton.
So it is somehow a bad thing that republicans and conservatives do not want socialism from either Clinton or Obama? But Democrats, I suppose, will vote for either Hillary or Obama and that is just fine by you? Even though their primary is laced with racial overtones, states left out of primaries, and slime thrown from both Democrats at each other.
As usual, I do not see much sense in your replies. I may not like McCain’s poll and “please like me” flip-flopping, but I definatly do not want the policies of Clinton or Obama in place. With McCain, there may be a chance at smaller government and defending ourselves against militant Islam and other threats, but with the Dems, I see no chances of a smaller government, strong economy, lower taxes, or a strong defense. I do not think McCain, post 2000, is very conservative, but I know what the left is and do not support them.
In short, it is the policies and positions of the left I do not support. Nor do I support their radical ANSWER/ACT/Soros/ACORN/WWP etc base.
Yet somehow it is bad that we conservatives (if conservatives choose to vote and not sit out this election in ‘protest’ again) are voting republican. But it is good that all democrats will loyally vote for their party no matter who wins their primary.
And is this not the reason we have primaries? We are a Representative Republic, not a direct Democracy. We have primaries to chose the final two and then choose the winner. Even in our non-parlimentary system, the final two must attract the most votes (Parlimentarians might call this a coalition).
Again, your reply seems like, yet another, sweeping generalization of conservatives.
Philadelphia Steve
16 years ago
I wasn’t dwelling on the reason, just the fact that I do not expect any Republicans, no matter what they say now, to vote any way other than Republican in November. It is also very unlikely that any Democrats will vote for Republicans either for that matter. The battle will be for the independents.
There were significant numbers of Democrats who did cross party lines in the 1980’s to vote for Ronald Reagan, but that is not going to happen this year.
I used James Dobson as my poster child for a Republican who declares he would never vote for McCain now who I promise will vote for him in November (assuming he gains the nomination) for two reasons:
1. He is the latest example of a Republican leader who has declared he will never vote for McCain.
2. I used Dr. Dobson’s name specifically because of the power he has within the party and the sensitivity among some Republicans about the power of the Religious Right over them.
Certainly the Democratic party has its own set of foibles, so there is no purity there. But if one can’t tweak the nose of one’s friends, then of whom can one kid?
Thank you. That response you made makes much more sense and I agree. I do not follow what Dobson writes/says but I will take you at your word he has said it.
It will be a battle for the independents (though, techically, I am also one as I belong to no party). After watching Leno’s on the street interviews concerning the elections last night, I do have to worry about how many people are paying attention or know the issues. I know his interviews are not scientific in any way and meant to encourage people to be knowledgeable, but it is still disheartening to see how little so many people seem to know about their surroundings.
Now to travel home on roads full of people who incorporate the same lack of awareness in their driving…..
Philadelphia Steve
16 years ago
“The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.”
Winston Churchill
True… But on the other hand. “It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.”
Sir Winston Churchill
So thus the paradox. Representative government is the greatest form of governance, but requires the most exertion from the governed. Though, honestly, how difficult is it to look up the party and candidate platforms and positions these days? I just wish more people would expend the effort.
But then it is not as much fun as hearing about some celebrity’s latest run-in with the law. You can lead a horse to water……
There was no moment in these sixteen years when the three former allies, or even Britain and France with their associates in Europe, could not in the name of the League of Nations and under its moral and international shield have controlled by mere effort of the will of armed strength of Germany.
-Winston Churchill, Memoirs of the Second World War
It is difficult to find a parallel to the unwisdom of the British and the weakness of the French Governments, who none the less reflected the opinion of their Parliaments in this disastrous period. Nor can the United States escape the censure of history. Absorbed in their own affairs and all the abounding interests, activities, and accidents of a free community, they simply gaped at the vast changes which were taking place in Europe and imagined they were none of their concern.
-Winston Churchill, Memoirs of the Second World War
By the autumn of 1933 it was plain that neither by precept nor still less by example would the British effort for disarmament succeed. The pacifism of the Labour and Liberal Parties was not effected even by the grave event of the German withdrawl from the League of Nations. Both continued in the name of peace to urge British disarmament, and anyone who differed was called “warmonger” and “scaremonger.” It appeared that their feeling was endorsed by the people, who of course did not understand what was unfolding.
-Winston Churchill, Memoirs of the Second World War
Until the middle of 1934 control of the events was still largely in the hands of His Majesty’s Government without the risk of war. They could at any time, in concert with France and through the League of Nations, have brought an overwhelming power to bear upon the Hitler Movement, about which Germany was profoundly divided.
-Winston Churchill, Memoirs of the Second World War
Don’t believe that anyone in the world will hinder me in my decisions [to invade Austria and Czechoslovakia]! Italy? I am quite clear that they are with Mussolini: with Italy I am on the closest of terms. England? England will not lift a finger for Austria…And France? Well, two years ago when we marched into the Rhineland with a handful of battalions [breaking the 1991 Treaty of Versailles]-at that moment I risked a great deal. If France had marched then we should have been forced to withdraw….but for France it is too late!
-Adolph Hitler, 1938
Even though large tracts of Europe and many old and famous states have fallen into the grip of the Gestapo and all the odious apparatus of NAZI rule, we shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in France, we shall fight in the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air; we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing-grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender; and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God’s good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and liberation of the Old.
-Winston Churchill, Memoirs of the Second World War
Philadelphia Steve
16 years ago
Re: “You can lead a horse to water……” ….but you can’t make her wear underwear 🙂
Philadelphia Steve
16 years ago
I’ll apologize in advance for this double post (and then call it a night, I have to get up early tomorrow). But this has always been one of my favorites:
“Men occasionally stumble on the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened.”
Winston Churchill
I see a report that Paul’s people also defected to Huckabee in exchange for three of the national delegates. See here. The defection(s) must have been incomplete in both McCain’s and Paul’s camp, but clearly it was enough.
Seems like Paul also defected to Huckabee in exchange for three delegates to the national convention. I was wondering what happened there – it wouldn’t have made sense to just do nothing when there was clearly an opportunity for some sort of bargain. I wish he’d struck his bargain with Romney, but maybe that wasn’t possible for some reason.
So much for an honorable campaign that McCain pledged.
Ron Paul sold out? What a shocker!
And David says: “So much for an honorable campaign that McCain pledged.”
I remember McCain talking about how proud he was of the positive campaign he ran in SC. Then of course he pulled every dirty, negative trick in the book to win against Romney in Florida.
So let’s think again when he tells us how conservative he is. Do we believe him?
A quick update from Colorado … the Denver Post is reporting there’s some confusion about the caucuses. Some people apparently believed there is a primary here. The full article can be found here: http://www.denverpost.com/ci_8175601. With the media, for the last two weeks, saying the state would play a crucial role in Super Tuesday, I suppose some believed a primary was to take place.
A similar scenario took place eight years ago when George W. Bush had a solid lead going into the GOP caucus. After the night was over, McCain finished closer than expected. Gives rise to wonder whether history is repeating itself with Romney holding a solid lead this time around.
Mike – does that mean that Romney is a Conservative? When did McCain support abortions, gun control laws, gay marriage and increased taxes?
Admit it – it is personal for you (and many others on this site) because McCain told you he was not going to change to please individuals.
Why would you simply believe that Romney will be ANYTHING when he will say ANYTHING to get elected? It is just naive if you ask me.
Centfl said: “Admit it – it is personal for you (and many others on this site) because McCain told you he was not going to change to please individuals.”
If the issues I had raised with McCain were issues of concern solely to me, or even a small cadre of “individuals” you would be right Cent!
But the issues I raised have long been the tip of the McCain thorn in the conservative side.
Trying to suggest otherwise would be about as dishonest as McCain bragging about waging a “positive campaign” then using every dirty trick in the book, inclulding the infamous robocalls, to win against Romney in Florida.
So Mike does that mean that you believe Romney is a Conservative?
What is your evidence if you take his words away?
let’s just say I believe Romney before I would believe McCain.
Ron Paul sold out? What a shocker!
The setup being what it is, I would expect the losers in the early rounds to try and cut deals – I wouldn’t describe that as selling out. I just wish Paul had made a deal with Romney rather than Huckabee.
So keep pulling for the Varmit hunter I guess. Anyone who has flip-flopped this much and pandered and spent his way thus far to only win 1/3 of the amount of votes as McCain certainly deserves your support. “
As an intgeresting question, if John McCain were to ask Mike Huckabee to be his Vice Presidential candidate, would that heal some of the rifts?
Steve, the “rifts” on the right aren’t as deep as you think. MSNBC’s got an analyst, Chuck Todd, who put it perfectly well after NH, “The Republicans will unite around a ham sandwich if Sen Clinton wins the nomination.” I don’t deny at all that there are deep differences between the far right and McCain, but the differences are not only exaggerated in depth, but ignored in importance:
Hillary nomination=no lack of party unity.
Far right conservatives hate her as much as far left liberals do Bush.
Collusion is an agreement, usually secretive, which occurs between two or more persons to deceive, mislead, or defraud others of legal rights, or to obtain an objective forbidden by law typically involving fraud or gaining an unfair advantage and can involve “wage fixing, kickbacks, or misrepresenting the independence of the relationship between the colluding parties.”
via Wikipedia
Some call it politics….I call it evil. Two against one is how evil gains advantage over truth. Go McCain and Huckabee. Your collusion is now public even though you will still deny it. It appears that our votes didn’t even matter last night. (steeling elections….oh never…Ha) I will be sitting this election year out because of the stench of the Republican collusion. No wonder Washington is so broken. But we shouldn’t be surprised. McCain has been in collusion with the dems for years. Huckabee may be new to the collusion concept but he is excelling now. Class envy and mormon hatred is taking away the best hope we have for the future of this country. I hope your pocket books and your conservative values sustain you through the next 8 years of Hillary/Obama. You fools.
Re: “Steve, the “rifts” on the right aren’t as deep as you think. ”
I agree with your point about Republican Party unity. I attribute the “rifts” to be media talking points to fill a 24-hour news cycle with fluff rather than real facts and information, which requires research and checking.
No Republican, right up to James Dobson himself, will fail to vote for the Republican nominee, regardless of who the Republicans nominate, or the Democrats nominate. Unlike the network airheads (we’re talking about Chris Mathews now), I do not see any Republicans voting for Obama if he is the enominee any more than they would vote for Senator Clinton.
So it is somehow a bad thing that republicans and conservatives do not want socialism from either Clinton or Obama? But Democrats, I suppose, will vote for either Hillary or Obama and that is just fine by you? Even though their primary is laced with racial overtones, states left out of primaries, and slime thrown from both Democrats at each other.
As usual, I do not see much sense in your replies. I may not like McCain’s poll and “please like me” flip-flopping, but I definatly do not want the policies of Clinton or Obama in place. With McCain, there may be a chance at smaller government and defending ourselves against militant Islam and other threats, but with the Dems, I see no chances of a smaller government, strong economy, lower taxes, or a strong defense. I do not think McCain, post 2000, is very conservative, but I know what the left is and do not support them.
In short, it is the policies and positions of the left I do not support. Nor do I support their radical ANSWER/ACT/Soros/ACORN/WWP etc base.
Yet somehow it is bad that we conservatives (if conservatives choose to vote and not sit out this election in ‘protest’ again) are voting republican. But it is good that all democrats will loyally vote for their party no matter who wins their primary.
And is this not the reason we have primaries? We are a Representative Republic, not a direct Democracy. We have primaries to chose the final two and then choose the winner. Even in our non-parlimentary system, the final two must attract the most votes (Parlimentarians might call this a coalition).
Again, your reply seems like, yet another, sweeping generalization of conservatives.
I wasn’t dwelling on the reason, just the fact that I do not expect any Republicans, no matter what they say now, to vote any way other than Republican in November. It is also very unlikely that any Democrats will vote for Republicans either for that matter. The battle will be for the independents.
There were significant numbers of Democrats who did cross party lines in the 1980’s to vote for Ronald Reagan, but that is not going to happen this year.
I used James Dobson as my poster child for a Republican who declares he would never vote for McCain now who I promise will vote for him in November (assuming he gains the nomination) for two reasons:
1. He is the latest example of a Republican leader who has declared he will never vote for McCain.
2. I used Dr. Dobson’s name specifically because of the power he has within the party and the sensitivity among some Republicans about the power of the Religious Right over them.
Certainly the Democratic party has its own set of foibles, so there is no purity there. But if one can’t tweak the nose of one’s friends, then of whom can one kid?
Steve,
Thank you. That response you made makes much more sense and I agree. I do not follow what Dobson writes/says but I will take you at your word he has said it.
It will be a battle for the independents (though, techically, I am also one as I belong to no party). After watching Leno’s on the street interviews concerning the elections last night, I do have to worry about how many people are paying attention or know the issues. I know his interviews are not scientific in any way and meant to encourage people to be knowledgeable, but it is still disheartening to see how little so many people seem to know about their surroundings.
Now to travel home on roads full of people who incorporate the same lack of awareness in their driving…..
“The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.”
Winston Churchill
http://www.coolquotes.com/quotes/winston_churchill/3.html
True… But on the other hand. “It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.”
Sir Winston Churchill
http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Sir_Winston_Churchill
So thus the paradox. Representative government is the greatest form of governance, but requires the most exertion from the governed. Though, honestly, how difficult is it to look up the party and candidate platforms and positions these days? I just wish more people would expend the effort.
But then it is not as much fun as hearing about some celebrity’s latest run-in with the law. You can lead a horse to water……
There was no moment in these sixteen years when the three former allies, or even Britain and France with their associates in Europe, could not in the name of the League of Nations and under its moral and international shield have controlled by mere effort of the will of armed strength of Germany.
-Winston Churchill, Memoirs of the Second World War
It is difficult to find a parallel to the unwisdom of the British and the weakness of the French Governments, who none the less reflected the opinion of their Parliaments in this disastrous period. Nor can the United States escape the censure of history. Absorbed in their own affairs and all the abounding interests, activities, and accidents of a free community, they simply gaped at the vast changes which were taking place in Europe and imagined they were none of their concern.
-Winston Churchill, Memoirs of the Second World War
By the autumn of 1933 it was plain that neither by precept nor still less by example would the British effort for disarmament succeed. The pacifism of the Labour and Liberal Parties was not effected even by the grave event of the German withdrawl from the League of Nations. Both continued in the name of peace to urge British disarmament, and anyone who differed was called “warmonger” and “scaremonger.” It appeared that their feeling was endorsed by the people, who of course did not understand what was unfolding.
-Winston Churchill, Memoirs of the Second World War
Until the middle of 1934 control of the events was still largely in the hands of His Majesty’s Government without the risk of war. They could at any time, in concert with France and through the League of Nations, have brought an overwhelming power to bear upon the Hitler Movement, about which Germany was profoundly divided.
-Winston Churchill, Memoirs of the Second World War
Don’t believe that anyone in the world will hinder me in my decisions [to invade Austria and Czechoslovakia]! Italy? I am quite clear that they are with Mussolini: with Italy I am on the closest of terms. England? England will not lift a finger for Austria…And France? Well, two years ago when we marched into the Rhineland with a handful of battalions [breaking the 1991 Treaty of Versailles]-at that moment I risked a great deal. If France had marched then we should have been forced to withdraw….but for France it is too late!
-Adolph Hitler, 1938
Even though large tracts of Europe and many old and famous states have fallen into the grip of the Gestapo and all the odious apparatus of NAZI rule, we shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in France, we shall fight in the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air; we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing-grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender; and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God’s good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and liberation of the Old.
-Winston Churchill, Memoirs of the Second World War
Re: “You can lead a horse to water……” ….but you can’t make her wear underwear 🙂
I’ll apologize in advance for this double post (and then call it a night, I have to get up early tomorrow). But this has always been one of my favorites:
“Men occasionally stumble on the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened.”
Winston Churchill
I think we can let this double post pass Steve.