New TIME poll has McCain/Clinton at a TIE!
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
Untill now McCain has been way ahead of her!
I dont think McCain was closely tied to Bush in the past as he has been in the past couple weeks. This tie is starting to set in with the American people as McCain is Bush's heir apperant. Expect McCain to keep tanking as time goes by, unless McCain does something to clearly sepperate himself from Bush.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
It doesn't surprise me they are tied, equally as many people dislike McCain as Hillary. I'm like klaatu, I think the nominees will emerge later, and will not be McCain and Hillary in the end.
You must understand, McCain has completely alienated himself from core conservatives, on the issue of campaign finance reform, illegal immigration, and the 'Gang of 7' thing. He slobbers around, fawning on liberals like Chuck Hagel, so the liberal media gives him a lot of undeserved kudos. I watch the guy talk, and can't help wondering if he is 'all there' in the head. If it comes down to voting for either McCain or Hillary, I might have to go with Nader.
This may sound odd, but I really think Newt will begin to emerge as the true "conservative" candidate in the '08 race, and it will be between he and Giuliani for the nomination. I would pay good money to see a real debate between Newt and Hillary! For that matter, between Newt and ANY Democrat! When I take an objective look at who has a legitimate shot in the Republican party, who is capable of running a successful presidential campaign, and has majority support among conservatives, I only see Newt and Rudy.
The problem with polls is this... at this point in time, Republicans are stuck in a funk, they really don't know who they want to run in '08. There is no 'natural choice' as is often the case, where the VP steps into the spotlight and rides the coat-tails, Cheney is not going to run for president. The next closest person in the Administration, is Condi, and she has no political experience running for anything, she is not really a politician. So, whoever Republicans pick, will likely represent the views of the Republicans who were okay with Bush, but wished he had been more 'conservative' in his policies.
Pinheads will try to say this will all be tied to positions on the war, and I don't think that is the case. I really don't think a majority of Americans are going to judge the next president on his support for the objectives in Iraq. If this were the case, Dennis Kusinich's numbers would be higher! I really think most Americans understand, we can't just bail in Iraq and ignore the problems of the middle east. And I think the next presidential hopefuls, will have clear and compelling ideas regarding what we should do in Iraq, and the middle east.
Take a look at the polls, the number one issue across the board in every poll is what? .....why does anyone believe, the next candidates for president, will share some mutual view that Iraq was a bad idea and we should get out? That represents one side of the view, that is certain... but the issue is two-sided, regardless of pinhead inability to see the other side. When it all shakes out, you will have two candidates with completely different ideas on what we should do about Iraq, nothing else would make logical sense.
It's still way too early to be declaring who will and will not win the nomination, a lot of things can happen between now and then, and there is a lot of politics yet to be played.
You must understand, McCain has completely alienated himself from core conservatives, on the issue of campaign finance reform, illegal immigration, and the 'Gang of 7' thing. He slobbers around, fawning on liberals like Chuck Hagel, so the liberal media gives him a lot of undeserved kudos. I watch the guy talk, and can't help wondering if he is 'all there' in the head. If it comes down to voting for either McCain or Hillary, I might have to go with Nader.
This may sound odd, but I really think Newt will begin to emerge as the true "conservative" candidate in the '08 race, and it will be between he and Giuliani for the nomination. I would pay good money to see a real debate between Newt and Hillary! For that matter, between Newt and ANY Democrat! When I take an objective look at who has a legitimate shot in the Republican party, who is capable of running a successful presidential campaign, and has majority support among conservatives, I only see Newt and Rudy.
The problem with polls is this... at this point in time, Republicans are stuck in a funk, they really don't know who they want to run in '08. There is no 'natural choice' as is often the case, where the VP steps into the spotlight and rides the coat-tails, Cheney is not going to run for president. The next closest person in the Administration, is Condi, and she has no political experience running for anything, she is not really a politician. So, whoever Republicans pick, will likely represent the views of the Republicans who were okay with Bush, but wished he had been more 'conservative' in his policies.
Pinheads will try to say this will all be tied to positions on the war, and I don't think that is the case. I really don't think a majority of Americans are going to judge the next president on his support for the objectives in Iraq. If this were the case, Dennis Kusinich's numbers would be higher! I really think most Americans understand, we can't just bail in Iraq and ignore the problems of the middle east. And I think the next presidential hopefuls, will have clear and compelling ideas regarding what we should do in Iraq, and the middle east.
Take a look at the polls, the number one issue across the board in every poll is what? .....why does anyone believe, the next candidates for president, will share some mutual view that Iraq was a bad idea and we should get out? That represents one side of the view, that is certain... but the issue is two-sided, regardless of pinhead inability to see the other side. When it all shakes out, you will have two candidates with completely different ideas on what we should do about Iraq, nothing else would make logical sense.
It's still way too early to be declaring who will and will not win the nomination, a lot of things can happen between now and then, and there is a lot of politics yet to be played.
klaatu
Fusionist
Newt has one of the finest minds in American Politics.. but as maineman points out... he carries too much baggage to become President. Be it a Democrat or Republican in 2008, He would make a good Cabinet member.
I believe Mccain has so much dislike for Bush... aside from the Iraq fuck up.. he did everything he could to get in Juniors way. I believe Mccain is miles ahead of Bush when it comes to Core Conservatism. The only Conservatives that seem to have a major problem with Mccain is rooted in the Religous Right. Granted... his style of campaign finance reform wasnt my cup of tea.. but it cant be denied that something needs to be done with this corrupt and unfair system. Conservatives are allowed to disagree with each other. The Gang of 7 actually tuned out to be a successful venture! Mccains major obstacle is that he is too damn old.
If a republican stands a chance at the White House in 2008.. he/she is going to have to lean towards being an Outsider, a Populist , one who could totally distant himself from Bush... and Iraq, and he is going to have to be Green.
I believe Mccain has so much dislike for Bush... aside from the Iraq fuck up.. he did everything he could to get in Juniors way. I believe Mccain is miles ahead of Bush when it comes to Core Conservatism. The only Conservatives that seem to have a major problem with Mccain is rooted in the Religous Right. Granted... his style of campaign finance reform wasnt my cup of tea.. but it cant be denied that something needs to be done with this corrupt and unfair system. Conservatives are allowed to disagree with each other. The Gang of 7 actually tuned out to be a successful venture! Mccains major obstacle is that he is too damn old.
If a republican stands a chance at the White House in 2008.. he/she is going to have to lean towards being an Outsider, a Populist , one who could totally distant himself from Bush... and Iraq, and he is going to have to be Green.
OrnotBitwise
Watermelon
I thought that "populist" was a dirty word now. Damo certainly seems to think so.
Okay, I've had my fun.
I think you're basically right. The pendulum has already passed its apex and the slow swing back has begun. Funny things can still happen; the political journey won't be anything like a straight line. If, for example, the "surge" strategy actually produces results in Iraq, that could delay things by another election cycle or two. No more than that though.
C
Cancel5
Guest
Populist a dirty word, then I am a dirty girl!
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
All the more reason for him to garner some crossover votes from pinheads! Y'all love that sort of thing, right? Now... if Newt can just learn to bite his lip, play the sax, and fake concern for our pain!
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
but as maineman points out... he carries too much baggage to become President.
You know, I am not so sure. I think America has dysfunctionally moved beyond the 'past baggage' thing. Take a good look at the field... we got Hillary, with more skeletons in her closet than Jeffrey Dahmer... Rudy, and his homo tendencies... Obama Hussein the Muslim... McCain's mental stability... Kerry's Swiftboat... Gore's meltdown and bloating problem... Howard Dean's scream... Tell me which candidate doesn't have 'baggage' of some kind?
It seems, if a little past marital infidelity didn't stop Clinton, it wouldn't stop Newt. This isn't the days of Gary Hart, America seems to overlook things like this now, more than they did before a certain cigar-smoking ex-prez redefined what "sex" is. Yeah, Newt has some skeletons, but Hillary's trump Newts, so....
You know, I am not so sure. I think America has dysfunctionally moved beyond the 'past baggage' thing. Take a good look at the field... we got Hillary, with more skeletons in her closet than Jeffrey Dahmer... Rudy, and his homo tendencies... Obama Hussein the Muslim... McCain's mental stability... Kerry's Swiftboat... Gore's meltdown and bloating problem... Howard Dean's scream... Tell me which candidate doesn't have 'baggage' of some kind?
It seems, if a little past marital infidelity didn't stop Clinton, it wouldn't stop Newt. This isn't the days of Gary Hart, America seems to overlook things like this now, more than they did before a certain cigar-smoking ex-prez redefined what "sex" is. Yeah, Newt has some skeletons, but Hillary's trump Newts, so....
maineman
Banned
you push that Dixie...PLEASE! I just can't wait for the party that impeached Bill Clinton because he didn't want to come clean about a BLOWJOB to nominate a serial adulterer who was fucking around on his FIRST wife and divorced her when she was dying of CANCER to marry his slut mistress and then, couldn't keep his dick in his pants and started fucking around on HER with one of his young staffers. PLEASE. Newt in '08 is like a fucking dream come true for me!
You just went on a long rant, mere days ago, about clinton getting a BJ and how that related to how moral character matters in our leaders.
Why the double standard with Newt?
Here's what you said about Clinton's BJ mere days ago:
DIXIE: "There is also a matter of ethics here, and I think good ethics are an important attribute for the man we elect to the highest office in the land. Men who cheat on their wives, and more importantly, forsake their vows to God, are not men of very high moral character."
Why aren't you applying that same standard to Newt?
Were you lying about your alleged attachment to "moral values" in our leaders?