Since so many of you think so, post why here. I'd like to see individuals articulating specific reasons why they do not support John McCain or find him to be a "Liberal". Because the completely lost talking heads on radio say so doesn't cut it, and the Bush tax cut opposition doesn't either since he actually did it on the principle of fiscal conservatism.
1/31/2008 6:54:27 AM
1/31/2008 8:17:30 AM
Bush tax cutMcCain-FeingoldMcCain-kennedyI basically view him as more of the same W.Despite talking about being tough on border security arizona has the most pour through it, and the idiot uses that as an example of how well he does on enforcing immigration.I tell ya what. You guys run Liberman and we will run McCain.
1/31/2008 8:56:28 AM
John "Bush Junior" McCain
1/31/2008 9:18:09 AM
^ congratulations, you added nothing to your cause.^^ As has been covered many times, he voted against the Bush tax cut because it did come with simultaneous spending cuts. McCain-Feingold is a travesty that should be over-turned by the Supreme Court . . . the sooner the better.Keep going folks.
1/31/2008 9:54:06 AM
^ McCain-Feingold is probably one of the only things keeping this country with some semblance of representative democracy. To repeal it would say that we should allow the open sale of congress and government contracts to the highest bidder. I know Republicans are tolerant of corruption but COME ON[Edited on January 31, 2008 at 9:59 AM. Reason : .]
1/31/2008 9:58:52 AM
I've got a big problem with the fact that an organization can't mention a candidates name 60 days out from an election. WTF is that shit? It's a convoluded piece of legislation with some merits, but that sort of thing is unacceptable.
1/31/2008 10:08:24 AM
Of all the loop holes in that bill, you take issue with THAT?Really?
1/31/2008 10:18:15 AM
The majority of the electorate starts paying attention less than 60 days out. That sort of provision is set up to give the incumbents an edge in the general election, you're damn right I take issue with that.Anyway, back on track, why shouldn't McCain be the nominee?
1/31/2008 10:20:39 AM
limiting free speech is a good thing steve? huhone of two republicans to vote AGAINST a taxcut... yeah, I dont see why republicans should worry. Ill use what Huckabee said last night, look at someone's actions not by what they are saying.Anyone else find it funny McCain said he wouldnt vote for his own bill now.McCain will get the nomination unless a miracle happens.Oh, and forgot to mention he is a senator is one reason to not vote for him.[Edited on January 31, 2008 at 10:27 AM. Reason : .]
1/31/2008 10:22:42 AM
1/31/2008 10:24:49 AM
Anderson Cooper is a terrible moderator.
1/31/2008 10:28:12 AM
1/31/2008 10:39:26 AM
markgoal, I totally agree.The problem with Arizona's solution is that they didn't know that illegal immigrants made up a very very large portion of their workforce. How that plays out economically we'll see.
1/31/2008 10:50:00 AM
McCain was a member of the notorious Keating Five. 21,000 investors lost about $285 million in life savings from the Lincoln Savings & Loan bankruptcy. McCain was one of five senators who put pressure on the prosecutor to ease off of Keating. Keating, BTW had contributed $1.3 million to the five's campaign coffers.But I guess if we don't let politicians get elected because they are corrupt, we wouldn't have any candidates.
1/31/2008 11:44:24 AM
i dont get how the republicans think romney is a better choice than mccain
1/31/2008 11:55:47 AM
^^ McCain did not pressure the "prosecutor" (I think you mean regulators). And in fact, he was later exonerated by the Senate Ethics Committee, only slightly rebuked for "poor judgment".
1/31/2008 12:08:01 PM
Welcome back to 1996, voters]
1/31/2008 12:32:34 PM
Regardless of how you feel about any of the candidates, is anyone else annoyed at McCain's insistence to continue repeating lies in debates, despite being called out by the press, moderator, and Romney? The giddy geriatric smirk doesn't help, either.
1/31/2008 1:00:01 PM
I think his age really could have an effect on his presidency.....I'm sure he's strong and healthy being former military and all, but at 75 and 76, who knows what could happen to his health
1/31/2008 1:08:26 PM
he's a stubborn old mankind of like bob dolea moderate conservative that probably wont beat whoever the dems send his way
1/31/2008 1:10:44 PM
1/31/2008 1:33:50 PM
then other side will respond and tell you to roll back welfare, etcsee this thread: /message_topic.aspx?topic=512650
1/31/2008 1:36:34 PM
1/31/2008 1:39:19 PM
1/31/2008 1:40:13 PM
^steve read up on hard vs soft money, then tell me what it addressed and if it changed anything.Yes are a country in debt have been our whole existance. Cutting taxes stimulates the economy. Ending the war would help some, eliminated or reforming entitlments would help the most. The majority of people who think the current system is fair, is because 92% of people pay 15% or less in taxes... so really they arent paying for it. So thats not saying much.If 9 out of 10 got free cars, but the 10th guy had to buy all 10 cars.. You could still say the majority of people think its a great idea. How about we stop penalizing people for working and saving? Sounds like a great idea. That or a flat tax.
1/31/2008 1:40:16 PM
right now these interest rates cuts are killing my savings accounts
1/31/2008 1:41:20 PM
1/31/2008 1:43:24 PM
Thats the idea, it makes more sense to spend or borrow right now than loan. It keeps money moving through the economy and stimulates growth. Theoretically.It also encourages Americans to increas their debt burden, which is already being taxed by falling house prices.
1/31/2008 1:44:35 PM
1/31/2008 1:48:09 PM
1/31/2008 1:54:28 PM
stimulating to whom? has median income increased? or just an improvement in gdp? has quality of life improved for the average american? or have the top 1% just gotten richer?
1/31/2008 1:57:05 PM
1/31/2008 1:58:40 PM
taxes were raised SIGNIFICANTLY on the rich in the 30s and 40s and it lead to the longest period of economic prosperity this country has seen.[Edited on January 31, 2008 at 2:01 PM. Reason : .]
1/31/2008 1:59:39 PM
stimulating to EVERYONEyou have more money than you normally would because the government takes less of the money you have earnedif you have more money, you'll be more likely to spend it...if you dont want to spend it, then save it and you'll be better off
care to back that up with anything other than caps?
1/31/2008 2:00:09 PM
i was just following your lead
1/31/2008 2:01:23 PM
i can get you numbers tonight if you need them. but i think it's fairly common knowledge that economically, most americans were doing well in the 50s and 60s. there was a massive amount of wealth redistribution that helped most everyone except for the very rich.
1/31/2008 2:03:09 PM
The poor have jobs, usually with little or no benefits that the elites do not provide. If they want less taxes, then they should provide benefits. Your perception that the poor are largely poor because they are lazy/ don't want jobs is spurious and without merit. Take off the ideological handcuffs and be a human being for once.
1/31/2008 2:04:17 PM
He used to be more moderate, but then he became more of a Bush lackey, which isn't the good kind of conservative.He can flip flop with the best of them.And he has some fun ideas on war with Iran.And relative to a lot of his party he is liberal on immigration which I think bothers some of the right wing.
1/31/2008 2:05:31 PM
1/31/2008 2:07:23 PM
1/31/2008 2:08:19 PM
^apparently the same place where the rich earn "unneeded" incomeoh and of course based on the portion of the poor population who DO sit on their asses and collect government handouts]
1/31/2008 2:08:56 PM
There's a huge difference in working two jobs and trying to feed your family and praying to god they don't get sick than in pondering hard whether your beach house should be in East Hampton or Southampton.
1/31/2008 2:10:12 PM
did you ever stop and think that the people pondering on which beach house to buy used to work 2 jobs to feed their family and eventually (GASP) their hard work paid off?let alone, if you are pretty much poor, maybe you shouldnt start a big family until you know you will be able to support them]
1/31/2008 2:11:10 PM
McCain is the best chance the GOP has to winning the election, the candidate with the most experience, and is not a religious zealot.I'd fear the bible police bashign my door down if huckabee wins
1/31/2008 2:12:42 PM
or they inherited a big chunk of it. but oh no we can't get rid of the "death tax." that would mean people would have to work more for themselves.
1/31/2008 2:13:20 PM
I'm sure that happens, but more times than not, those people were given EXTRAORDINARY opportunities as children as a result of the families they came from.My beach house will be in Southampton, but that doesn't stop me from realizing that there are people out there who were born into a cycle of poverty and have probably worked TEN times harder than me and will never see the lifestyle that I will live.
1/31/2008 2:13:26 PM
I agree that my "unneeded" comment was subjective in nature, but vast material wealth used primarily for luxury expenditures cannot be construed as "needed" by any definition, as most people in the country/world live with luxuries on a daily basis.
1/31/2008 2:13:31 PM
you guys arent supposed to hate the rich and want to take their money because you're jealous of their situation and because not everybody is as rich as themyou're supposed to use them as motivation for you to work harder and get rich like themTHAT is the american dreamnot to redistribute the money that they earned, or their parents earned, or their grandparents earned simply because other people dont have as much]
1/31/2008 2:17:48 PM