I don’t understand liberals who drool at the sound of McCain’s name. Ok, so once in a while he diverges from the party line and he supports campaign finance reform. If this makes a standout politician, we’re all doomed. The man’s a firmly-entrenched Republican. He’s not a ‘maverick’. He just sometimes gets kind of pissy, does his cute little loose-cannon thing, and then runs back to the GOP fold. Joe Lieberman kisses Bush and unleashes the Wrath of a Thousand Burning Democrats, while McCain campaigns for Bush and earns the undying love of America’s center-left? Ridiculous.
Just curious who in this thread is on the left and proclaiming there love for McCain?
I am a Republican, veteran, Voted for Reagan, I have some liberal views, but I am not a liberal and I do not think the posters in this thread that like McCain are liberals. I just want my party back, it got hijacked.
Jim
You don’t often get better than that these days. McCain’s attractiveness is based mainly on his prevailing during his years in the Hanoi Hilton, don’t forget.
If Giuliani runs, expect to hear a lot about Abner Louima, Amadou Diallo, and whatserface, the mistress he installed in the official mayor’s residence. It’s almost been forgotten how unpopular, even despised, he’d become as of 9/10, but that shit’s all still there.
I hope you get your party back, I really do. I am much more likey to vote Democratic, but lately I miss Reagan. I even miss Nixon.
Sorry, just riffing off the general topic-- not referring to anyone specific in this thread.
Guiliani/McCain? McCain/Guiliani? You couldn’t fit both of those guys egos within the confines of the Hindenburg. Further, McCain is busily sucking the toes of the Trog Right, beseeching their forgiveness for his sins. They might be willing to spread the balm of their forgiveness on the contrite McCain, but then Rudy! will have to suck it as well, or its no sale.
Part of what I liked about Rudy is he stood by his position, he did not pander to the press and spoke refreshingly straight compared to most politicians. However he pissed off a lot of New Yorkers and was guilty of awarding at least one major patronage job for political favor. I do not believe there is a completely clean politician, but overall you know what you get with Rudy and his corruption index appears to be low and his ability to plan ahead and clean things up, very high.
Nixon was a nasty, power grasping man. But he was a fairly liberal Republican and had some excellent policies, both Domestic and Foreign. He was acceptable to the Right Wing as he was a rabid anti-communist. Keep in mind, he signed the Clean-Air Act into law, the very law the current Bush is dismantling. He established the EPA & NOAA. Overall I admire his policies, while disliking the man.
Jim
You say that as if it were at all possible to strong arm the religious right into accepting a pro choice Republican. Wouldn’t matter if a Democrat got elected, the RR has already demonstrated their willingness to sit on their hands and let a Republican get ravaged to prove their point.
Heh, the very idea of trying to convince Robertson and his ilk to “roll over and take it like a man” just tickles me to no end.
YOUR party got hijacked? What about us Rockefeller/Anderson LIBERAL Pubs? You know, the guys who thought business could sometimes stand a little regulation to save it from its worse angels, some folks sometimes need a little help, taxes were sometimes a necessary evil, and some criminals were heinous enough that they deserved a nudge to meet their Maker? WE were thrown out DECADES ago.
You may well be right, perhaps McCain/Giuliani would split the party. Maybe this would be for the good in the long run. The Republicans could move back to the middle, be strong on Defense and Law and Order, conservative on fiscal matters and maybe pick up enough moderates to minimize the Religious right back out of policy making.
Jim {I am pipe-dreaming aren’t I}
I think we are in the same party. I am a Green Republican, I have more in common with the Rockefeller Republicans than any other type unless the Bull-Moose comes back.
I would consider Mayer Bloomberg of NYC a Rockefeller Republicans. Would you?
Jim
I’m a New Yorker, and I couldn’t vote for Rudy for Prez. I loved the man, he made a damn good Mayor, I’d love him in the Senate… but he’s got a temper, he’s stubborn as the day is long, and he’s a fighter. We’d be in a war in no time. God knows who with. He’s the man who broke the Mafia in NYC, by and large… he’s even a character in a few movies. (Look for a proscecutor in a checked coat, it’s probably him), but he has an issue.
Hard to explain it, but mostly, things that tick his personal prejudices off tend to tick him off without examination, and he will trample people’s rights to stomp them out. First Amendment or not.
Then, in that case, the Republicans last nominated a northeasterner for President in 1948 They last nominated one for vice president in 1996 (if you consider Maryland a northeastern state, or consider Kemp as really being from New York), or 1968 if you don’t.
No, he’s a lifelong Democrat who changed uniforms to get a bye into the finals when he first ran for Mayor. The “Rockefeller Republicans” (yes, kiddies, there used to be a liberal wing of the GOP that actually had strong influence) have mostly recognized reality and realigned themselves with the party that better represents their interests and principles.
Speaking as a conservative Republican, I would love to vote for these two gentlemen in 2008.
The next President must cater to the desires of both the dems and the pubs and both are centrist enough to fill that bill.
I’d also vote for Condi in a heartbeat for either position also.
So you are suggesting I am living in denial thinking the Republican party might someday serve my needs and wishes again? You are probably correct.
Jim
Yep, and thanks. I’m further suggesting that you join the bulk of the former “Rockefeller Republicans” in recognizing that their principles are more important than their traditional organizational affiliations, and make the appropriate change.
Second the motion. Without an honest conservative party, we are unbalanced. We need advocates of prudent and cautious approaches to change, just like a car needs brakes. If you can work to restore credibility and sanity to the Pubbie party, you will (probably) do far more good for the health of the Republic than you would by joining a party you don’t really sympathize with.
What motion are you seconding? Mine was that our friend here quit giving his support to people who generally oppose his interests and principles, and instead give it to people who generally support them.
If it were still possible for the liberal/moderate wing to continue to influence the GOP’s national policies, we’d have seen some evidence of it lately. “Working from the inside” is just a euphemism for “Give them votes and effort just to have it taken only as endorsement of their views”. Why should What keep doing that? Here’s a thought for ya, luc - if you want the tighties in the GOP to be balanced out again, why haven’t *you * joined them?
Except that I don’t believe for a moment that they would ever have the opportunity to split the ticket, simply because Giuliani would never be allowed his lick at that shiny brass ring due entirely to his pro choice stance. And I personally think that McCain wouldn’t get the nod because of his age and temperament.
Heh, the RR has gotten power and they have developed a taste for it. They will, I believe, nuke the entire Republican party before they give an inch.
In short, yes, you are most assuredly pipe dreaming.
Less a Republican than an opportunist. He wouldn’t have a capital R after his name right now if the Democratic opposition had been less overwhelming.