Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Well known Conservatives/Republicans supporting Obama

Well known Conservatives/Republicans supporting Obama
Thread Tools
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 24, 2008, 07:37 PM
 
How many conservatives and Republicans are now supporting Obama instead of McCain?

You have:

Colin Powell - Secretary of State under Pres. Bush
Scott McClellan - Press Secretary for Pres. Bush
Charles Fried - Solicitor General under Pres. Reagan & McCain Adviser
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
xi_hyperon
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Behind the dryer, looking for a matching sock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 24, 2008, 07:57 PM
 
Christopher Buckley
Ken Adelman
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 24, 2008, 08:07 PM
 
Christopher Hitchens
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 24, 2008, 09:02 PM
 
Andrew Sullivan
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 24, 2008, 09:06 PM
 
Blast you hyteckit, you said John McCain!

Okay...

Sarah Palin
ebuddy
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 24, 2008, 10:31 PM
 
How many switchers have there been in here either way?

Besson3c's official prediction: 0
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 25, 2008, 08:13 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
How many switchers have there been in here either way?

Besson3c's official prediction: 0
I'm guessing you're probably correct and there being 0 switchers here. I don't know that there are any surprise switchers on either side although one could call Al Gore's running mate for McCain pretty compelling.
ebuddy
     
tie
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 25, 2008, 09:53 AM
 
Arne Carlson - former Republican Gov. of Minnesota
William Weld - former Republican Gov. of Massachusetts
The 4 o'clock train will be a bus.
It will depart at 20 minutes to 5.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 25, 2008, 10:37 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
I'm guessing you're probably correct and there being 0 switchers here.

If you cock your head and squint I'm a switcher.

I'm much closer to McCain politically, and agree with his military position WRT Iraq, but I'm far too wary of how he would execute his ME policy, especially considering the "seat-of-his-pants" way he bungled his veep pick.

So, the overriding reason I'm voting for Obama is that Bob Barr is a bigger ******bag.





That needs to go on a bumper sticker.


Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
although one could call Al Gore's running mate for McCain pretty compelling.

It is, and I had forgotten about it.

The fact it's a one issue sort of thing does make it slightly less so.
( Last edited by subego; Oct 25, 2008 at 10:53 AM. )
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 25, 2008, 11:37 AM
 
There are a few high profile feminists that have come out in support of Palin
Prameela Bartholomeusz a small business
owner and a member of the Democratic National Platform Committee…Linda
Klinge the former Oregon president and now (soon to be former)Vice-President of the
National Organization of Women…Shelly Mandell (soon to be former)President of the Los
Angeles chapter of the National Organization of Women and Lynn Rothschild (one of Hillary's big donors)
( Last edited by Chongo; Oct 25, 2008 at 04:35 PM. )
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 25, 2008, 11:56 AM
 
Feminists sometimes get accused of being whack-jobs.

Well, you know, sometimes they are.
     
spacefreak
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 25, 2008, 06:11 PM
 
I'm still waiting for the list of Conservatives. None mentioned above come close.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 25, 2008, 07:37 PM
 
McClellan isn't a Conservative?
     
Dork.
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 25, 2008, 07:52 PM
 
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 25, 2008, 07:56 PM
 

"The biggest brigade in the Obamacon army consists of libertarians, furious with Mr Bush’s big-government conservatism, worried about his commitment to an open-ended “war on terror”, and disgusted by his cavalier way with civil rights."


Obama '08!

Because Bob Barr is a bigger ******bag!
     
vmarks
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 25, 2008, 08:10 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
McClellan isn't a Conservative?
Lay out for us what conservative principles McClellan holds?

Consult Goldwater's book if you need to.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 25, 2008, 08:27 PM
 
Originally Posted by vmarks View Post
Lay out for us what conservative principles McClellan holds?

Consult Goldwater's book if you need to.

I didn't accuse him of not being conservative, so I don't think it falls to me to prove he is.

Honestly, all I know about his politics is that he self-identifies as conservative.

Not exactly compelling evidence, but I note it's the only evidence put forward by anyone so far.
     
Krusty
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Always within bluetooth range
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 25, 2008, 08:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by vmarks View Post
Lay out for us what conservative principles McClellan holds?
Well, that's a little odd for a burden of proof. Can you lay out what makes McClellan a liberal ? Looking at his life, seems to have a lifelong association with the Republican party in some form or another and was chosen by Bush/Cheney as their press secretary. How much more credentials do you require before you can reasonably call someone a conservative ?? Do you need to see his voting record or something like that ?

Colin Powell was hand picked for various high positions in Reagan and Bush administrations in addition to admitting that he's voted Republican for the last 36 years (including for Viagra Dole in 1996).

In your mind, what sort of evidence is required to prove someone is a "conservative" ? Whether or not you want to make some philosophically particular definition of "conservative" such that it is impossible to prove, the real world test seems to show that people who were formerly reliable voters for Republicans are claiming they will vote for Obama this year.
     
vmarks
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 09:44 AM
 
Republican is not a synonym for Conservative.

There's occasionally an overlap, but don't mistake the two for being the same.

Colin Powell has always been Republican, but rarely been a Conservative. McClellan is clearly a Republican, but I can't find any evidence of McClellan self-identifying as a Conservative. Note, I haven't read McClellan's book.

The thread says "Well known Conservatives/Republicans supporting Obama." You've got plenty of Republicans, but I'm looking for these Conservatives and not seeing them.

As for Krusty's contention that being in chosen for the Bush/Cheney administration makes a person a conservative, that's false. I've covered here in numerous threads how Bush is not a conservative on many issues.

The very GOP moderates who said we had to pick McCain and dump conservatism -- guys like Scott McClellan, Colin Powell, William Weld, etc. -- jumped ship to Obama.

Somehow, I'm not surprised by that.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 09:54 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
If you cock your head and squint I'm a switcher.
It is hard to sound diplomatic in the written word, but I would not consider you a "switcher". You say you're more ideologically aligned with McCain and the differences between McCain and Obama are almost entire worlds apart. This leads me to challenge the degree of certainty you might have in your own political ideology. If I'm wrong, you've done a remarkable job playing "devil's advocate" in this forum.

I'm much closer to McCain politically, and agree with his military position WRT Iraq, but I'm far too wary of how he would execute his ME policy, especially considering the "seat-of-his-pants" way he bungled his veep pick.
Two questions;
1) How do you align much more closely with McCain politically?
2) I would disagree that McCain's pick was "by the seat of his pants". I think the choice was absolutely brilliant on a host of levels already covered in other threads. The mismanagement of the campaign since then has been absolutely astounding, but I've vented on that piece as well. How has Palin governed in a way contradictory to McCain's sensibilities as an otherwise electable candidate?
ebuddy
     
Krusty
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Always within bluetooth range
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 09:58 AM
 
Originally Posted by vmarks View Post
As for Krusty's contention that being in chosen for the Bush/Cheney administration makes a person a conservative, that's false. I've covered here in numerous threads how Bush is not a conservative on many issues.
Point taken. That makes sense.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 10:00 AM
 
DemocratsforMcCain.com

They have an excellent piece on an Obama for each America
rhetoric vs record
ebuddy
     
dcmacdaddy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 10:45 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
I thought this site would be an advocacy site for conservative-leaning Democrats to come together and share in their common beliefs regarding the benefits of a McCain/Palin presidency. Yet all I see are common Republican policy stances and little information from/by/about the Democrats who support John McCain (as claimed by the site's name). Is there a place on this site that lists individual Democrats, well-known or not, who have come out publicly for the McCain/Palin ticket? Other than this one blog posting on the site, I could not find a mention of any self-proclaimed Democrats who have or plan to vote for John McCain. I am thinking I just missed the information somewhere on the site so if you could point out for me where it is I would be very appreciative. Thanks!
( Last edited by dcmacdaddy; Oct 26, 2008 at 10:52 AM. )
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
     
dcmacdaddy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 10:52 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
As it turns out, the group behind the Democrats For McCain website has also created an Italians for McCain website as well. And, as indicated here, the two websites were created by the same individual and have almost identical designs and content. This is interesting. I wonder if the Italians For McCain group considers itself a subset of the Democrats For McCain group (i.e.: Italian Democrats for McCain) or if the Italians For McCain group is based exclusively on ethnic/national identity such that they are comprised of both Republican and Democrat Italians who favor McCain.

Good find, ebuddy.

It's nice to no there are so many distinct advocacy groups out there for John McCain.
( Last edited by dcmacdaddy; Oct 26, 2008 at 10:59 AM. )
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
     
Mithras
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: :ИOITAↃO⅃
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 11:30 AM
 
It's just a coincidence, dcmacdaddy. Italians like green, and democrats blue, is all.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 12:22 PM
 
That's a spicy meatball!
     
The Crook
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Sep 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 12:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by vmarks View Post
You've got plenty of Republicans, but I'm looking for these Conservatives and not seeing them.
You're being less than generous, to say the very least.

Christopher Buckley and Andrew Sullivan are certainly conservatives. Are you not aware of them?

Crooked Member of the MacNN Atheist Clique.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 12:41 PM
 
Christoper Hitchens is also rather conservative.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 04:19 PM
 
Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy View Post
As it turns out, the group behind the Democrats For McCain website has also created an Italians for McCain website as well. And, as indicated here, the two websites were created by the same individual and have almost identical designs and content. This is interesting. I wonder if the Italians For McCain group considers itself a subset of the Democrats For McCain group (i.e.: Italian Democrats for McCain) or if the Italians For McCain group is based exclusively on ethnic/national identity such that they are comprised of both Republican and Democrat Italians who favor McCain.

Good find, ebuddy.
Why is it a bad find? Why would the democrats involved have to make it about themselves? De Rothschild known as "Hillraiser" helped start a Scranton DemsforMcCain and so far as I can tell it is just a blog-spot for McCain supporters of all types to collect, blog, and connect. It clearly states that it is not affiliated with nor funded by the GOP. PUMA seems to be heavily involved as disenfranchised Hillary supporters.

How do McCain's policies conflict with traditional Democratic ideals other than the (R) after his name? Most of the issues covered there are pretty cerebral though I must admit the blog-spot highlighting the hopeful overturning of Roe V Wade is suspect.

It's nice to no there are so many distinct advocacy groups out there for John McCain.
It'll be even more interesting to see how many self-professed Obama supporters will be pulling the lever for McCain. Don't get me wrong, I'm not predicting a McCain victory so much as I have a strong hunch it'll be much closer than most polls are predicting.
ebuddy
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 04:35 PM
 
ebuddy: why is it that conservatives such as yourself seem unwilling to entertain the notion that the race will be a Democratic landslide? I honestly don't mean this in a gloating way, because I don't know that it will be, but why would you be surprised if it was?

This is not an attack on your conservative ideology as much as it is a product of Obama marrying McCain to Bush for months and months on end, Bush being extremely unpopular, and basically tarnishing the Republican brand. McCain's maverick claims have carried a certain amount of traction, but only up to a point. Ask people who is going to bring change, and more people will answer Obama since that is the branding he has established for his campaign over the course of many months.

Maybe some conservatives are in denial about how badly this current administration has sucked?
     
Mrjinglesusa
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Why do you care?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 05:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Maybe some conservatives are in denial about how badly this current administration has sucked?
Nail. Head.

It speaks volumes that Bush has not, in fact he cannot, stump for McCain. When historians look back on Bush's Presidency, I guarantee he will go down as one of the Top 5 worst Presidents we have ever had.

EDIT: http://hnn.us/articles/48916.html

In an informal survey of 109 professional historians conducted over a three-week period through the History News Network, 98.2 percent assessed the presidency of Mr. Bush to be a failure while 1.8 percent classified it as a success.
Asked to rank the presidency of George W. Bush in comparison to those of the other 41 American presidents, more than 61 percent of the historians concluded that the current presidency is the worst in the nation’s history.
2.3GHz i7 15" Retina Macbook Pro (Late 2013)
     
dcmacdaddy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 05:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Why is it a bad find? Why would the democrats involved have to make it about themselves? De Rothschild known as "Hillraiser" helped start a Scranton DemsforMcCain and so far as I can tell it is just a blog-spot for McCain supporters of all types to collect, blog, and connect. It clearly states that it is not affiliated with nor funded by the GOP. PUMA seems to be heavily involved as disenfranchised Hillary supporters.
Umm, ebubdy, look at my post again where I say "Good Find, ebuddy" and give you a thumbs-up. Why are you asking if it is a bad find?

As to your other questions, I assumed that a website called Democrats For McCain would contain advocacy from various Democrats who find John McCain to be the better candidate. But, other than the occasional in their forum, I see little mention of avowed Democrats who feel McCain would be the better President. Wouldn't you expect a website called Republicans For Obama to highlight Republicans who feel Obama is the better candidate? I would be equally perplexed if such a site exists and has nothing but Democrat talking points on it and very few Republicans coming out and avowing their preference for Obama. I simply expected such a website to actually be full of individuals publicly and proudly espousing their choice and I did not see that on the Democrats For McCain website. Hence, my questions as to where such information might be on the site. Maybe we should should chalk up my perplexity to naiveté at expecting a website called Democrats For McCain to be full of individuals asserting their preference for a McCain presidency.
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
     
nonhuman
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Baltimore, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 05:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
How many switchers have there been in here either way?

Besson3c's official prediction: 0
Well, I voted for Bush in 2000 (though not in '04), and Obama in '08 (voted early). But I've never identified as either a Democrat or Republican (registered as a Libertarian, but not actually a member of the party). So do I count as a switcher.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 06:00 PM
 
Why would I validate you as a switcher? My official prediction would be wrong if I did so!

Besides, technically speaking only human beings are allowed to vote anyway, so your votes are illegal and won't be counted anyway.
     
nonhuman
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Baltimore, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 06:04 PM
 
Only citizens (who aren't felons) are allowed to vote. Nowhere is the definition of citizen limited to human beings.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 06:14 PM
 
Yeah, but our constitution talks about men and women, not non-humans.

Go back to where you came from nonhuman, and stop wasting our tax dollars! Surely you have your own planet that you can return to, or was it destroyed by a nuclear war in the future necessitating that you move to Earth, blend in and live among us under the radar, in secret?

The jig is up, nonhuman. If you were a human being, you would find me awesome, and thus far I have not seen any evidence of this.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 06:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
ebuddy: why is it that conservatives such as yourself seem unwilling to entertain the notion that the race will be a Democratic landslide? I honestly don't mean this in a gloating way, because I don't know that it will be, but why would you be surprised if it was? This is not an attack on your conservative ideology as much as it is a product of Obama marrying McCain to Bush for months and months on end, Bush being extremely unpopular, and basically tarnishing the Republican brand. McCain's maverick claims have carried a certain amount of traction, but only up to a point. Ask people who is going to bring change, and more people will answer Obama since that is the branding he has established for his campaign over the course of many months.
You've brought up a lot of things here, but I'll try to address them in kind. I'm curious why you were so careful not to offend my ultra-conservative sensitivities.

To preface; if I truly thought it was going to be a landslide, all party preferences and/or ideological differences aside, I'd have no problem admitting as much. My first words of McCain this election year were critical of him. I've been hard on him for his debate performances, I've given brutally honest breakdowns of Palin's performances, and have consistently pointed out mismanagement of McCain's campaign every step of the way. If you weren't one of those who generally disagree with me, but expressed solidarity with me at that time, you were one of the few. What you're trying to imply, albeit in a very cautious manner, was that I've fallen prey to a kind of partisan inability to see reality. What's telling is that you could've read any of my posts, have an attention span greater than the average gibbon and yet would try to pin this on me anyway. This is not an attack on your liberal ideology as much as it is a product of yet another liberal's need to compartmentalize differences. I'm just sayin'.

Look, the fact of the matter is that it should've been a landslide all along. His choice of Biden over Hillary was a mistake that will cost him more votes than I think are being acknowledged. I believe true polling is well within the margin of error and frankly Obama/Biden should already be an apparent landslide. Obama has done almost everything right in his campaign, McCain has done almost everything wrong yet... it will only tighten this next several days. This is an analysis besson, nothing more nothing less. If I'm wrong and it's a landslide for Obama, I'll be the first to pop back in here (if I remember) and say as much.

If I'm right, will you begin to focus less on differences?

Maybe some conservatives are in denial about how badly this current administration has sucked?
Maybe so. Maybe you underestimate how badly this Congress sucks. Only time will tell.
ebuddy
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 06:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy View Post
Umm, ebubdy, look at my post again where I say "Good Find, ebuddy" and give you a thumbs-up. Why are you asking if it is a bad find?
You had just gotten done indicating why there's a sister site called 'Italians for McCain' among other problems and curiosities you had with the cited reference. You closed with "good find ebuddy". I guess I thought you were being sarcastic?

As to your other questions, I assumed that a website called Democrats For McCain would contain advocacy from various Democrats who find John McCain to be the better candidate. But, other than the occasional in their forum, I see little mention of avowed Democrats who feel McCain would be the better President. Wouldn't you expect a website called Republicans For Obama to highlight Republicans who feel Obama is the better candidate? I would be equally perplexed if such a site exists and has nothing but Democrat talking points on it and very few Republicans coming out and avowing their preference for Obama. I simply expected such a website to actually be full of individuals publicly and proudly espousing their choice and I did not see that on the Democrats For McCain website. Hence, my questions as to where such information might be on the site. Maybe we should should chalk up my perplexity to naiveté at expecting a website called Democrats For McCain to be full of individuals asserting their preference for a McCain presidency.
I was thinking of having a McCain sign in my yard too, but I'm not sure I can afford vandalism to my cars and my house. You think I'm kidding. I've seen it. If I were a Democrat for McCain, I'd keep it pretty quiet. I'd still want to communicate my views, but I don't know that I'd be publishing my name. While some there have, they'll likely end their careers as they know it. Maybe they'll get a spot on Fox News or eventually with the RNC, but their days as "Democrats" are over.
ebuddy
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 06:58 PM
 
Sorry to pigeonhole you with the others ebuddy, I'll try to remember that you are a different breed of conservative. Perhaps you have some extra chromosomes or something.

Addressing your last comment about Congress sucking, like I've said before, I really don't have any faith in the general public to really believe that they have any sort of idea how Congress is performing, let alone who their local congressperson is. Congressional popularity is pretty much just presidential halo effect. If the Republicans are doing well as a whole, people will vote in Republican congressmen and women, and ditto for the Democrats.

If Congressional popularity matters, why are the Democrats poised to pick up several seats this election despite their incredibly low popularity? Why? Because Bush has sucked, that's why. Our Democracy is ineffective when the general population is woefully under-informed.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 07:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
I was thinking of having a McCain sign in my yard too, but I'm not sure I can afford vandalism to my cars and my house. You think I'm kidding. I've seen it. If I were a Democrat for McCain, I'd keep it pretty quiet. I'd still want to communicate my views, but I don't know that I'd be publishing my name. While some there have, they'll likely end their careers as they know it. Maybe they'll get a spot on Fox News or eventually with the RNC, but their days as "Democrats" are over.
That would be all the soon to be former leaders of NOW that have come out in support of McCain/Palin. I can't see how anyone can call Hitchens a conservative. The only thing he agrees with them on is on Iraq and the War on terrorism.
     
Mithras
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: :ИOITAↃO⅃
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 08:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Christoper Hitchens is also rather conservative.
Well, he's for anything, as long as it's extreme and will make people mad.
     
Mithras
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: :ИOITAↃO⅃
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 08:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by vmarks View Post
The thread says "Well known Conservatives/Republicans supporting Obama." You've got plenty of Republicans, but I'm looking for these Conservatives and not seeing them.

As for Krusty's contention that being in chosen for the Bush/Cheney administration makes a person a conservative, that's false. I've covered here in numerous threads how Bush is not a conservative on many issues.
So what you're saying is, George Bush could announce his support for Obama, and he wouldn't count?
     
vmarks
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 10:34 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Crook View Post
You're being less than generous, to say the very least.

Christopher Buckley and Andrew Sullivan are certainly conservatives. Are you not aware of them?
Sullivan thinks he's a conservative, and he talks a good game when he talks about "small government, individual freedom, humble faith, balanced budgets, respect for tradition or a strong but prudent foreign policy."
- and if he genuinely cared about those things, I'd be all for him.

Hitchens is interesting. That's a good thing, no one wants an uninteresting Hitchens.
http://www.primetimepolitics.com/pri...n_tim_russert/ is where Hitches and Sullivan go head to head.

Ken Adelman, I'll grant you. Adelman sits where I do, when he says "I've considered myself less of a partisan than an ideologue. I cared about conservative principles, and still do, instead of caring about the GOP.

Granted, McCain's views are closer to mine than Obama's."

Adelman goes on to endorse Obama. I would not.

In Christopher Buckley's endorsement, he writes "President Obama will (I pray, secularly) surely understand that traditional left-politics aren’t going to get us out of this pit we’ve dug for ourselves. If he raises taxes and throws up tariff walls and opens the coffers of the DNC to bribe-money from the special interest groups against whom he has (somewhat disingenuously) railed during the campaign trail, then he will almost certainly reap a whirlwind that will make Katrina look like a balmy summer zephyr."

I hope Mr. Buckley understands that fellow conservatives have no faith that a President Obama will understand any such thing, and will very likely raise taxes, tariffs, and will along with his fellow party members take in special interest money.

It's desirable that if there is a left-wing President and a left-wing Congress, that there be a minority conservative collection of conservative watchdogs. Perhaps it would even be possible to sweep Congress ala 1994/1996.

A rational fear is that this would not be possible in light of a left-wing President and Congress.

David Frum, who unlike me values Republicans as well as conservatism, writes "...the political culture of the Democratic Party has changed over the past decade. There's a fierce new anger among many liberal Democrats, a more militant style and an angry intolerance of dissent and criticism. This is the culture of the left-wing blogosphere and MSNBC's evening line-up -- and soon, it will be the culture of important political institutions in Washington.

Unchecked, this angry new wing of the Democratic Party will seek to stifle opposition by changing the rules of the political game. Some will want to silence conservative talk radio by tightening regulation of the airwaves via the misleadingly named "fairness doctrine"; others may seek to police the activities of right-leaning think tanks by a stricter interpretation of what is tax-deductible and what is not.

The best bulwark for a nonpolitical finance system and a national culture of open debate will be the strongest possible Republican caucus in the Senate. "

Frum isn't far wrong.
     
vmarks
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2008, 10:46 PM
 
Originally Posted by Mithras View Post
So what you're saying is, George Bush could announce his support for Obama, and he wouldn't count?
He'd clearly fall under the Republican hypothetically supporting Obama, but he could not fall under the Conservative hypothetically supporting Obama - because he's never been a conservative.

Smaller government? Nope, the 'compassionate' establishment of huge entitlements and education bills when the federal government lacks the authority to have an education department pretty much made sure he wasn't a conservative. Free market economics? Nope, the steel tariffs were an early example of how he wasn't a conservative. Humble faith? Perhaps, in that he admitted his own personal failings when it came to substance abuse. Balanced budgets? Hardly. Respect for tradition? Nothing leaps out to my mind here. Strong but prudent foreign policy? Strong, but not strong enough. Prudent, conservatives argue over.

After all, Reagan wrote in 1985, "France and Italy refused to permit our F-111 bombers to cross their air space on the way from a base in England to Tripoli to join carrier-based planes from the Sixth Fleet in the attack. As a result, the F-111's had to detour more than a thousand miles over the Atlantic and Mediterranean; this would shorten their effective range and, by leaving them with less reserve fuel, would possibly make them more vulnerable during the attack. The refusal upset me, because I believed all civilized nations were in the same boat when it came to resisting terrorism. At least in the case of France, however, economic considerations prevailed: While it publicly condemned terrorism, France conducted a lot of business with Libya and was typically trying to play both sides."

Everything old is new again.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 27, 2008, 12:15 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
It is hard to sound diplomatic in the written word, but I would not consider you a "switcher".

I think you've done everything fine from a diplomatic standpoint.

I had intended my caveat (cock your head and squint) as acknowledgment that some may disagree with my self-assessment, and as an invitation for people to take issue with said.

Of course, I had hoped my "because Bob Barr is a bigger ******bag" slogan would denote my lack of enthusiasm. Perhaps it needs work.


Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
1) How do you align much more closely with McCain politically?

If you are to take him at his word, and cherry pick when in the altogether not uncommon circumstance where him contradicts himself, everything.

On the domestic front you have the Bill of Rights (including the 2nd and the 10th). Small government. Anti-pork. I haven't paid too much attention to his economic plan, but somehow doubt on paper it's going to Carter-up the joint the way Obama's plan will.

As for foreign policy, I'm pro-military (though of the deterrence school). I'm stridently pro-Israel. I have major issues with Iran. Hell, I defended McCain's 100 years in Iraq statement. Even he doesn't do that anymore.

So, why am I voting for Obama?

Very simply, the philosophy put forth above demands more responsibility of its adherents than any other. It's akin to the exceedingly high responsibility – and the entwined temptation to fall – we give prosecutors. Those that live up to it are exemplars of justice. Those that don't, and this is not hyperbole, are a genuine tool of evil.

While McCain hasn't convinced me it would be impossible for him to live up to the responsibility, he's given me much with which to doubt how probable it would be.

So, in this analogy I've cooked up here, I vote for the defense attorney. A group of people for whom I'll note that whether they live up to their responsibility or not makes for an almost negligible difference in outcome.



Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
2) I would disagree that McCain's pick was "by the seat of his pants". I think the choice was absolutely brilliant on a host of levels already covered in other threads.

Brilliant is not an antonym of "via pants-seat".
( Last edited by subego; Oct 27, 2008 at 01:46 AM. )
     
hyteckit  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 28, 2008, 02:08 AM
 
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/200...politico/14986

James A. Leach - Iowa Congressman and House Banking Committee Chairman
Wayne Gilchrest - Maryland Congressman
Lincoln Chafee - Rhode Island Senator (Recently left the Republican party, nice guy)
William Weld - Massachusetts Governor
Larry Pressler - South Dakota Senator
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
Mithras
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: :ИOITAↃO⅃
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 28, 2008, 06:51 AM
 
Yeah but no true conservative would support Obama, ergo none of those people are true conservatives, ergo the thread still fails. QED.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2008, 06:59 AM
 
Nuttin' for me ebuddy?

I was at least hoping I'd get a poetry point for "entwined temptation to fall".

Tough crowd.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2008, 07:19 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Nuttin' for me ebuddy?

I was at least hoping I'd get a poetry point for "entwined temptation to fall".

Tough crowd.
There really wasn't a lot to say. It seems you're voting for a symbolic gesture over anything substantive.

It seemed you were saying that while you disagree with Obama's platform generally, he's got a better chance of living up to his promises of disappointing you. While McCain generally espouses a platform you can support, his actions lead you to believe he may disappoint you. You're voting for the one with a better shot of disappointing you because the capacity of the Presidency is ineffectual anyway. You've placed your faith instead, in a collective that voted for Obama because they perceive our current State of the Union is Republican-induced.

What is there to say?
ebuddy
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 29, 2008, 07:48 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
You're voting for the one with a better shot of disappointing you because the capacity of the Presidency is ineffectual anyway.

You lose me here.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:02 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,