patrick.net

I don't think McCain has any chance of winning against Obama if he gets the nomination. McCain is nicknamed as Bush III for his stance on war and Mr Bush is the most hated President now.

Malcom,

Don't ever get me wrong (I'd love to spend more time in San Diego!) Our neighbor spends part of the year in Encinitas (sp?) and seldom seems half as aggravated as "I" am!

With escalating housing costs most of my retired buddies have been driven inland. Temecula, Murrieta etc. I lived in Imperial Beach and still check prices there from time to time. That aside it just seems SD has this legacy of corruption (Duke Cunningham and a number of mayors?)

"McCain is nicknamed...." (as?)

Yes by all means let's spread that around as much as possible! WHY... he and the Prez see eye-to-eye on virtually everything! (Especially water-boarding and torture of all kinds)

In fact, I'm ordering my "Let's not elect Bush III again this time either...?...!" bumper stickers as we speak!

Good Lord.

I don’t think McCain has any chance of winning against Obama if he gets the nomination. McCain is nicknamed as Bush III for his stance on war and Mr Bush is the most hated President now.

I think McCain will still win regardless. However, it is nice to see a landslide victory.

The Iraq war is horrible and I am certain McCain can make improvements. Other than Iraq, Bush isn't worse than any big-government Democrat. Also, Bush is NOT the populist politician type that we despise.

I prefer to have Hillary Clinton as the Democratic nominee. Obama poses to much threat to McCain.

McCain's not a bad guy, but between the two, I'll take Obama. Not perfect either, but at least he doesn't have to tow his party's disastrous foreign policy & war baggage with him.

In USA voters generally don't elect old candidates. McCain is 71, and will be 72 by the time he gets into the office early next year (if he gets elected). Regan was the oldest President to be elected at 69 and FDR was youngest at 42.

Regan was the oldest President to be elected at 69 and FDR was youngest at 42.

Many people agree that Reagan is the best President ever.

FDR stole gold from Americans and created the New Deal crap.

FDR stole gold from Americans and created the New Deal crap.

And instituted the SEC, Social Security, the FDIC and steered us (victoriously) through WWII. The New Deal you blithely dismiss as "crap" may also have prevented a Communist revolution during the depths of the Great Depression. Perfect? No. But let's give credit where credit is due.

FYI: my dad might have starved if it weren't for the CCC, so I indirectly owe my life to FDR.

Peter P

What do you mean by "The Iraq war is horrible and I am certain McCain can make improvements"?

Do you think we should continue to support one past mistake or try to improve on past mistakes? In medical terms when one of your body parts is rotten and it starts spreading into other parts of your body it is always suggested to chop off that part before it is too late. We should retreat from IRAQ ASAP. There is no alternative.

Obama's CHANGE campaign is working so well because he is proactive on his stance on IRAQ and other issues. Now, what he does after getting elected is another story.......but for now he saying things that is most obvious and I can agree to that.

Let's try to keep some perspective here: integrity and good ideas have no party affiliation.

DinOR,

Well put. I should get one of those bumper-stickers, too.

I think Bush and McCain both should be sent to the Iraqi desert, where they could wander around for 40years until they regain their senses, if that is possible.

HARM,

>>McCain’s not a bad guy,

Seriously, McCain is a VERY bad guy. He does not see anything wrong with occupying Iraq for 100 years. That would be a mistake of truly biblical proportions.

Here's a thought: You know how it is popular for right-wingers to say well-if-you-hate-America-so-much-then-why-dont you-go-back-to-where-you-came-from?

I propose a twist on that one: If you love occupying {Iraq, CountryX} so much, why don't you go over there and stay as long as the occupation lasts.

Perhaps we should make it a rule that any president that wages war should spend 4 years (or 2 terms) in any country they conquered after they leave office, whether that war is over or not.

We should retreat from IRAQ ASAP. There is no alternative.

Sure. I agree. That should be the goal.

HARM, we should agree to disagree.

It is also arguable that the New Deal worsened the Great Depression.

As an alternative, he could also have incentivized production and investment though targeted tax cuts and tax credits.

Cut and Run will definitely be the big issue this election cycle. The real question, though, is are we referring to housing or Iraq?

The real question, though, is are we referring to housing or Iraq?

People care A LOT more about housing than Iraq. Oops. Hillary may have a chance.

Remember Escaped From DC? He predicted that HRC will become the next FDR.

Something we can all agree on: the Clintons should not be allowed anywhere near the White House.

http://www.thecherokeean.com/news/2008/0220/Front_Page/004.html

“In a campaign swing through East Texas last Friday, former President Bill Clinton…predicted that another one million ‘of your fellow citizens’ are facing foreclosures on homes because of the current mortgage meltdown.”

“‘We’ll tell the mortgage companies: you eat 20 percent, we (the government) will eat 20 percent, you won’t foreclose on these people,’ he said. ‘When you’re in a hole, you quit digging.’”

Umm... what's this "we"? Oh, right: he means savers & responsible taxpayers.

At least McCain is closer to being a supply-sider.

Something we can all agree on: the Clintons should not be allowed anywhere near the White House.

Go watch Definitely, Maybe!

I think the reality is that if Obama were to be elected, Iraq would get worse. Much worse. But I just love the fact that we're already dismissing HC!

If we're basing our judgements on McCain's age the truth is that the man should have died several times over. Hollywood portrays ejecting out of a jet aircraft as some sort of "thrill ride". I'm here to tell you as a first hand witness (it's a 50-50 thing). Even just landing on an aircraft carrier is dicey. Add in the better part of a decade in the "Hilton" and I'd say this is a guy that'll die when he's good and ready.

I vastly prefer McCain to Osama. But I want to see Osama beat Hitlery for the Dumbocrat nomination first.

“‘We’ll tell the mortgage companies: you eat 20 percent, we (the government) will eat 20 percent, you won’t foreclose on these people,’ he said. ‘When you’re in a hole, you quit digging.’”

Umm… what’s this “we”? Oh, right: he means savers & responsible taxpayers.

I completely see your point BUT if any US government forces the banks to split the losses 50-50, I'll be ecstatic. So far there is every indication that they are forcing them to eat practically nothing (what with all the rate reductions and TAF). And the UK seem to be doing even worse (as in nationalizing).

However, as an undecided on the Nov. election, there's a larger issue here for me. Politicians will say whatever during a campaign. One can look at their past history and close allies to guesstimate what they'll actually try (no guarantee of success, see Pres. Bush) to do. On those grounds, where do Obama supporters get their confidence that he's a "good bet" for the US?

(no flames please - I am genuinely stunned by the level of support he is receiving from practically everyone and I'd love to figure it out)

McCain does not see anything wrong with occupying Iraq for 100 years, well, neither do 99% of Americans either.

Every day is the Day Of The Condor in the Empire. Never forget that.

McCain does not see anything wrong with occupying Iraq for 100 years, well, neither do 99% of Americans either.

Make that 60% or so.

BayAreaIdiot,

I think part of the sensation comes from what McCain describes as the "Holiday from History". Everyone is SO tired of the war (and Bush) they're willing to agree to (or jump on) any bandwagon they see as providing relief?

*See "BDS"

DinOR
a very good theory, thanks! There must surely be other dynamics at play too though...I'll keep looking :-)

On those grounds, where do Obama supporters get their confidence that he’s a “good bet” for the US?

I'm hardly an Obama groupie/fanatic, but I guess his modest appeal for me could be summed up as:
--not pro-quagmire
--not pro-bailout
--not Hillary

but HARM (with the exception of point 3!) those other two items are what he says. Any politician can and will say anything they deem useful in an election campaign. How do you know (or more accurately "guesstimate") what he'll actually try to do? Or is it just that you find the alternatives so unpalatable, you'd rather take a gamble than stay at home and not vote at all?

peeterPee - nope, 99% at least. You don't get my Day Of The Condor reference. 99% at least of Americans do NOT want to comprimise on their Way Of Life(tm) and that includes cheap-ish gas, and all the other fruits of Empire. Cheney is NOT stupid, and when he said our Way Of Life(tm) is not negotiable, he merely said what 99% of Americans feel, deeply, but don't have the guts to come out and say, themselves.

Cheney is NOT stupid, and when he said our Way Of Life(tm) is not negotiable, he merely said what 99% of Americans feel, deeply, but don’t have the guts to come out and say, themselves.

I see your point.

HARM, I thought Obama is very anti-guns.

How do you know (or more accurately “guesstimate”) what he’ll actually try to do?

How do we know with 100% certainty what *any* politician will do once elected? That alone is not sufficient reason to write off anyone new and just go with the same sorry-ass, bought off incumbents. In any case, despite his short voting record in the Senate, he generally seems to vote on principle. And Hillary consistently votes with the neocons and Wall Street, while pretending to be "pro-working class".

justme,

I fail to see a connection in advocating any Pres. take up residence in said hot-spot at the end of his term and... creating a lasting peace?

That aside, there are hundreds of thousands of U.S vets taking up permanent residence in the Philippines. Through the Huk Rebellion, Martial Law, Marcos rule, Peoples Power Revolution and the rise of Islamic extremists. So yeah, I guess we DO put our money where our mouth is.

Shit! When do we go!?

@Peter P,

Not exactly. His record on 2nd Amendment is not great, but still better than Hillary's:

http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=9490
http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=55463

Well, I guess Obama is someone I can sit down and have sushi with.

DinOR,

Well, yeah, what was supposed to be a deterrent to starting war against small faraway countries might end up being additional suffering for said country.

All attempts at humor aside, I suppose the Philippines is a little different because they have traditionally been thankful that we overturned the Japanese occupation of WW2. Perhaps more similar to Kuwait than to Iraq?

justme, war is a necessary evil in the human world.

Some wars are better managed than others (e.g. The Falklands War). But not all wars are the same. We should let history judge them.

[comment deleted by moderator]

well nobody is talking about 100% metaphysical certainty, nor am i say new guys should be disqualified. However, he is a special kind of new guy: unless I am wrong we have never before had someone so "green" (and I don't mean that in the Al Gore sense) become #1. Even Bush II had two terms as Gov.

You concede his short voting record but say it's good enough for you. To be honest, I look through his voting record and I can't fairly see any pattern - of course that could be because it's short, or more likely because I'm not skilled in reading voting records.

To me he is a gigantic question mark. I honestly have no idea what he would try to do if elected. Except I'm pretty sure he would give nice speeches.

ExSVR,

Warning: racist insults like that can subject you to moderation. Keep that stuff to yourself, thank you.