Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

GOP 2008: McCain supporters hit the trifecta of stupid [Karl]

Failed GOP presidential candidate Bob Dole has written a letter to either scold or reach out to Rush Limbaugh regarding Sen. John McCain’s quest for the presidential nomination, depending on which page of the Politico you read.

There is no indication this was prompted by Camp McCain, but can Dole (or McCain) be so fantastically dim as to be unaware of the McCain-Dole comparisons already being made by people like NRO’s Ramnesh Ponuru?  To wit:

It has seemed a bit like the 1996 race. McCain is Dole: the old war hero who has run before, who does not enthuse either economic or social conservatives but has a pretty conservative record. Giuliani is Forbes: the socially liberal, economically conservative New York candidate. Huckabee is Buchanan: the social conservative with rhetoric that scares economic conservatives. Romney is Gramm, the movement-oriented candidate with boatloads of money but difficulty connecting with grassroots conservative voters. (I’m not sure where Thompson fits in this scheme.) Romney has gotten further than Gramm, but much of the story is the same. The social-Right candidate takes out the movement candidate, the economic conservative ends up not playing a huge role, and the nomination goes to the old guy whom much of the Right distrusts.

I hope the story doesn’t end the same way.

Others have been less kind, though (as usual) few will match the vitriol of Ann Coulter:

John McCain is Bob Dole minus the charm, conservatism and youth. Like McCain, pollsters assured us that Dole was the most “electable” Republican. Unlike McCain, Dole didn’t lie all the time while claiming to engage in Straight Talk.

Today, we have already been subjected to Bill Kristol trying to paint McCain as a “happy warrior” instead of “Senator Hothead,” and a Jeff Jacoby column distorting Ronald Reagan’s record in support of McCain.  Now Dole trots out the same talking points Limbaugh already knows by heart — with just a hint of Reagan-slighting — on McCain’s behalf?

The McCain campaign really needs to get the word out to their supporters that they are insulting the intelligence of the people they are trying to woo.

(h/t Memeorandum.)

51 Replies to “GOP 2008: McCain supporters hit the trifecta of stupid [Karl]”

  1. McGehee says:

    The McCain campaign really needs to get the words out to their supporters that they are insulting the intelligence of the people they are trying to woo.

    You think they’ll consider that a bug, and not a feature?

    We are talking about the author of the Incumbent Protection Act.

  2. JD says:

    Someday maybe someone will realize that giving orders to people, telling them to grow up, and in general, just being condescending and arrogant, is not a very good way to win people over to their way of thinking.

  3. Karl says:

    A fair number of McCain’s supporters do seem to ape his less attractive traits, without the compensating biography.

  4. jdm says:

    The McCain campaign really needs to get the word out to their supporters that they are insulting the intelligence of the people they are trying to woo.

    But, but, it worked so well on the those who’re already on board.

  5. guinsPen says:

    Like McCain, pollsters assured us that Dole was the most “electable” Republican.

    Tell me about it.

    signed,
    John Forbes Kerry

  6. happyfeet says:

    David Brooks is even worser how he’s always having to pull McCain’s old man pubes out of his mouth. I was going to link this past Sunday but it was really just that bad. What a vagina.

  7. Jeff aka Alcyoneus says:

    Can someone tell me what the hell has happened to my party? Damn it.

  8. happyfeet says:

    I know right? It’s a conundrum.

  9. JD says:

    I know we have all been over this, repeatedly, but this whole MDS crap is infuriating. The sanctimony inevitably follows. If otherwise smart people are unable to grasp the concept that there are substantive and varied reasons to not vote for McCain in the primaries, then they are being willfully dishonest. The primaries are far from over, and rolling over and taking the Straight Talk Express right in the sphincter just because they have deemed him to be the inevitable nominee is ridiculous. If or when he becomes the nominee, I will re-evalute to see if he has come to his senses on the 1st Amendment, taxes, immigration, and being a grizzled old codger.

  10. Brainster says:

    Is there anybody so deluded to think that the Republicans could have nominated somebody in 1996 that would have beaten Clinton? We’re not talking about Jimmuh Carter here. Pat Buchanan was the “base” conservative; he would have been mincemeat. Steve Forbes (whom I supported)? Not a chance. Bubba was going to win a second term. Dole wasn’t a terrific candidate, but none of the terrific ones were running, because they knew it was hopeless. That is not (yet) the case in 2008.

  11. happyfeet says:

    That is wisdom you speak JD. You forgot to mention the smegma though.

  12. happyfeet says:

    Dole fell on a stage and they played it over and over and over and over again. They wouldn’t have done that if his defeat was inevitable.

  13. JD says:

    Brainster – Before I continue, may I first point out that I despise Slick Willie Clinton with the intensity of seven suns, or slightly less than I despise Coach Bellicheat. Having said that, other than Reagan, I cannot picture ANY Republican giving Willie Jeff any type of competition. Any candidate would have been nothing more than a sacrificial lamb, and yet, Clinton could still not get 50% of the vote. He is arguably the best politician (not leader, President, anything like that) but politician. It helped that the folks in the media were lining up to give him hummers. So, your point is well taken. Dole was toast from the outset, even if he was 40, well spoken, any characteristic you can come up with.

  14. JD says:

    And smegma.
    And Kyoto.

  15. happyfeet says:

    I talked to a liberal or at least he’s a liberal sympathizer and he thought the world of Dole and gave me a my aren’t we the ignorant little Republican look when I was kind of meh about him. He’s in the hate Clinton camp, and also knows Obama doesn’t have the chops. I rather suspect he’s crossing over for McCain this year.

  16. jdm says:

    I rather suspect he’s crossing over for McCain this year.

    Given the (willful or merely dopey) ignorance of actual conservative beliefs by people who should know better, I’m not surprised that so many, well, centrists (aka [RD]INOs) are enamored with McCain.

    The fact of the matter is a lot of 9/11 Democrats haven’t bought into the whole Republican agenda and certainly not a conservative agenda. This goes for most of the country-club Republicans (the go along to get along types) and the oh-so earnest compassionate conservatives as well.

  17. Luck says:

    “The McCain campaign really needs to get the word out to their supporters that they are insulting the intelligence of the people they are trying to woo.”

    Is the campaign thinking that will works? If it so, just keep it up for people to be aware for the campaign they’re persuading.

  18. cynn says:

    Well, I haven’t bought into the Republican agenda because I don’t know what it is. I’m busy and I need these things rolled up and nicely sliced, like a sushi platter. So far, all I’m hearing is the Not-McCain clarion call. Not an effective strategy.

  19. JD says:

    I really do not get what Luck is trying to say. Maybe my eyes are playing trix on me.

  20. Karl says:

    cynn,

    I know you have heard about the GOP agenda: Endless war, tax cuts for the rich, a police state, pestilence, etc.

  21. JD says:

    Oppressing women, old people, and minorities. Funding the military industrial complex. Crony captialism. No bid contracts. Giddy with the thought of torture. Spying on all Americans. Hating us teh gheys.

  22. cynn says:

    Karl, believe it or not, I don’t subscribe to the absolute-based rhetoric on either side. I have profound differences with the right, but I certainly don’t think you all are a bunch of knuckle dragging doofs. I suppose a general platform is something that is forged at the party convention; but you guys are all over the board these days. Schizophrenic, almost — some of you chewing your legs off to get out of the righty compound, and others self-flagellating to the point of embarrassment. I hold a few of your core principles, i.e. border security, but why flail in despair over McCain? Even I could live with J. Lieberman; we’d bring him into line where it counts.

  23. Karl says:

    Brainster,

    Lots of folks would say that the candidates running this year aren’t all that wonderful. I’m fairly sure you disagree as to one of them, but you are one of the few commenters here with nice things to say for McCain who doesn’t say things that alienate the group to which I refer.

    There are plenty of people online who make the Dole-McCain/Clitnon-Obama analogy, which is why it’s dumb for Dole to be involved in this. Does anyone think Rush Limbaugh is going to be persuaded by anything Bob Dole has to say? (Yes, that’s purely rhetorical.)

    Bonus: Dole’s ACU ratings in ’94 & ’95 were 100 and 91.

    McCain’s ACU ratings in ’05 and ’06 were 80 & 65.

  24. dorkafork says:

    Even I could live with J. Lieberman; we’d bring him into line where it counts.

    I agree. Is it too late to get him into the Republican primary?

  25. Karl says:

    cynn,

    I’ve tried to be an equal-opportunity flailer, though McCain is probably getting a bit more now that he’s the front-runner. I have also tried to explain to the truly hardcore anti-McCainiacs why McCain is popular.

    As you note, the overall agenda often gets hammered out in a party platform. But the nominee generally gets his (or in the Dems case possibly her) way — which is another reason folks care who the nominee is. If you are for border security, McCain is a pretty awful choice.

  26. happyfeet says:

    He’ll build the goddamn fence.

  27. cynn says:

    I just don’t understand the vicious acrimony in rigtyland. I can’t tolerate Clinton and her siamese twin hubby, and I can’t figure out Obama. Now McCain, I would not only have a beer with, but an entire pitcher. Granted, I would wind up pouring it on his head, but you take electability where you can find it, right?

  28. happyfeet says:

    There’s so many of these thoughts that would just be really a lot more appropriate come Wednesday morning I think. Carts and horses.

  29. cynn says:

    Yes. After this Super Bowl, anything can happen.

  30. happyfeet says:

    Well put.

  31. Darleen says:

    I can’t tolerate Clinton and her siamese twin hubby

    well, cynn…go and start with the Newsweek article where McCain was having fun belting back vodka with Hillary!, recall that Bill wants McCain to run against Hill because “it’ll be the most civilized election” (heh) and understand that McCain is Democrat-lite, not even moderate Republican.

  32. Brainster says:

    Karl, believe me I winced the moment I saw it on Memeorandum, because I knew it would play into that narrative. But it’s unfair to Dole and unfair to McCain. And I’ve always felt that Dole was effectively the result of some conservatives sitting on their hands in 1992, so you could argue that the real comp for him will be whomever we nominate in 2012 if we don’t win this year for the same reason.

  33. JJ says:

    Where happened to my party?

    Hey, it spent itself into oblivion over the past several years. In a most Beavis-like fashion.

    And, if you aren’t happy with the Rep choices, then you must have been paying attention from the beginning. Who? Mitt? Fred?

    Come up with some better alternative ideas because anything is better then any of the Dem choices. If McCain is all that’s left, then soooooooo much better than Hillarity or the rookie.

  34. Karl says:

    Brainster,

    Not even Democrats think fairness has much place in politics. Unless it’s the Fairness Doctrine, which they’re all for. At this point, I wouldn’t be surprised if McCain agreed.

  35. JD says:

    Bill wants McCain to run against Hill because “it’ll be the most civilized election” (heh)

    Right up to the point where McCain becomes a warmongering, knuckle-dragging, racist, homophobic misogynist.

    Even I could live with J. Lieberman; we’d bring him into line where it counts.

    cynn – This is precisely why many do not like McCain. When it counts, he is likely to go to the other side for support.

  36. geoffb says:

    Bill wants McCain to run against Hill because “it’ll be the most civilized election”

    Bill said that huh?
    And his lips were moving?
    I guess You can take that to the Savings and Loan. Madison that is.

  37. datadave says:

    “#

    Comment by JD on 2/4 @ 8:46 pm #

    Oppressing women, old people, and minorities. Funding the military industrial complex. Crony captialism. No bid contracts. Giddy with the thought of torture. Spying on all Americans. Hating us teh gheys.

    good, you sound like Whittaker Chambers I hope you take that as a compliment.
    And was that sarcasm or the truth?

    Seems like McCain would be the best thing to happen for the Republicans. He can win especially if Hillary pushes her mandatory health insurance premiums upon the lower middle class who can’t afford those premiums in the first place. Obama’s right about that one. ? will McCain push for the same thing? It’s a huge bread and butter issue for me and millions others.

    NPR’s Marketplace has it correct:

    “JEREMY HOBSON: Todd Krost, who lives outside Detroit, is a lifelong Republican. But this year, he and his wife, who both work and make about 60 grand between them, are planning to vote for a Democrat. Someone who’s addressing their economic concerns. He says all they’re hearing from Republican candidates are biographies.

    Todd Krost: I’m not so much concerned about that as I am our pocketbook and, you know, what my family’s gonna do for the next couple years.

    Same goes for Carly Cummings, a small business owner and lifelong Republican from Omaha, Nebraska:

    Carly Cummings: Well, I am for less government, but I am also for taking care of everyone and making sure that just that we look out for our fellow man. So I feel like there is more compassion and just more foresight economically on the Democratic side to be able to reach out to a broader variety of people.

    The problem for Republican candidates is not just limited to Todd and Carly. It extends to what former Bush speechwriter David Frum calls the middle-middle. Traditionally, Republican suburban or exurban families making about $70,000 a year.

    Scott Keeter, of the Pew Research Center, has the numbers to prove it:

    Scott Keeter: Over the past few years, we have seen a very large partisan gap in ratings of the national economy. We are now seeing that gap declining somewhat, as more Republicans are saying that they don’t think the economy is doing well.

    Hobson: So traditionally, Republicans have said the economy is doing fine under this Republican president, and now they’re starting to break away and sound more like Democrats?

    Keeter: That’s right.

    Keeter says people are even taking the unusual step of changing their party affiliation. And he says that change is happening most among middle class voters.”

    it’s the economy, stupid. (seems like Hillary will play into Obama or McCain’s hands if she pushes a big tax increase upon lower middle class with enforced health premiums. But McCain’s lack of care about the economy could be worse for the economy.

  38. B Moe says:

    it’s the economy, stupid.

    Actually, it’s the stupid, stupid.

  39. Mikey NTH says:

    #27 cynn:

    It is easy to understand because the acrimony is also out there in leftyland. Both the Democrats and the Republicans are centrist parties, and they overlap in places, like a venn diagram. Each also has extreme wings. Currently political power is balanced in this country, with each party having about the same amount of strength. The extremes are the passionate ones who want nothing more to engage their enemies, slaughter them, and feast amongst their impaled victims. The moderates in the center near and where the parties overlap, aren’t quite as passionate.

    The extremes hate the moderates because they do not have the passion, they do not hold the purity of ideology above all other things and are willing to compromise. So they are called DINOs and RINOs by the extremes. Despite their passion, the extremes need the moderates or they will surely never have political power. So the extremes of both parties are kept in alliance with more moderate members, they are forced into alliance.

    With the current balance between the two parties, the moderate elements have had more influence in the parties than the extremes. The numbers needed for electoral majority have had to be acquired from the moderate side of the political spectrum as those extremes that will work with the parties have pretty much been recruited. This has not played well with either party’s extremes, they are impatient for more influence – and if one of the parties had a clear majority, and a good sized one – the extreme of that party would have more influence as a cushion would provide them with the room to maneuvar.

    In this election year we have two pretty evenly balanced party. We have no incumbent president or vice-president seeking the presidency. No one serious from the last electoral cycle is running, and only one from the cycle eight years ago. This has forced each party into an internal power struggle to find one candidate that will represent them. and the extremes are angry because the moderates of each party are not choosing their most ideologically pure candidates, but instead the more ideologically compromising candidates. The extremes believe they are being taken for a ride, that they are being told to eat a turd-burger and enjoy it, and they Are. Not. Happy.

    Where will this end? I don’t know, I really don’t. Whomever is the candidate for their respective party is going to have to work hard to mend fences both ways – the moderates are probably also ticked at the extremes pulling a ‘holier than thou’ role (no one likes a sanctimonious person lecturing them). Some concessions as to platform and policies are going to have to be made to mollify the extremes. Extremes may even bolt their parties to form third parties, which is electorally disasterous for the extremes and the parties they leave – no one who remains behind has much good to say about sanctimonious ‘summer soldiers’. This last may happen as it happened as recently as 1992, to the cost the extremes of the Republican party now know.

    I can’t predict what will happen over the next nine months, if the same level of intra-party anger will be kept up. All I can predict is that at the end we will have a president from one of the two major parties.

  40. JD says:

    Yes, datadave, I like Oppressing women, old people, and minorities. Funding the military industrial complex. Crony captialism. No bid contracts. Giddy with the thought of torture. Spying on all Americans. Hating us teh gheys.

    So now national healthcare is a tax increase on the poor. Not only content to impose your beliefs on us, but now want us to pay for it too. I pray you never hold an elected position.

  41. datadave says:

    JD, Is was Justice of the Peace….ha, married people and adjusted their property taxes.

    I didn’t say “poor”. They have Medicaid. It’s the oppressed middle class that’s turning on the Retards…oh, I mean Republicans. I’ll be for victory in Iraq if McCain et al imposes a short term surtax upon those making over 250K a year to fund the war and win it..otherwise the war’s lost…even Republicans will want out if the costs continue the skyrocket as they have. That surtax would fund a hefty amount of militarism and winning the peace which is what is needed. The war was won long ago. The peace is what we are losing at.

    b’jesus, you quote that phrasing so well I think you mean it. What does the Republicans stand for other than that?(and enriching the top 1 percent of income earners at the expense of the middle class).

    don’t bother answering for my reply as I am going to work. c’ya.

    eh….what’s that? don’t let the door hit me on the way out or something?

  42. Rob Crawford says:

    I’ll be for victory in Iraq if McCain et al imposes a short term surtax upon those making over 250K a year

    So, basically, unless you get your class warfare, you’re against a US victory?

    Do you wonder why people question your patriotism?

  43. McGehee says:

    Getting back to a worthwhile commenter:

    you take electability where you can find it

    Cynn, that’s what Democrats were thinking when they nominated Kerry.

  44. […] seems like only yesterday that I wrote: The McCain campaign really needs to get the word out to their supporters that they […]

  45. Carl Gordon says:

    What doesn’t get much press or even a cursory mention, is that Bob Dole has an excellent, if somewhat sick sense of humor. That pen thingy he carries around in his gimp hand is actually a running gag he’s refused to move on from o’er all these years. Whenever some imbred GOP mutant would ask for specifics on one of his ambiguous plans for Amerika, he’d get all flustered and tell the unfortunate recipient, “Hey! Bob Dole says pull my finger!”. ANd that’s not even the worst of these sickos. Rush is famous for dropping wolf bait at large gatherings of slobbering conservatives and their tard children.

  46. Rusty says:

    #45

    Aw shit. dave attracted another one. Carl. Aren’t you supposed to be chained to a marine Corps recruiting office door? There’s a good lad.

  47. datadave says:

    “So, basically, unless you get your class warfare, you’re against a US victory?

    “Do you wonder why people question your patriotism?”

    “refuge of scoundrels”.

    no, it’s sound economics that the over 250K a year crowd can afford it and it’d make them feel good to contribute to their country for a change. The rest of us can’t afford anymore taxes.

  48. B Moe says:

    ..otherwise the war’s lost…even Republicans will want out if the costs continue the skyrocket as they have. That surtax would fund a hefty amount of militarism and winning the peace which is what is needed. The war was won long ago..

    …I need to work harder, so I can make more money, so I can buy more crack, so I can work harder, so I can make more money, so I can buy more crack, so I can work harder….

  49. JD says:

    no, it’s sound economics that the over 250K a year crowd can afford it and it’d make them feel good to contribute to their country for a change. The rest of us can’t afford anymore taxes.

    So, this is not dd’s war. It is the rich’s war. And W is not his President.

    Is there anything that the raving moonbats can’t apply a little class warfare / envy to?

  50. B Moe says:

    Is there anything that the raving moonbats can’t apply a little class warfare / envy to?

    No.
    Anything else I can help you with?

  51. Lisa says:

    I agree that this McCain phenomenon is fascinating. I never thought I would see the day when the presumed GOP nominee’s record did not give me several ulcers (I am a proud and happy liberal). He has a great voting record on social issues. He is very thoughtful and bright. Even when I disagree with him, his positions seem well-reasoned. I like that he is repulsed by the slobbering authoritarian mobs on both sides of the aisle and will coldly give them the smackdown.

    Clearly, he is not the posterboy for modern conservatism. How did this happen? You guys loathe him, but it is very likely that he will represent you as the Republican nominee.

    Perhaps the average Republican voter as a whole has moved a bit to the left? Or maybe you guys have way more closeted centrists and liberals than you think in your party…

    Oh, I heard some very articulate fellow from this website on NPR this morning. You sounded great.

Comments are closed.