Interesting article from Politico.com: McCain readies unorthodox campaign. In essence, McCain is shying away from the traditional, top-down, centralized Presidential campaign; instead, McCain plans on designing his campaign to be much more decentralized, more regional-based style of campaign. Some interesting quotes:
McCain strategists insist their paradigm can work. And the sour national climate for the GOP, McCain’s limited money supply and his preference for an impromptu campaign style that he can take to all parts of the country mean there is no other option but to break the mold, says one aide.
“To run a normal, typical race like a normal, typical Republican, we would win 45 percent of the popular vote and 189 electoral votes,” this aide says. “You can’t just go to Columbus.”
Also:
...perhaps most importantly — McCain will rely on free media to an unprecedented degree to get out his message in a fashion that aims to not only minimize his financial disadvantage but also drive a triangulated contrast among himself, the Democratic nominee and President Bush.
Obviously, there's a lot that could go wrong with this. A regional manager could be ineffective and ruin the campaign for that region; the friction between the RNC, the McCain campaign, and other staffers could bog down the campaign; and so on. Also, the campaign finance aspect is beyond my ken; I don't know what the stated "jointly funded" idea means in the real world, during the General election. The sour grapes from unnamed Republican opratives is kinda interesting as well; my reading of that section of the article is that people don't like something new or different, or maybe they're upset about not having a job opening in a more traditional campaign.
Personally, I like this idea, initially at least. Given how unusual and wacky this primary season has been, I have no idea what'll actually happen. But this seems to be a good plan, designed to maximize McCain's strengths and minimize his weaknesses.
HG
This is, in essence, McCain admitting that he's not going to have enough money to compete, and that he's not even willing to try.
Say hello to President Obama.
Ditto
I don't know guys...given how dead in the water McCain was this past summer, maybe running a bare-bones campaign would be preferable (meaning, lean and mean, not bloated and slow). Plus, one of the strengths (somewhat) mentioned in the article is the exposure through free media; I took that to mean McCain would continue to meet with, talk with, and engage bloggers and online journalists like he did this past summer, something I don't see either Obama or Clinton doing.
I also don't think President Obama is a foregone conclusion. As self-evident as this sounds, it really depends on how the final weeks and months of the Democratic primary go: if Obama can maintain his lead, without shooting himself in the foot, I think the superdelegates would be hard pressed to go against him. If, on the other hand, Clinton is able to close the gap and arm-twist enough superdelegates to vote for her, a McCain-Clinton contest makes for a much easier row to hoe for the Republicans. A McCain-Obama contest is a much more difficult for the Republicans to come out ahead...
just my two cents.
HG
"Plus, one of the strengths (somewhat) mentioned in the article is the exposure through free media; I took that to mean McCain would continue to meet with, talk with, and engage bloggers and online journalists like he did this past summer, something I don't see either Obama or Clinton doing."
The media - at least the one that still garners the most significant viewership - is going to eat McCain for lunch as soon as the Dem race is over.
"If, on the other hand, Clinton is able to close the gap and arm-twist enough superdelegates to vote for her, a McCain-Clinton contest makes for a much easier row to hoe for the Republicans."
I actually think Obama will be much easier to beat than Clinton. Once you take away the Hope/Unity snake oil, there's really not much there. As it appears now, Obama adds nothing to the Kerry/Gore coalition, but loses substantial parts of it, and he's got no real centrist experience to point now that people realize that he can't even unify Democrats, let alone the entire nation.
I just don't think, given the signals he's been giving off for the past few weeks, that McCain is even willing to try.
This is, in essence, McCain admitting that he's not going to have enough money to compete, and that he's not even willing to try.--Yes, McCain said this in the first paragraph and for a republican you sound so willing to help, gee I remember how everyone was expected to fall in behind the nominee when it might be Rudy. I don't know if this is really McCain’s campaign plan you can't believe everything you read. I like the idea that pin heads from Washington that have no idea what happens locally are not making all the decisions.What’s wrong with trying to make the money go further? Right now the polls don't look to bad both Obama and Hillary is lagging and McCain is moving up.
Given McCain's outreach, I think he will get what he needs. I think a lot of the 2300 club or 4600 club will come back on board. Those of us that supported others go through a stage where we are troubled by McCain deception and tactics used against "our chosen candidate." In the next stage we watch Hillary dodging bullets in Bosnia and Obama not knowing that Rezco was purchasing his side yard for him. In the next stage we remember McCain's moves as just political. The next stage is that we realize what a disaster this country will face if we have a President that can simply wish away our enemy. When good people realize that this is what Hillary and Obama believe, McCain will have plenty of money.
"Yes, McCain said this in the first paragraph and for a republican you sound so willing to help, gee I remember how everyone was expected to fall in behind the nominee when it might be Rudy."
Still bringing up Rudy, eh?
Everyone is still expected to fall in line behind McCain. Polling even indicates that is what is happening. So why are you still bitching about Rudy?
"What’s wrong with trying to make the money go further?"
Nothing.
Why does he have to be so self-righteous that he's not even going to try and raise enough money to compete?
Why is he giving up on fundraising seven months before the election?
Why is he so naive that he thinks the media is going to make his case for him?
Just because he's the GOP nominee doesn't mean every decision his campaign makes should never be questioned. Some of us even pointed out when Rudy's campaign was making bad decisions.
And McCain's campaign is making bad, stupid, dumb, asinine decisions.
There was nothing in the article that said he wasn't going to try to raise money, he is and so are Rudy, Romney and Huckabee. You’re not just questioning his campaign your sticking a stake in it before it gets going.--"Say hello to President Obama."
Interesting point IP. Romney pledged to contribute $15 million. He has only suspended his campaign. I wonder how this little loop hole will work if Romney becomes the VP. I think he may be able to take the federal money from his primary and divert some donations, including mine, to the race. I really don't know. The closest situation might have been the Kennedy?Johnson contest, but that was back in the Middle Ages.
"There was nothing in the article that said he wasn't going to try to raise money,"
Read it again. His campaign was admitting a "limited money supply."
"You’re not just questioning his campaign your sticking a stake in it before it gets going.--"Say hello to President Obama.""
The people sticking a stake in it are the people who are dumb enough to think a modern campaign can be run without significant fundraising, or that the media is ever going to carry the message of a Republican nominee.
I don't know why you feel it's necessary to cheerlead for such obviously awful decisions. Just because he's the Republican nominee doesn't mean his campaign is perfect. Clearly, it's not.
"Romney pledged to contribute $15 million."
Under a Federal law whose name escapes me, such a contribution would be illegal.
After reading this, I am amazed that anyone would vote for this monster McCain:
acsa2000.net/cain2004.org/Dine-Navajo-PressRelease.htm
Ron Paul all the way. Vote for a true Republican. All three other candidates are part of the anti-American CFR (Council on Foreign Relations). Ron Paul has them all beat on economics, among other things.
Go Ron Go.
www.ronpaul2008.com
I actually think Obama will be much easier to beat than Clinton. Once you take away the Hope/Unity snake oil, there's really not much there. As it appears now, Obama adds nothing to the Kerry/Gore coalition, but loses substantial parts of it, and he's got no real centrist experience to point now that people realize that he can't even unify Democrats, let alone the entire nation.
I think that's just a desperate framing by the Clinton camp. Isn't it more accurate to say that there are two strong Democratic candidates that have loyal followings--so loyal in fact that they claim they will not vote Democratic if their candidate doesn't win (obvious BS, in my opinion)--and that makes for a competitive race?
I mean you of all people should know that McCain didn't "unify" the Republican party, he was just the candidate who rode timely momentum to victory in a extraordinarily weak field, right?
Damn it. This sounds like guaranteed defeat to me. I'm sorry... they may be trying to think outside the box, but lets face reality. There is no way McCain can win with this situation. At this point, I'm assuming Obama is going to win the Democratic nomination.
Have you seen Obama's fundraising abilities? Hundreds of millions! Just in a few months even! Even if McCain wasn't held down by the FEC rules, there is no way he could compete and raise even close to what Obama will be getting. And don't be foolish, money wins. This is why we need a candidate who can fundraise and bring in the cash.... McCain is not that candidate.
Plus, even if McCain had the money, I doubt he could win. Have you seen the enthusiasm of the support surrounding Obama? He goes to a rally and there are literally thousands of people there. Besides, logically, considering the way people think/are convinced to vote for someone: who are they going to pick? The optimistic candidate who's youthful and 'hip,' or the old man who wants 100 more years of war and to continue policies that have obviously failed?
McCain is a Bob Dole wrapped up in unpopular Bush policies. There is absolutely no way he can win. He's going to struggle to win over the conservative base, he supports a war that nobody seems to like (so why are they going to vote for it?). He doesn't know anything about the economic/monetary issues, which will be the #1 issue.
We need a candidate I think who is against the war. Nobody likes it, and just look at the economic results it's caused.
We need a candidate who understands the economic and monetary issues.
We need a candidate who is not going to propose big government solutions to problems. That's kind of the problem. All 3 candidates are virtually the same. They all openly/secretly support the same things. We need someone who is the complete opposite of the democrats if we want to have a chance to win. We need a small government conservative.
Ronald Reagan won overwhelmingly because he advocated and promised people that they could have individual freedom to run their lives. That message is possibly not as strong today because society has become so dependent on the government to solve problems. However, given the chance I think that message can wake people up again.
This is why I support Ron Paul. McCain just doesn't do it for me, and I honestly am convinced that he cannot win.
I do think Ron Paul has a chance to win (if given the support and attention he deserves).
-He is against the war and has been from the start, so that takes care of the war issue problem. It also gives him the advantage over Hillary who voted for the war, and Obama who voted to fund the war. Ron Paul also has the most support from the troops, so that cancels out any idea that he doesn't support them.
-He is an economist with a degree and understands the economic and monetary issues better than any of the candidates who have run. Have you heard how the people on Wall Street literally cheer when they heard Ron Paul question Ben Bernanke?
-He has repeatedly won the support of experts on both foreign policy and economic issues... everything he has said is all backed up with hard facts.
-He's a conservative and small government advocate. His beliefs are all based on philosophy and not jsut pandering to get votes. He has a record and has stayed true to his principles and people will respect that. They'll also respect his devotion to obeying the Constitution and never voting to raise their taxes.
-His support is so enthusiastic it rivals Obama's as does his fundraising. Give him a chance and I'm sure people would donate even more money.
-People today are more concerned with the problems they face. They're not afraid of terrorists, they're afraid of being able to pay their bills, taxes, buy groceries, etc. Ron Paul has talked about the economics policies and the problems we now face for years.... He said we we're in a recession way back last year, people laughed at him, now we're in a recession. Not so funny anymore. People want someone who knows what they're talking about and is consistent and doesn't sell out to win power. Look at how popular Ron Paul is in his district. That's proof that given the chance, he can win, and with overwhelming support. Anyways, Ron Paul has real solutions to the problems. Even though he doesn't like things like social security, medicare/medicaid etc. He recognizes that people are dependent on them. So, how about cut money where it isn't necessary and where it's actually hurting us (like overseas spending) and putting back into things here at home. That's a solution people can understand and will appreciate. Not raising your taxes and reducing them is another. Cutting off major spending and bringing home family members is another. Respecting the law/Constitution is another. I could go on and on.
At this point, McCain can't win. Obama will likely be president, but if we want a real chance in this election, then I believe our best bet is with Ron Paul.
I really don't understand how people can not like him for the one issue with the war, and then turn around and love McCain despite the fact he's practically a democrat, supports amnesty for illegal immigrants, doesn't strongly support the tax cuts (not raising taxes is not enough), and has taken part in several democrat sponsered legislation. Besides, being against the war doesn't mean not having a strong national defense. Ron Paul just thinks that the war is hurting our national defense and not helping it. So when policies don't work, then change them.
This is a joke, right?
McCain needs a revolution in order to win the White House. Too bad for him that the revolution belongs to Ron Paul.
Dan makes very good points, realistically a McCain victory is very unlikely even if money wasn't an issue, Ron Paul would be the GOP's only hope of beating the Socialists in November (he outflanks them on every issue that matters to democratic voters; the war, the economy, healthcare, taxes) but the neo-con controlled power-base within the republican party (aka facists-r-us) will never give him any support, they run people against him in his own district (he's too republican for the neocons). Oddly, they don't seem to care about what's good for the Republican party or America, that they never need to admit their mistakes (how far they've taken the party from it's platform, the resulting negative affect it's had on the party and America) is all that matters to them. The great irony is that Ron Pauls views are all similar to Ronald Reagans (who's mantra was also that big government is the problem), they worship Reagan, while they treat Paul like a turd in the punch-bowl...
Typical of the most flawed candidate in US History. http://www.wcltam.com/news/special/articledetail.cfm?articleid=23261
and he is not a well man:
http://www.tbrnews.org/Archives/a2818.htm#001
Congressman Dr.Ron Paul the only statesman that will get my support and my vote and I list the reasons why.
Brief Overview of Congressman Paul’s Record:
He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.
He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.
Congressman Paul introduces numerous pieces of substantive legislation each year, probably more than any single member of Congress.
Mainstream Media will not report on the facts we need to do our own research.
My first thought was Rudy's "florida strategy"... a desperate attempt to deal with obvious disadvantages that seems inherently flawed to many and a big risk to others. Second thought was Dean's over-reliance on the grassroots.
The funding issue is a big one... and McCain made his own bed on it in many ways, as IP has noted. I didn't read this article as McCain giving up on fundraising as much as working with what they got now and dealing with reality of current sentiments and doubts among potential supporters, and considering options in the future, but it's indicative of the desperate situation the GOP is facing nationally that pre-dates McCain winning the nomination. This election is and always has been the Dem's to lose.
It could always be worse though... and I'd like to thank our Ron Paul spammers for reminding us that there are far more hopeless candidates still "in the running." :-)
--
Glock21 Op/Ed
How absurd that McCain refuses to even acknowledge that Ron Paul is still running as his Republican rival. What with all the fuss over the hordes of delegates coming over to Ron Paul's side (a lot better than holding their nose while voting for McCain), I'm not surprised McCain is just giving up.
I'm just waiting for the Obama and Clinton scandal that will finally wake people up. We've still got a few months.
Say hello to President Ron Paul.
given the chance to win (the nomination, and the attention and support he deserves) yes, I do. Maybe go back and read what I wrote... I explained it quite clearly.
It could always be worse though... and I'd like to thank our Ron Paul spammers for reminding us that there are far more hopeless candidates still "in the running." :-)
Such as McCain.
Why are you saying Ron Paul Spammers. Please be correct and say Ron Paul Supporters. Thank you very much. A** wipe!
RON PAUL IS THE ONLY ONE WHO CAN GET THIS COUNTRY BACK ON TRACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
McCain can't win. He's violated the campaign finance law which bears his name. He used matching funds to get on the ballot in every state (if what Howard Dean said is proven true) and his candidacy is then moot. And shall we talk about Democrat vs. Republican turnout at the polls?
Instead of wasting your time reporting on a dead horse that's a socialist in disguise, why don't you write about a true patriot? A 20 year congressman with a voting record that clearly illustrates his commitment to the Republican ideals of smaller government, less taxation, sound foreign relations, a sound economy, and a strong military?
If the Republicans want to win this election, I don't see how they can do it with anyone other than Ron Paul as their nominee.
I second Ron Paul. Long live the rEVOLution. It's all just a beauty contest without Ron Paul at the helm pushing the important issues: The Federal Reserve, social(ist) security, the income tax, etc.
As I said this is just an article you don't know if this is what the campaign is going to do. I have read all kinds of things including that Obama has said if the republican candidate will take only federal campaign funds Obama will, which would give McCain an edge. You take one issue and jump automatically to McCain is toast, I understand the complaint if it's true but you jump to the conclusion way to easy. Ron Paul does not even register in the polls and has little chance sorry, just a fact.
I feel like I should apologize for inadvertantly drawing out the Ron Paul spammers; sorry guys.
Back to our original programming. I'm not as pessimistic as IP and others seem to be ("Hello, President Obama"), I find myself more in line with Glock: basically, this is a realistic appraisel of current strategy and fundraising limits for McCain, something that could be "scaled-up" if/when more money comes in. I also agree with Glock that this fundraising issue for McCain isn't specifically about him; it's a result of the dire straits the GOP find themselves in. I think any of the Republican candidates would've had problems fundraising in this political climate.
I gotta disagree with you IP, about Obama being the easier Democrat to beat come November. Clinton comes in with an almost automatic, almost built-in opposition. I think it would be much easier to "rally the base" if Clinton is the nominee. I can't remember where I read it, but some blogger made the analogy that an Obama nomination would result in a very active, energetic liberal base, and a more depressed conservative base; whereas a Clinton nomination would do the opposite.
Interesting times, for sure....
hello!
the past record of your average republican voter/participant gop person has been dismal. the party in recent decades has misguided many citizens with the same old tactic(s) of promising one thing and doing another.
then ron paul steps up to the plate to tell it like it is and have the record to prove it! many hopeful republicans still out there, yet ignorant or in denial to the facts affecting our party in a bad way.
thank God ron paul is amongst us!
all you misguided folks, please wake up & smell the coffee. record numbers of new people joining our party are doing so to support dr. paul.
record numbers in donations went to ron paul.
in our country, our troops have the unique oppurtunity to participate in choosing their commander in cheif. Wake up and discover who our troops overwhelmingly support... republican congressman ron paul! the soldiers are our real eyes & and ears on the ground, not fox news or cheney...
support our troops, support our constitution, become a part of the biggest upset by an underdog in our lifetime...
VOTE ron paul
the joke is on you.
don't be a victim of your own ignorance.
I'm glad the Ron Paul folks could join us this morning. I welcome your participation, but please keep it respectful and constructive, and try to post something more than "Ron Paul RULEZ, dude."
That request goes to the anti-Paul folks, too, please.
"I also agree with Glock that this fundraising issue for McCain isn't specifically about him; it's a result of the dire straits the GOP find themselves in."
I disagree. The RNC is raising money by the bucketload. GOP donors are energized, but they're not energized for McCain. Could it be because McCain has rhetorically treated all donors as corrupt for years? I wouldn't give money to someone who called me a crook either.
"I can't remember where I read it, but some blogger made the analogy that an Obama nomination would result in a very active, energetic liberal base, and a more depressed conservative base; whereas a Clinton nomination would do the opposite."
While this may have been true in January, there's no way this is the case now, not after all the things Obama has said and done since February 5. Obama would energize the conservative base just as much as Clinton, but would lose large chunks of Kerry's coalition (working-class whites, Jewish Democrats and a good portion of Latinos, for starters) and be less able to compete for independents.
Obama's one big advantage is money. And he's not been able to successfully leverage that since Super Tuesday (although the Dem Primaries have been very static since then) and I wonder how much of an advantage it would be if Obama doesn't take public funds and McCain does.
Maybe I'm just not buying the Obama hype. <shrugs>
Where is Arvid and his/her avatar when we need it? :)
Being an RP supporter, I truly wish he had a chance at winning the nomination, but it would take a lot of effort on behalf of the RP supporters on the county/state level to put forth unbinding resolutions to free up delegate votes at the convention. They're trying, but it's a difficult road. Just to address the fella that says that he barely registers in polls--RP was given probably 1/350th the media coverage that other "major" candidates (that he beat despite the lack of coverage) such as Fred Thompson and Rudy Giuliani, so is it really a wonder? The war is abhorred in 70+% of the United States, yet is supported by the majority of the Republican Party (another thing working against him in the primaries). In a national election, the entire country would be exposed to RP and his views, and he'd easily win in a landslide. He'd have the Republican base due to simply being the Republican candidate, and he'd nab tons of Dems and Independents based upon his track record and view on the war. Obama is a paper president that would blow over in the face of an honest, Constitution-abiding statesmen.
As for McCain, I agree with IPundit that the media will eat..him..alive once the Democratic mess is sorted out. His stance on the war, his admitted lack of knowledge of economics when we're in a wicked recession that's only getting worse, his lack of true fiscal conservatism...he's going to get destroyed.
First of all, IP, it's "Ron Paul RULZ." ;-)
Seriously, isn't it great to see people taking an interest in politics again, even getting excited and passionate about it? Especially young people. It's so what our country needs today. I'm glad the local GOP realizes that, and is welcoming in everyone who wishes to promote the Republican principles of governance.
Honestly, I'll happily take a person who believes passionately in their candidate and really feels like they can support them over one who is simply settling for the best shot against the other team, even if I don't agree with them. We are in dire need of people waking up and paying attention to what is going on in our government, and we can thank the Ron Paul movement for getting many more people interested and involved.
Like de Tocqueville said, without citizen involvement in government, there are no citizens, but only subjects.
"Seriously, isn't it great to see people taking an interest in politics again, even getting excited and passionate about it? Especially young people. It's so what our country needs today. I'm glad the local GOP realizes that, and is welcoming in everyone who wishes to promote the Republican principles of governance."
Yes. I'm excited that so many Ron Paul supporters wanted to remain active in the local GOP after the Primary, whether as Precinct Committeemen, delegates and alternates, or just as activists.
Frankly, we need all the help we can get, and I wish the statewide folks would realize that, too.
If McCain is losing county and state conventions to Dr. Paul, that tells you his chances of running a successful regional grassroots campaign are not good. Many activists in the Republican party are on Dr. Pauls side.Whether you like Dr. Paul or not, his supporters will be the key in a Republican win or lose. If they break away to vote and fund the Libertarian, McCain will be Ralph Nadered.
As a member of my local GOP here in the great state of Tx for 30 yrs, I am one who will more than gladly vote for the candidate that has fought to uphold the constitution...(Hint): It sure isn't candidate McCain or the two democrats left in the running. I vote for the candidate and DONOT vote for the party. Thank You.
It is OK to dream. But sometimes we must face reality. McCain has the nomination - by hook or crook. He will beat the campagn finance problem that he created with his own legislation. The Mainstream Media wants him. Of course we should do everything we can to prevent the inevitable. We should hope that something good might happen to our country - maybe it will happen just before X-Planet collides with earth - but until then, the same wardens are in charge.
In case anyone is wondering where all the Ron Paul folks are coming from:
One, I'm hardly a GOP insider, at least not at any level beyond Chamaign County politics, and certainly not in any way regarding the Presidential race.
Two, I have no idea if "there is something going on." I'm just reacting to the news article HG linked in the orignal post.
Three, I'm not "sounding an alarm." I have no connection to McCain's campaign, I'm not working on their behalf, and I doubt they are interested in my help anyway.
What do you know....Ron Paul was right all along. Imagine that. Meanwhile, you knew he was right the minute you realized the media and everyone that he would expose worked to suppress him. And what do you know...everything he said was going to happened has been happening. The sheeple are waking up. RP in 08 and beyond.
When Dr. Paul was recently on the Cavuto show it was mentioned by Neil the way he was cast eroneously as a "kook" by the national media. Ron Paul has been interviewed by many talk shows regarding his economical expertise and his "standing up" to the Federal Reserve. His only concerns are that we abide by the document that made our country different and great and prosperous. He brings many people to his speeches. He is a Great American and all need to really check out what he says, not what others say for him. He actually scares the "powers that be" because they know they have been usurping our constitutional goals for a free country. He has all of the qualifications needed for a great president, not to mention being a white, male Republican! The main concern is his foreign policy of bringing home the troops (AS stated in our Constitution). Odd, then, that if you add all of the contributions from active military for all of the candidates together, the amount Ron Paul got was greater than all the rest combined! He has a LOT of support and many are not looking where they should look for our next president.
IP said: "Yes. I'm excited that so many Ron Paul supporters wanted to remain active in the local GOP after the Primary, whether as Precinct Committeemen, delegates and alternates, or just as activists.
Frankly, we need all the help we can get, and I wish the statewide folks would realize that, too."
I think it's great they're taking an interest. As far as being helpful to the IL GOP or the national GOP I have my doubts since many, especially the highly motivated and vocal Paul supporters seem to consider coalition building a betrayal unless its their candidate they're rallying people to. That said, I think they brought a lot of moderates and independents out of the wood work on a pro-Constitution, anti-taxes, anti-nanny-state, platform. In that sense I think the Paul run may have a net benefit for the GOP. They also energized a boatload of younger voters whose views will probably temper over time and also have a net benefit for the GOP.
Overall I think it was a good thing he was in the primary race, but I'm not sure how well the leadership/activists all-or-nothing philosophy mesh with party building. And it's a bit mind boggling that many are still pushing the idea that there is some energized 'silent majority' among the electorate that will swoop in and save the day for their candidate that was either silenced during the primaries and/or waiting for after the last primaries at the convention or in the general to prove them right. It all seems very conspiratorial to me.
--
Glock21 Op/Ed
Where is Arvid and his/her avatar when we need it? :)
Heh. :)
-----
"Another Anon with a worthless opinion" - Run4cvrlib on 2/2/08
"I guess I have little tolerance for people who just attack people just to do it and give no justification." - Run4cvrlib on 2/2/08
Obama would energize the conservative base just as much as Clinton, but would lose large chunks of Kerry's coalition (working-class whites, Jewish Democrats and a good portion of Latinos, for starters) and be less able to compete for independents. Obama's one big advantage is money.
Actually, Obama's biggest advantage will be the issues. While McCain is busy supporting the fiasco in Iraq, Obama will be laying out a timeline for bringing the troops home. While McCain is busy promoting more tax cuts for the wealthy, Obama will be making the case for fiscal responsibility. While McCain is advocating the status quo on health care, Obama will be presenting new proposals that bring us closer to covering all Americans.
The reality is that we haven't seen Obama's strengths yet because he hasn't been debating anyone who fundamentally disagrees with his positions. The Dems have been parsing words and slicing issues to try to find distinctions in an attempt to slow Obama down. It has hurt his momentum, for sure.
But once Hillary is out of the way Obama will be able to draw very clear and very attractive lines between himself and McCain. After sitting through eight years of Bush few Americans outside of the partisans are going to want to pull the level for four more years of Bush policies.
No, Obama hasn't really been scratched by the character slams that have taken place in the last couple of months. They are so early, and so irrelevant, that most Americans will have forgotten about them, or find them really "old news" by November, especially if the war continues to go poorly and the economy stays in the tanker.
There probably hasn't been a better chance for the Democrats to win the White House since LBJ's election in 1964. That's why Hillary is fighting so hard. She knows that whoever wins the nomination is heavily favored to win the White House, so this is the fight right here, right now.
I tend to agree with IP and D. Boon that McCain has little chance vs. St. Barry, and it really scares me because of the stupid stuff the Justice Stevens says and the pledge of both Dems to appoint justices just like him.
(Jonah Goldberg today at NRO)
I think it's great they're taking an interest. As far as being helpful to the IL GOP or the national GOP I have my doubts since many, especially the highly motivated and vocal Paul supporters seem to consider coalition building a betrayal unless its their candidate they're rallying people to. That said, I think they brought a lot of moderates and independents out of the wood work on a pro-Constitution, anti-taxes, anti-nanny-state, platform. In that sense I think the Paul run may have a net benefit for the GOP. They also energized a boatload of younger voters whose views will probably temper over time and also have a net benefit for the GOP.
Thanks for your kind words, Mr. Glock. "Ron Paul Republicans" are a very diverse group of people working for what we believe is a great cause. For us to work together at all requires us to be coalition builders rallying around core unifying principles. None of us agree with one another 100% on everything. We dont always agree 100% with everything about Dr. Paul but we are pleased to have a real candidate who is sincere, principled and committed as Ron Paul has proven himself to be over a period of nearly 30 years.
We are willing coalition builders and we are working with Libertarians (which is very natural), Constitutionalists (also natural for most of us), Republicans (lots of us are lifelong Republicans), Greens (grass roots participatory government is a great idea), Independents. We can even find some things we can agree on with Democrats and the extreme left (such as our opposition to the War in Iraq). Actually, coalition building is partly what the R[ƎVO˩]UTION (with emphasis on the love, and respect part) is about. We are not rock-throwing dissents. We are all about Personal Liberty, Peace, and Prosperity. We dont think those are just meaningless and empty words.
Overall I think it was a good thing he was in the primary race, but I'm not sure how well the leadership/activists all-or-nothing philosophy mesh with party building. And it's a bit mind boggling that many are still pushing the idea that there is some energized 'silent majority' among the electorate that will swoop in and save the day for their candidate that was either silenced during the primaries and/or waiting for after the last primaries at the convention or in the general to prove them right. It all seems very conspiratorial to me.
Being in the primary anchored us into the Republican party, some of us seem to fit better intellectually as Libertarians but since Ron Paul is both Libertarian and Republican we think we can be too. In many places we are welcomed as Republicans. Our people represent a diverse group that includes some people who have been labelled as conspiracy theorists, etc. Even Jay Leno rightly observed that the "fix" has been in on Ron Paul, denying him the media attention that is required for widespread dissemination of ideas. There was even at one point the spreading across the entire MainStreamMedia (MSM) of the Lie that Ron Paul had dropped out of the race. Such is the sort of thing that this campaign has had to deal with. It is not a very nice thing to have to deal with but we believe that we coped with it and we have not given up but are rather energized by the media suppression.
We still believe that the message of freedom, peace, and prosperity, and a pro-Constitution, anti-taxes, anti-nanny-state, (and anti-War in Iraq) platform really and truly does resonate with the American people and is the platform that the majority of Americans would rally around if they were given the opportunity.
And, by the way, Ron Paul has a new book that is out NOW.
"There was even at one point the spreading across the entire MainStreamMedia (MSM) of the Lie that Ron Paul had dropped out of the race."
If the Paul campaign hadn't sent out a letter conceding they couldn't win and were merely keeping their hat in the ring to "spread the message" and not as a viable candidate... the media wouldn't have reported that. The fact that his supporters think he should still be running comes off as deluded to many people since another candidate has already won a majority with pledged candidates and is the presumptive nominee. The Paul campaign built a coalition... but it wasn't for the party... and still isn't for the party. When people in the party see that Paul still hasn't endorsed the presumptive nominee it makes it clear they have little interest in joining with the GOP coalition... but rather keep building their own sect of it in opposition to the rest.
It's these kind of moves and his active supporters/leadership supporting these kind of moves that makes me a serious skeptic that they have much interest in working within the GOP as opposed to fighting it. It really doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.
--
Glock21 Op/Ed
"The Paul campaign built a coalition... but it wasn't for the party... and still isn't for the party."
Well, to be fair, the same thing can be said about John McCain and every other modern Presidential candidate of either party.
Maybe it's because I'm an independent but that just doesn't seem accurate to me. Perhaps I'm not understanding what you're trying to say here, or at least what you're getting at. It seems that candidates from both parties traditionally work with their primary opponents to ensure that the winner is supported for the best of the party as a whole and to keep the coalition together. It usually comes off as a snub if they do not, and they come off even worse if they actively continue to oppose them, like with Buchanan, Lieberman, Paul and others.
--
Glock21 Op/Ed
"Maybe it's because I'm an independent but that just doesn't seem accurate to me. Perhaps I'm not understanding what you're trying to say here, or at least what you're getting at."
I'm saying that modern candidates build coalitions that remake parties to their personalities and issues, rather than adjusting their issues and personalities to the pre-existing parties.
For example - John McCain will make campaign finance "reform" a centerpiece of his campaign and coalition, but it is not a centerpiece issue of the GOP. He will attempt to move the GOP towards his position, rather than moving his position towards the Party.
Ah, okay. In that sense, I agree. The big difference is that if a candidate wins the party's nomination it gives them a bit of a mandate to do so. Someone who lost by vast margins who actively works against the party's choice can easily come off as both out of touch and against the party.
And I think I see what you're getting at with the individual issues like CFR, but I don't think any election is necessarily an endorsement of every policy, but the general package, with the good and compromising on the bad.
--
Glock21 Op/Ed
"The big difference is that if a candidate wins the party's nomination it gives them a bit of a mandate to do so."
I disagree. McCain on issues like CFR, cap-and-trade, etc. are perfect examples of why.
McCain did not win the majority of votes from the people. McCain may be a presumptive nominee but the convention is in September.
Glock21:
I am a long time conservative Republican, and was for Ron Paul in the Primary, and will be for Ron Paul in the General Election. I could never imagine voting for McCain. I made the mistake of voting for Bush the first time, and it was based on that fact that he was promising a "Humble Foreign Policy", and a "Conservative Platform" which the Republican party had maintained for quite a while.
I did not vote for Bush the second time around because I knew he was not being truthful, and wanted to maintain presence in the middle east, and around the world. Our foreign policy has strongly affected our economy, and I would call anyone a fool who may disagree with me. The writing is on the wall, and Ron Paul has been warning our government about the collapsing economy, and dollar for years, he has also warned that continued intervention would lead to great problems in the United States, as well as other nations. The media has not wanted to cover him, because he speaks the truth, and is not in it to make money off the backs of our American soldiers, and the people of the United States as the Big Corporations, and media sources have been doing over the past 5 plus years with the continuance of war. We need a sound monetary policy, limited government, and no more greedy politicians/lobbyists in the White House, and that is why my vote and support is for Ron Paul.
I went to a fascinating lunch yesterday at which Jim Edgar talked about the presidential race. As a Republican he is of the opinion that the GOP would much rather face Sen. Clinton, primarily for the following reason: Although candidates and interested voters always want the races to be about issues, the races end up being about character. Sen. Clinton's negative polling is a direct report on the voting public's assessment of her character. On the other hand, both supporters and undecideds seem to like Sens. McCain and Obama as individuals, at least to a much greater extent than Ms. Clinton. In the end, then, a voter could support a candidate with whom he/she disagrees on a number of issues, but most voters cannot vote for a candidate they dislike and distrust.
He made a number of other interesting points, but he led off with the following grain-of-salt warning: He had given a similar presentation about 7-8 months ago and predicted that 1) Sen. Clinton would have the nomination sewed up after Super Tuesday, and 2) the GOP very well might not have a candidate prior to the convention, but if they did it would definitely not be John McCain. In other words, things can change profoundly in just a few months.
Perhaps one's top priority isn't loyalty to the party, but loyalty to the principles, and if one's party has chosen a candidate that doesn't promote the principles, (at least in one's opinion,) can one really support such a candidate with integrity?
If he becomes the GOP nominee, a certainty Dr. Paul brings to the GOP is, 1) without exception, 22 years of rock solid conservative voting. 2)Leadership as a time tested non-waivering proponent of small government, and the Constitution. 3) Depth and clarity of vision, as this crisis in the dollar, banking, and stock market shakes pillars. He has authored six books on economics, is the Ranking Member - Subcommittee on Domestic & International Monetary Policy, Trade, and Technology, serves on the Joint Economic Committee, and Committee on Foreign Affairs. Among the candidates, Dr. Ron Paul stands alone in this regard.
Just out of curiosity. A lot of the Ron Paul folks here seem to think that Paul can win the convention, even though even Paul himself has dismissed this as unrealistic. What do you guys know that we don't know?
Keep in mind that the majority of the pledged delegates heading to the convention are the delegates who were McCain supporters slated to be delegates for him if he won their State/CD/etc... that's part of how the politicians keep pledged delegates "faithful." It seems painfully unrealistic that they or any of Huckabee or Romney's delegates who were supporting candidates with greatly diverging foreign and domestic policies would form some sort of coalition with the small percentage of Paul delegates in any significant numbers.
Your support of his policies aside, how can he possibly win at the convention?
--
Glock21 Op/Ed
HG: "I can't remember where I read it, but some blogger made the analogy that an Obama nomination would result in a very active, energetic liberal base, and a more depressed conservative base; whereas a Clinton nomination would do the opposite."
IP: "While this may have been true in January, there's no way this is the case now, not after all the things Obama has said and done since February 5. Obama would energize the conservative base just as much as Clinton, but would lose large chunks of Kerry's coalition (working-class whites, Jewish Democrats and a good portion of Latinos, for starters) and be less able to compete for independents."
Ya gotta figure once the Dems rally around a candidate that lead over McCain will skyrocket. Especially considering the new "McBush" economic plan.
new
"The Paul campaign built a coalition... but it wasn't for the party... and still isn't for the party."
Well, to be fair, the same thing can be said about John McCain and every other modern Presidential candidate of either party.
McCain has done a better job of building a coalition than anyone that I can remember. First of all he manuvered Huckabee into stopping Romney's preemptive strike in Iowa. Then he convinced Rudy to do the Rope a Dope in Florida. Then he had Florida's Senator and Governor break their sworn pledge of neutrality and endorse him. Then he had Arnold and Rudy running to California where he had Nancy Reagan in tow. Then he flipped flopped my man Romney within a week. Add Lieberman and good comments by all the democrats. In the latest poll he is up within the margin of error against both. Then he gets Romney to pledge 15 million and sends him out to talk about the economy. Add Bush to those that back him and you have everyone except Ron Paul. By the way, they asked Ron Paul during the campaign whether he would run a 3rd party campaign and he reminded everyone that that he had been an R for over 21 years. Except for the war, Ron Paul is a backer. I think it is time for him AND HIS BACKERS to get on board. (God, I cannot believe I said that)
If people are willing to get behind Ron Paul, why not me? I'm better than any of the existing candidates and probably have a better shot than Paul. We would have to wait five years to swear me in, but it'd be worth it.
"By the way, they asked Ron Paul during the campaign whether he would run a 3rd party campaign and he reminded everyone that that he had been an R for over 21 years."
Not possible... he was still running as a Libertarian in 1988 (nearly got a half a percent in the popular vote)... that was less than 20 years ago given it was later in the year. He quit the Republican party because he found Reagan so repugnant, within a month of him taking office iirc, that he couldn't bring himself to stay in the Republican Party. Now he's running and using Reagan's support prior to his 1980 victory as proof he's a "true republican" which, afaik, hasn't been true since roughly the time I was born in the late 70's. Paul has always been closer to the conspiratorial wing of the LP than anything else in my lifetime... and his behavior in this eleciton shows he hasn't changed since his flirtations with the LP.
--
Glock21 Op/Ed
xian- get 10 terms in congress behind you, and then by all means, run!
"Ya gotta figure once the Dems rally around a candidate that lead over McCain will skyrocket."
Actually, I don't know if that's a foregone conclusion this year. We've never seen a primary campaign last thing long, with this level of emotional attachment and aversion to intraparty candidates.
Perhaps the Democrats will end up rallying around their eventual nominee. Or perhaps they won't - perhaps the supporters of the losers will feel their candidate was treated unfairly, for example.
At this point we just don't know, as we've never seen anything like this before.
IP I think you know more history than that. Lots of times the primary battles are intense, and even the nominee isnt known until the convention on both sides.
"IP I think you know more history than that. Lots of times the primary battles are intense, and even the nominee isnt known until the convention on both sides."
Not since at least World War II.
Nothing like this has ever happened in the age of television, that's for sure.
1976.
Yeah, I am not sure where this analysis about the Dems is coming from (feel free to explain further!). While this has been a prolonged primary battle, those are hardly rare, and the antipathy of the liberals and moderates toward the Bush Administration is pretty motivating. As the focus shifts away from Clinton v. Obama and toward McCain v. Obama the constant refrain of "3rd Bush Term" or "McBush" will be difficult for the McCain campaign to rebut. Especially considering that so many of his policies directly mirror Bush policies, at least when it comes to the top three issues: economy, war, health care.
It is going to be tough for McCain to draw distinctions between himself and Bush, especially while trying to build a hold the necessary coalitions on the right.
Democrats are motivated. And they know this is a prime year to retake the WH. That is why the battle over the nominee has been so long and difficult. Whoever wins the primary will be heavily favored to retake the White House, regardless of the character smears that so many conservatives have taken to regurgitating like a drunk 19 year old in front of Kams during unofficial.
"1976."
1976 was nothing like this, in terms of intensity or nastiness or duration.
McCain is a fellow with credibility.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06hR2EGpl4o