Is John McCain crazy or giving up his hope or just desperate?

[RTFirefly]

Maybe he IS giving up hope:

McCain campaign to cut back on staff

The campaign dismissed the notion of mass layoffs, but it wouldn’t quantify exactly how many jobs are affected. Some positions won’t be filled as planned in May, and some consultants will be paid on a per-project basis.

<snip>

By Sunday, candidates must report how much they spent during the first quarter of the year. Republican allies who have expressed concern for months about what they characterized as the McCain campaign’s excessive spending say they expect he will report having doled out much of what he collected.

[What_Exit]

@RTFirefly

Maybe he IS giving up hope:

McCain campaign to cut back on staff

I hope he sticks it out longer, I think he does more to hurt Romney then Rudy. If he makes it through the year, it might keep others from moving up to quickly in the polls and gaining any momentum. Rudy’s campaign is pretty fragile. Close inspection by the right wing of the party will hurt him in the primaries.

Jim

[John_Mace]

@elucidator

That’s as may be, but doesn’t make your slam on Doggyknee’s board behavior relevent. Because it isn’t. You know that, right?

It wasn’t a slam. It was a statement of fact. Just look at the post that prompted me to point that out. McCain is a “moron” because he has a different stand on this issue than **Dio **does. If that’s what passes for critical thinking around here, then it’s a sad commentary on the stat of this MB. There are plenty of intelligent people who take the same stand that McCain does. Do you think Gates and Petreus are “morons” who don’t believe in what they’re doing?

[RTFirefly]

@What Exit?

I hope he sticks it out longer, I think he does more to hurt Romney then Rudy. If he makes it through the year, it might keep others from moving up to quickly in the polls and gaining any momentum. Rudy’s campaign is pretty fragile. Close inspection by the right wing of the party will hurt him in the primaries.

Is Romney even a factor anymore?

Be that as it may, I think a good stretch as the far-and-away GOP frontrunner without any serious competition would be terrific for Rudy - at least from my POV. His survival into the primaries, IMHO, depends on his ability to dodge serious scrutiny and questioning.

So I’d love to see the McCain campaign have to ‘go dark’ due to lack of funds, and let the media narrative for the GOP contest become “Rudy and the seven dwarves” or some such.

In 1999, the media could do nothing but puff pieces on GWB and get away with it. Commentary is a bit more distributed now, so there are more voices to call them on it if they try to pull the same stunt with Rudy.

[Little_Nemo]

I’m a little confused by the math in the quoted article. The line saying “Unlike most Americans who have turned against the war, three in four Republicans call it a worthy cause” doesn’t hold up unless the Republican party has really collapsed in the last two years. Assuming the country is fairly evenly split between Republicans and Democrats, 75% of the Republicans is still a pretty substantial number - even if every Democrat except Joe Leiberman is now against the war, we’re talking 37.5% against 62.5% - and that’s fudging every approximation in favor of one side. I realize “most” is a flexible term, but I think it generally means more than 62.5%.

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@John Mace

It wasn’t a slam. It was a statement of fact. Just look at the post that prompted me to point that out. McCain is a “moron” because he has a different stand on this issue than **Dio **does. If that’s what passes for critical thinking around here, then it’s a sad commentary on the stat of this MB. There are plenty of intelligent people who take the same stand that McCain does. Do you think Gates and Petreus are “morons” who don’t believe in what they’re doing?

Could you quote where it was that DtC said that McCain is a moron because he holds a different point of view? Or is that your contribution to a misrepresentation?

It is possible to hold a moronic point of view, isn’t it?

If so, at what point is one able to call someone else a moron for holding what one believes is a moronic point of view?

It would be just as useless to the state of the board to constantly take up a position in defense of a politician one didn’t even support just to be defending him. It would also be useless to constantly pick nits when one has no substantive argument to make, but feels one must be oppositional.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@John Mace

McCain has always been a supporter of the war. He has criticized Bush for the execution of the war, but not for idea that it was the right thing to do. I don’t see what’s so odd about the fact that he continues to believe that we need to stay in to “win”. McCain is a politician, and I’ve never bought into the idea that he somehow has this super-integrity, but I don’t believe he would pretend to support a war that he doesn’t, in fact, support.

A lot of people who supported the war in the beginning have now come to realize what a mistake it was, and it was a mistake in conception, not just execution (not that the execution hasn’t sucked too, but I don’t think there could have been any way to be “successful” in Iraq. All the stuff that’s happened and continues to happen was easily forseeable and predicted from the outset. The only thing that surprised me was the complete lack of WMD). What is it that prevents McCain from being able to recognize reality? Is he less intelligent than everybody else? I don’t think so. I think he’s feeling his age and that he knows '08 is the only real shot he’ll ever have at the White House. I think it’s making him say whatever he thinks he has to say to get in there. If he didn’t want to be president I think he’d probably be calling the war a mistake.

Do you think he believed what he was saying when he tried to portray his visit the Shorja Market as being akin to a lazy stroll through through a flea market in Peoria?

My opinion of McCain has changed. He used to be on my short list of Republicans I would consider voting for. In the last couple of years, though, he has shown me that either he has sold out or he never was a “Maverick” in the first place.

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@Little Nemo

I’m a little confused by the math in the quoted article. The line saying “Unlike most Americans who have turned against the war, three in four Republicans call it a worthy cause” doesn’t hold up unless the Republican party has really collapsed in the last two years. Assuming the country is fairly evenly split between Republicans and Democrats, 75% of the Republicans is still a pretty substantial number - even if every Democrat except Joe Leiberman is now against the war, we’re talking 37.5% against 62.5% - and that’s fudging every approximation in favor of one side. I realize “most” is a flexible term, but I think it generally means more than 62.5%.

Are there only Republicans and Democrats among the population of the country?

[Squink]

@Little Nemo

75% of the Republicans is still a pretty substantial number

A poll from the Pew Research Center found that only 35 percent of Americans consider themselves Republicans

here

75% of 35% is 26%

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@John Mace

It wasn’t a slam. It was a statement of fact. Just look at the post that prompted me to point that out. McCain is a “moron” because he has a different stand on this issue than **Dio **does. If that’s what passes for critical thinking around here, then it’s a sad commentary on the stat of this MB. There are plenty of intelligent people who take the same stand that McCain does. Do you think Gates and Petreus are “morons” who don’t believe in what they’re doing?

I said I DON"T think McCain is a moron. I think he’s a liar. I don’t think you have to be a moron to sell out politically or say crap you don’t believe. Your question about Gates and Petreus gets the same answer. Not morons, just liars. If they really BELIEVED what they said they would be morons, but I don’t buy any of them as sincere.

[Merijeek]

@What Exit?

This seems like a losing strategy. He will end up being the War Candidate at this rate. I suspect he will continue to flounder in the polls and slide backward.

Jim

I think he’s banking on being “The War Candidate” because that’s all that’s open to him. He can’t win at the rate things are going - there are too many candidates lining up for him to make it.

I think his big gamble is that something will happen regarding the war that will make it either look good (unlikely) or in some way an absolute necessity so that he can point to it and say, “See, I told you. And that’s why you should pick me.”

My own opinion is that he’s toast - he’s not getting the nomination. So, he’ll take the long shot in hopes it’ll pay off, because it’s all he’s got.

-Joe

[Merijeek]

@Hentor the Barbarian

It would be just as useless to the state of the board to constantly take up a position in defense of a politician one didn’t even support just to be defending him. It would also be useless to constantly pick nits when one has no substantive argument to make, but feels one must be oppositional.

Distinction without a difference?

Damn, that sounds familiar.

-Joe

[RTFirefly]

@Merijeek

I think he’s banking on being “The War Candidate” because that’s all that’s open to him. He can’t win at the rate things are going - there are too many candidates lining up for him to make it.

I think his big gamble is that something will happen regarding the war that will make it either look good (unlikely) or in some way an absolute necessity so that he can point to it and say, “See, I told you. And that’s why you should pick me.”

My own opinion is that he’s toast - he’s not getting the nomination. So, he’ll take the long shot in hopes it’ll pay off, because it’s all he’s got.

-Joe

The problem is, it’s hard for him to distinguish himself from the GOP field (other than 1% Brownback) this way. Everyone is for the war; everyone supports their Fuckup-in-Chief on the war. Giuliani, who’s the frontrunner these days, certainly does.

If Petraeus somehow finds a pony in Iraq (and who knew McCain would actually use that terminology?) the GOP nominee will benefit, but I can’t see its turning Giuliani supporters into McCain supporters in time for the primaries.

[What_Exit]

@RTFirefly

The problem is, it’s hard for him to distinguish himself from the GOP field (other than 1% Brownback) this way. Everyone is for the war; everyone supports their Fuckup-in-Chief on the war. Giuliani, who’s the frontrunner these days, certainly does.

If Petraeus somehow finds a pony in Iraq (and who knew McCain would actually use that terminology?) the GOP nominee will benefit, but I can’t see its turning Giuliani supporters into McCain supporters in time for the primaries.

Rudy is being smart about it though, he is making very few public comments about the war and no one has put him on the spot about a timetable for the pull out. McCain is out cheerleading the war. So maybe if something miraculously happens to resolve the war neatly McCain might be able to benefit from it. However, I cannot foresee a clean end to the war. Now tensions are rising between Turkey and the Kurds. The one peaceful region of Iraq could become violent as two of our allies have started rattling sabers.

Jim

[tomndebb]

Enough with the “Doggyknees.” I realize that it is mostly friendly, but someone is going to come along and use it in a hostile fashion and then get all upset when I tell them to stop mocking people by mangling a username in GD.

[ /Moderating ]

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@tomndebb

Enough with the “Doggyknees.” I realize that it is mostly friendly, but someone is going to come along and use it in a hostile fashion and then get all upset when I tell them to stop mocking people by mangling a username in GD.

[ /Moderating ]

Can I still call him “Lucy?”