Diogenes, you’ve said that there are four sources for this incident. I’m only seeing three being mentioned: Arianna Huffington, Bradley Whitford, and Richard Schiff. There’s apparently another unidentified witness but she’s only confirmed that Cindy McCain said she didn’t vote for Bush.
True enough, but if Cindy said that, it adds credibility to the claims that John said it.
Mmmm. no, not really, married couples with divergent political views is not at all uncommon.
Are we to believe that McCain thought Gore was the better candidate? If there is some evidence of that, then I think this story would be more believable. Although McCain and Bush differ on a some issues, I think there is much more overlap of their politics than there is between McCain and Gore.
As smear campaigns go, this is dumb. How many people would care whether McCain voted for Bush, even if this story was true? This is why we lose elections; our smear campaigns are stupid and ineffectual.
Seriously, where are the swiftboaters and illigitimate black babies? If we’re going to try and ruin McCain’s campaign, we need to learn better smear tactics than this.
More probably that he blanked his ballot. Wouldn’t blame him under the circumstances, even if he didn’t have a rep for holding grudges.
Could be. If the story is true, perhaps he wrote in his own name, as did his wife (according to the story).
Then it is not a smear campaign. Just another little chink in the armor that protected McCain from the public really knowing him.
Not that it would affect any of the many people looking for someone to pursue Bush’s policies but *without * screwing up, which after all is McCain’s platform.
It’s a two-pronged attack. On the one hand, it reminds die-hard conservatives of the ongoing question of how committed McCain is to their agenda. To the more general electorate, it calls McCain’s reputation for integrity into question.
Not voting for Bush is a bad thing that ought to keep candidates from being elected, then?
When come back, bring real news. This isn’t even worthy for McDonalds dinnertable discussion, let alone news outlets or Great Debates.
It’s relevant if he openly lied about it to curry favor with one group or the other (depending on which one was the lie). So the debate is about whether you find the evidence credible enough to conclude that he did.
Well, in the link I supplied it was a smear.
Of course he was a Biden sympathizer. No doubt Huffington felt a kinship with a fellow plagiarist.
Regards,
Shodan
More likely Huffington is targeting her product to a niche market. The one she used to be in, during the Clinton administration, was overcrowded - her rebranding has proven quite lucrative for her. The most charitable thing you can say for her is that perhaps lack of a philosophy to guide her thinking has left her able to be objective, but then you can say that about Limbaugh too.
Hint: The fact that someone says something you agree with doesn’t mean they’re being sincere or even thoughtful.
He’s not alleged to have said that. I think it more likely he left it blank or wrote in his own name. It’s also possible he really did vote for Bush and only said he didn’t to ingratiate himself with the other guests. I actually find that less likely. He had every reason to be pissed at Bush. The story he allegedly told the dinner party – that he publicly supported Bush as a loyal Republican but privately thought he was an idiot who he couldn’t bring himself to actually pull the lever for – seems in keeping with his personality and has a ring of believability to it. He probably just never saw it coming back to bite him in the ass this way, and now he has no choice but to deny it.
The die-hard Pubbies will turn out to vote for McCain even if he says Bush is a dumb, vicious scumbag who belongs in a holding cell in the Hague awaiting his trial for war crimes (the truth, in short). Their alternative will be either a white female Democrat or a black male Democrat. Either sexism or racism will drag them to the voting booth, screaming and crying and sobbing because their only alternative is McCain and they despise McCain, but they will take that alternative because that’s who and what they are.
See, I think these guys will stay home. I also think this will make him look good to rational Republicans. And, geez, you can vote for whoever you want. I don’t see what the big deal is here.
I fail to see the issue. We are addressing one vote cast by one citizen. The man has the right to vote for whoever he chooses and for that vote to be confidential.
Even if he didn’t vote for GW (and who could blame him if he didn’t considering the battle they had eight years ago) that doesn’t mean he voted for Gore. There were alternate candidates.
OK, but this is about McCain and the probable fact that he didn’t vote for Bush. It’s not that difficult to believe and it’s not that big of a deal unless you’re McCain or a member of the Right-wing base. Then it’s rather uncomfortable.
The only reason to accuse Huffington of blatantly lying is that it’s an unwelcome little piece of info.
Grandpa McCain ought to be shouting from the rooftops that he showed amazing judgement in 2000 by not voting for the most inept president in our history.