I’m very serious. Because it seems painfully clear to me that politics and policies are utterly beside the point by now. Between Palin’s clear lack of fitness to be standing ready to take over from Mr. 72 and not that healthy and the fact that he has demonstrated NO clarity, no focus, no real plan of any kind to do anything except be elected, by any means necessary, what could the appeal possibly be?
Please share.
Thank you.
Come on, you can’t be serious. Are you really that out of touch? I’m not going to vote for him, but ~50 million people are. You think they’re just picking his name out of a hat?
My grandfather plans to vote for McCain because he’s convinced Obama will be more likely to raise his taxes. He tells me that during his entire lifetime, the only times he has had his taxes reduced were under Republicans.
some things people voing mccain might be saying/thinking; I hate taxes; marriage is sacred (and not for people of the same sex); I am against baby killers (abortion); Obama sounds like an Arabic name; I do not want a black president.
a few things for clarification: The above is not a list of McCain’s positions, but it might be reasons that people vote for him, even when the offficial positions are similar. (when you are conservative it seems likely to prefer a Republican over a Democrat even if they have similar stances)
as might have become clear already, i personally don’t agree with any of the stances mentioned above:D
This.
It’s extremely hard for any candidate to be so awful that he gets much less than 40% of the electorate (in a two party vote, of course). That tells me that about 80% of the population have their votes set in stone routinely, no matter the name on the ballot. (Of course, individuals change their affiliations, roughly counter-balancing each other, from Republican to Independent to Democrat). The other 20% determines the election. So roughly 40% of the electorate is voting for McCain because he’s got that ® next his name.
The interesting part of your question is: why would anyone over and above McCain’s base vote for him? Why would an intelligent, careful, thoughtful Independent voter decide that McCain looks like a good choice? Maybe because they’re not all really intelligent, careful, or thoughtful? Maybe they’re not all that Independent, either? Maybe they’re one-issue voters, who might vote for a Democrat if he came out strongly against gun control while the Pubbie took a weaker stance, but in this case have decided that McCain’s the Guns Yes! candidate? Maybe they don’t know shit? Maybe they’ll pull the wrong lever, or push the wrong chad? It may be a million or so voters who fall into any of these categories, but that’s a pretty small slice of the voting public.
Why don’t you show him where he’s wrong?
I personally prefer McCains stance on nuclear power. I’m tired of it being demonized and would like to see new construction occur, since wind and solar are simply not good baselines.
Are you a single-issue voter? Are you a registered Republican?
I’ll go on record and say I doubt McCain get’s 50 million people voting for him. With the way his campaign has been run, and with the constant gaffes and attacks I no longer think this election is going to be a squeaker. It won’t be a landslide, but I also don’t think there will be any question as to who won on November 5th.
Both candidates seem to be pushing nuclear power to some extent – how do you see them differing?
There is one difference I think I’m aware of – McCain wants to build reprocessing plants. But don’t those end up with plutonium as a byproduct? How are the candidates addressing the question of what to do with waste?
You’ve been here for eight years. Surely this cannot be the first Stoid post you’ve read.
Blank incomprehension that anyone could possibly dissent from lock-step leftism is the stock in trade for a good many hereabouts.
I think it would be literally impossible for some Dopers to post a reasonable explanation why anyone would vote for any Republican. Literally - their fingers could not form the words. They would be forced to resort to accusations of racism and bad faith and stupidity.
It’s a pity on some level. On another, it’s kind of funny.
Regards,
Shodan
Those people tend to be unswayable for some reason. My father is a bit like this. Since he was already in the highest tax bracket before he retired, 36-38% he doesn’t give a good godamn about the tax plans, but he doesn’t trust Obama’s plan for financial recovery. He’s said that if either of them would carefully go through point by point he might consider changing his vote. Since they won’t, he’s voting republican since it’s better for protecting his money. :rolleyes: i’ve tried to go through it with him, but he doesn’t want to read a website or any long documents, he wants to hear it from them.
He was a POW. That makes him angry at terrorists and countries we could potentially go to war with. Voting for him appeals to one’s inner patriotism. And how could being angry and violent toward terrorists possibly go wrong? Not like Obama, whose name similarity automatically makes him terrorist friendly.
Also, “John McCain,” sounds like “John McClane.” Only a terrorist would not vote for Die Hard.
Well, thank you for saying ‘some’. I feel sure that most people could come up with a few reasons, I have no intention of voting for any Republican in the foreseeable future, but I can certainly understand good reasons to do so.
Although from overseas I am fervently hoping Obama wins, I have no problem listing why people will vote for McCain.
I am astonished that anyone (including the OP) doesn’t know this.
You may not like (or even believe) some of the following claims, but they certainly apply.
In no particular order…
Obama continually qualifies his support with comments like ‘so long as its safe’, disregarding the safety record of the industry in the US for the past 20 years or more, and wants to balance it with wind and solar farms. Wind and solar are all fine and good, but they will never replace coal and nuclear as a baseline for the grid.
Reprocessing is actually a very big step in reducing the waste that it is necessary to dispose of. Up to 60% of the fuel in spent fuel rod is unused. Right now, due to policies dating back to the 70s, this is thrown away. Recycling spent fuel rods increases the amount of energy you receive from nuclear fuel without increasing the amount of high level waste that needs to be disposed of.
And plutonium is just another fuel. If you want to get rid of it, you use it in a reactor designed for it.
Obama also opposes opening the Yucca Mountain facility.
Surely this cannot be the first Shodan post you’ve read.
Blank incomprehension that anyone could possibly dissent from knee-jerk rightism is the stock in trade for a good many hereabouts.
I think it would be literally impossible for some Dopers to post a reasonable explanation why anyone would vote for any Democrat. Literally - their fingers could not form the words. They would be forced to resort to accusations of socialism and bad faith and stupidity.
It’s a pity, even after Watergate, Guantanamo Bay and WMDs in Iraq.
Glee
Plutonium is a product, not a byproduct. Plutonium can be burned in a powerplant, either as the primary fuel, or blended with Uranium. This is routinely done in European and Japanese plants. (and probably others I am not aware of) It is NOT presently done in US plants due to weaponization concerns: Reactor grade Uranium is difficult to refine to the concentrartion required for a weapon. Plutonium is quite easy (well, maybe not in your garage, but compared to Uranium enrichment) to refine to weapons grade, thus is not used in the US energy program. Changing this policy would do much to make US nuclear energy more practical, including the waste issue.
You do know, of course, why those decisions were made in the 1970’s? You do know why the USA isn’t reprocessing fuel, right?
Hint: It involves terrorism long before that was the en vogue excuse for everything.
-Joe