McCain’s Campaign Collapses
Do you think John McCain chances for the nomination are dying? Will Rudy win the nomination in 08?
TH-The John McCain candidacy, launched amid much hope, fanfare, and high expectations, may be dying before our eyes.
Even worse, it may go out with a whimper instead of a bang.
It may not end in an Armageddon style primary defeat, but just dry up from lack of support, money, or interest.
Throughout all of 2006, McCain sat atop the polls right next to Rudy Giuliani. In the Fox News survey of December, 2006, he was getting 27 percent of the Republican primary vote to Rudy’s 31 percent. But, after Giuliani announced that he was running, the Arizona senator fell to 24 percent while Rudy soared into the stratosphere at 41 percent of the primary voters. But even when McCain was polling well, he wasn’t raising the money he needs for this campaign.
February 28th, 2007 at 9:10 am
McCain would never get my vote. Not after he went against Randy Graf!!!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=DqRMMe2JpnI
February 28th, 2007 at 9:27 am
And neither will McCain will get my vote since he voted AGAINST the Bush tax cuts.
Additionally, he is on the wrong side of the immigration issue… or, at the least, his Senate Bill was too lenient on illegal immigrants.
Combined, these mistakes are lethal to a candidate in the Republican primaries.
If McCain didn’t believe everything the news media told him to believe… and if he were a true “Reagan” conservative… he’d have been on the right side of these issues and would probably be doing much better now.
But ideas and votes DO matter!
February 28th, 2007 at 9:46 am
I’d imagine that if Rudy gets the nomination a lot of Republicans will be sitting home on election day.
February 28th, 2007 at 9:56 am
I agree. Unless another candidate comes along that is well liked among a WIDER spectrum of the Republican base, this election is shaping up to be a Democrat’s dream come true.
Alternatively, if one or two of the lesser known candidates… like Tancredo… rose up in their standings, that might solve this problem as well.
Otherwise, we might as well get used to saying “President Clinton” again.
February 28th, 2007 at 10:19 am
Additionally, Rudy is going to get slaughtered once more people get more intimately familiar with his scandalous personal life.
His “hard ass” demeanor right now works for him because it gimes him the “I’m the tough guy on terror” advantage.
But once the DNC is done exposing his personal life (and they have MUCH material to work with), Rudy will then turn into the “he is just like my asshole ex-husband” (or relative’s ex-husband) candidate.
This will probably hurt Rudy (particularly with the women’s vote) even more than his lack of support from the social conservatives.
February 28th, 2007 at 10:59 am
I doubt it will be the DNC that will be talking about Rudy’s divorces etc. I’m willing to bet that one of his primary opponents will be the ones to send out the pictures of him dressed in drag for the gay pride parade.
February 28th, 2007 at 11:41 am
As a long time Republican,McCain in I will sit out this election.
February 28th, 2007 at 11:48 am
Ron Paul in 08 a real conservative
February 28th, 2007 at 11:51 am
Ron Paul is ALMOST a real conservative. His only problem is that he doesn’t support providing our troops and generals with the tools they need (and have requested) to win. Like the democrats, he prefers that we lose the war. Therefore, he is a loser. Too bad because he is so right on so many other issues.
February 28th, 2007 at 11:55 am
Rob
Win a civil war between crazy people who have been killing each other forever? How?
February 28th, 2007 at 12:05 pm
DTS:
I don’t fault Ron Paul for not supporting the war in the first place.
But I do fault him for not supporting the surge and for not understanding the long term implications and reprecussions of losing vs. winning this war.
This is no rocket science. This is common sense.
He would have been smart to say:
“I disagreed with going to war in the first place. I voted against it. But now that we are there, I believe it is the right thing to do to give General Petraeus the tools he needs and has requested to win.”
THAT would have been both smart policy and smart politics. Instead, Ron Paul gave us the opposite. Not only was he wrong, he was dumb to have not realized this. And that level of poor judgment disqualifies him from being a good president, as far as I’m concerned.
I certainly would not feel safe at night with Ron Paul as “Commander in Chief”.
February 28th, 2007 at 12:05 pm
I wonder why McCain has so much support. Do you think it is just people know his name?
I would say the same for Hillary.
February 28th, 2007 at 12:23 pm
I think it is a combination of factors.
McCain:
(1) is the only solidly pro-life candiate among the top-tier candidates… Romney supporters would take issue… but Romney has tons of inconsistency problem in this area. So McCain is the ONLY place a voter can go if the pro life issue is really important to that voter and they wanted to pick a candidate was already among the top candidates.
(2) name recognition
(3) has run before
(4) has never been “demonized” by the news media. In contrast, the problems many conservatives have with McCain are not so well known among the average voter. For example, I’d bet that many of them have no idea that McCain voted against Bush’s tax cut.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:07 pm
JEB BUSH
February 28th, 2007 at 4:18 pm
Al,
LOL! That’s a good ‘un! How much do you think he’d get? 35%?
February 28th, 2007 at 4:18 pm
I’m getting excited about the possibility of Jeb… but I have to wonder that Al is really thinking… or what is “up his sleeve”?
February 28th, 2007 at 4:19 pm
Yep, Jeb, neocon central! Hillary Clinton is a shoe in with that one!
March 1st, 2007 at 1:08 pm
Caroline,
If the election were held today, then I’d agree with you 100%.
However, there are strong signs that we are beginning to win Iraq war and if things in Iraq continue to get better over the next year, then this issue could shift dramatically.
But I do think that Jeb would need to show that he isn’t a “W” clone and he’d have to be SHARPLY “to the right” of Bush on both immigration policy and government spending… and I’m both hopeful and doubtful that this will happen if Jeb jumps in the race.
March 1st, 2007 at 1:58 pm
You’re kidding right? We’ve been hearing this same thing from the neocons for years now and things never get better-only worse!
March 1st, 2007 at 2:21 pm
BTW - I wish that liberals would apply these same standards to their failed social-welfare gov’t programs. Even when they fail year after year with billions down the tubes… liberal can’t ever admit that they are “failed policy”!
Nevertheless, there is much mis-information and exaggeration about the problems in Iraq… if things KEEP getting better… in about a year, past problems won’t matter that much… except for the political luggage that those who favored losing the war will be carrying around.
But I looked up Jeb’s stances on immigration and it appears that he backs driver licenses for illegal immigrants. Huge mistake and this alone could kill his prospects.
March 1st, 2007 at 4:37 pm
I think he’ll have Judith Regan in his back pocket and something juicy to unleash on Guliani in the primary. I say Jeb takes the nomination.
Handicapping is one of my hobbies. Stocks, football, basketball, politics…
I see the stage being set. Romney and McCain falling all over themselves in an effort to woo the social conservatives is working like a charm, as there are more “who will represent the social conservative” articles out there every day EVEN THOUGH BROWNBACK IS RUNNING!
Which tells me that Brownback is left out because that question needs to be built up for a while, and then Jeb comes in riding a white stallion, waving the supponea he signed for retrieving stool samples from Terri Shiavo’s husband.
Dubya played this game to a T and the Shiavo matter was nothing but a way to earn Jeb some street cred with the evangelicals.
I’ve posted this on my blog…probably said it better there, but that’s my analysis.
March 1st, 2007 at 4:41 pm
Can we not do better than another Clinton or Bush?
March 1st, 2007 at 5:06 pm
Ron Paul.
March 1st, 2007 at 5:14 pm
Rob,
Does everything you post have to be couched in knee jerk neoconservatism. What we have now is an occupation. Look no further than the surge plan for this. How does someone “win” an occupation? You can’t knee jerk that into “win” or “lose” or “us” against “them”.
March 1st, 2007 at 5:15 pm
Chris,
Do you think a non neocon has any chance of winning the GOP nomination? Or perhaps I should rephrase that into “Do you think anyone that doesn’t promise to carry on the neocon plan” will win the GOP nomination?
March 1st, 2007 at 5:21 pm
I don’t know. Do you think a non-neocon can win the Democratic nomination?
March 1st, 2007 at 5:25 pm
caroline
Why is the front runner a LIBCON for the Democrats Hillary?
March 1st, 2007 at 5:35 pm
John,
Why is the front runner with social conservatives a thrice married mayor who was once married to his cousin, is pro choice and dressed in drag for the NYC gay parade?
I would imagine a lot of Hillary’s numbers are due to name recognition at this point.
Chris,
Who’s a neocon who’s running? I don’t think that Hillary would be considered a neocon. She doesn’t meet the cornerstones set out by Irving Kristol, the father of neoconservatism.
March 1st, 2007 at 6:42 pm
I am just as hard on both parties front runners!
March 1st, 2007 at 7:15 pm
John,
What do you think people will think of this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IrE6FMpai8
March 1st, 2007 at 7:20 pm
caroline
I wonder what Sadie Fields would say?
March 1st, 2007 at 7:21 pm
caroline
The strange part is Hillary and Rudy are real close on the issues.
March 1st, 2007 at 7:38 pm
LOL John! Would Sadie have a breakdown or what? Naw, I think she would just make excuses for it.
You’re right. They are close on the issues. Of course, they both are into winning in NY state and their views pretty much represent the state.
March 1st, 2007 at 8:40 pm
We may find out how Sadie spins Rudy. That will be a good show to watch.
March 2nd, 2007 at 6:56 am
Al
Thanks for the REAAAL BAD IDEA!!! Is Chelsea old enough to hold a national office?
March 2nd, 2007 at 7:01 am
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.carnali.com/images/weblog/Assorted/chelsea.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.carnali.com/index.php%3F/carnali/2005/07/27/&h=330&w=210&sz=29&hl=en&start=52&tbnid=qLt08zIL49kOmM:&tbnh=119&tbnw=76&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dchelsea%2Bclinton%26start%3D40%26ndsp%3D20%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN