Dick Morris: A McCain-Huckabee Ticket? (BARF!)
Below is the e-mail that I fired off to Dick Morris after reading his January 20 column. As I say to him, I'd about as soon vote for a Democrat as for McCain-- or for Huckabee either, for that matter. Now that Fred Thompson is all but finished, I personally prefer Mitt Romney over McCain, Huckabee, or Giuliani. For some reason, Morris doesn't think that Romney can win in November. Perhaps, as a Jew, Morris thinks that Romney's Mormonism is an insurmountable handicap-- I don't know.
Tom DeLay, the former House majority leader, said today that he could support any of the aforementioned candidates except McCain. DeLay said that if McCain were the nominee, he would leave that part of the ballot blank. He went on to recite a litany of issues on which McCain had fought mainstream Republicans, some of which I had forgotten about. We live in strange times, my friends!
McCain-Huckabee? I think I just stepped into the Twilight Zone! Aren't you the same Dick Morris who told us in 2006 that the '08 race would be Hillary vs. Condi Rice?
Aren't you aware of the antipathy among the GOP rank-and-file toward McCain? If he IS nominated, the GOP will cease to be the home of conservatives, myself included. Conservatives will either stay home or vote third party/independent.
Surely you know that McCain has NEVER won the GOP vote in ANY presidential primary, which means that he'll have a problem in Florida's closed primary. And Romney even beat Huckabee among evangelicals in Michigan. Hell, the GOP might as well nominate a Democrat as to nominate McCain!
It's "bloc"-- not "block"-- vote. And there's no such word as "coronate."
posted by Steve Rankin | 9:15 PM
3 Comments:
Actually he came within a percentage point of doing it South Carolina
I will support McCain. If people wish to go third party or vote Dem while we have troops in the field and we are under attack fine.
I for don't think we have that option
Do you mean that you support McCain now-- or that you'll just vote for him if he wins the nomination?
If McCain is the nominee, few, if any, conservatives will actually vote for the Democratic nominee. Some conservatives won't vote in the presidential race; some will vote third party/independent; and some will hold their noses and vote for Crazy John. You certainly won't see conservatives out "beating the bushes" for him (no pun intended).
Personally, I've never voted for a Democrat for any federal office, and I won't be starting this year. But, to me, voting for McCain would be almost like voting for a Democrat. (Who would Crazy John pick for his running mate? Russ Feingold? Ted Kennedy? Chris Matthews?)
The last time I voted for the "lesser of the evils" in a presidential election was in 1976, when I voted for President Gerald Ford-- or rather I voted AGAINST the Democrat Jimmy Carter. Never again!
Certain of the pundits, etc., assume that, if Crazy John is nominated, conservatives will fall in line and vote for him in order to keep Hillary (the likely Dem nominee) out of the White House.
The left-wing pundits who love McCain won't in fact vote for him. But they'll have tears in their eyes when he gives his graceful concession speech next November (if, God forbid, he's the GOP nominee).
Crazy John is all for letting Democrats and independents invade the Republican nominating process-- since he knows that he can't win the votes of most Republicans. He's going to have big problems in the closed primary states.
Another reason the liberals love the idea of a McCain nomination is that they know it would destroy the party that Ronald Reagan built. I'll guarantee you this: if Crazy John is nominated, you won't hear him this fall saying that he's a "conservative" or a former "foot soldier in the Reagan Revolution."
I believe that the GOP race will come down to McCain vs. Romney, and I'll back Romney as the far better choice of those two.
I wouldn't vote for Crazy John McCain for dog-catcher, and there will be ice skating in hell before I would vote for him for president.
KenG wrote:
"Why is it that 'we have troops in the field' should chnage anyway we think about anything? We should first answer the question,'Why are they there?' And if illegally so, we should 'remove' those who sent them. If that means postponing an election or two, so be it. Firing squads come first."
Post a Comment
<< Home