Greg wrote:Here's hoping that Thompson wins South Carolina and Giuliani wins Florida.
Idk. One side of my family in SC is for Huckabee, the otherside is for McCain, and my uncle in Florida is an independant liberal so I don't know what's going to happen.
"It's the least most of us can do, but less of us will do more."
Magilla, I think what Oscar Guy means is that other religious groups (and even non religious groups) aren't so cool with Mormons. It may be unfair but that's just how it is. Mormons make a lot of Americans uneasy. And trust me, a lot of Christians don't consider Mormons "Christians" in the same way.
And I don't think it's unfair to be skeptical about a religion that believed black people were an inferior race and wouldn't let them become Mormon until 1978 -- a decision that had less to do with "divine revelation" and more to do with political convenience.
OscarGuy wrote:Romney's Mormon faith does not get along well with most other U.S. Religions.
Mormons are Christians. They get along fine with other religions. They are very conservative in their habits - no drinking, no smoking, minimal makeup. I suppose some people could be concerned that Romney would somehow seek to impose their strict moral codes on the rest of us, but that's nonsense. Huckabee, on the other hand, does have an agenda and that's far more scary.
The only candidate we don't want on the ballot is Mike Huckabee for this reason alone: he appeals to the religious nutsos of the country, which means he can pull them to the polls. Giuliani can't convince them that he's with them on gay marriage or abortion because of his record and Romney's Mormon faith does not get along well with most other U.S. Religions.
I think Huckabee could actually bypass the recession issue and with religious support still win, but it would still be an uphill battle.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
If the country is still in recession at election time, do you guys think it will really matter who the Republican nominee will be?
McCain seems to be the most electable, but his candidacy seems to me to be based heavily around his national security/foreign affairs experience.
If the economy is the priority in voters' mind, don't you think it will drag his numbers down? After all he doesn't seems to be an expert on that field, which might explain his big loss at Michigan.
I was also delighted. Because he's so odious, I wanted him first to be humiliated in Iowa and New Hampshire. And now I hope he wins everything in sight. His almost pathological flip-flopping makes John Kerry look as steadfast as the Rock of Gibraltar.
"Y'know, that's one of the things I like about Mitt Romney. He's been consistent since he changed his mind." -- Christine O'Donnell
I'm delighted with Mitt Romney winning Michigan too and I really want him to get the nomination. I think he's the best bet to guarantee a Presidential victory for the Democrats in 2008. So go Mitt!
I can't tell you how delighted I am by the Mitt-ster's win in Michigan last night. The press has been trying to hustle McCain to the GOP nomination for two weeks now; a win for him here would have given him a serious push. But he's run into his old problem: Republicans just don't much like him. They don't truly like anyone this year (Romney's win was in the someone-has-to-get-the-most-votes category), but the DC pundit hope that their buddy could push past before anyone caught him has been exposed as wishful.
More to the point, the GOP race is now what it seemed last summer (when None of the Above led the polling): utterly wide-open and unpredictable. The journalistic wet dream -- a brokered convention -- is for once not complete fantasy.
And all of this plays into Democratic hands. Allan Lichtman's Keys to the Presidency has documented that the two most fatal problems the incumbent party can face are a serious intra-party nomination fight, and a recession during the campaign year. Not since Jimmy Carter in 1980 has a party faced both at once. The Democrats aren't just picking a nominee right now; they're picking our 44th president.
No wonder McCain won the New Hampshire Republican primary. He told a New Hampshire crowd just before the primary that he thinks it's a good idea for the U.S. to stay in Iraq for the next 100 years. Now that's firing up the Republican base.
I swear to God, can't you just hear Ron Paul reading Peter Finch's dialogue from 'Network'?
COME ON, GUUUUUYS! GET OUT OF YOUR, UH...GET OUT OF YOUR CHAIRS. AND, UH, OPEN YOUR WINDOWS...AND YELL OUT THE WINDOWS, YOU CAN DOOOOO THIIIIIISSSS!...
I could only watch portions of the Repukes; according to my roommate, Romney performed poorly and made a couple of gaffs that could come back to haunt him.
The Dems were interesting for seeing Edwards sidle up to Obama and essentially become his attack dog; Obama looked a bit tired, but not tired enough to stop rattling off his substance-less platitudes; Richardson seemed like the odd man out; and now I totally understand why the right hates Hillary--I don't care for her because she's a hypocrite and as ruthless and uncaring as they come--but her shrill response to Edwards and Obama--it was almost like a Repuke satire of Hillary.
Edited By Penelope on 1199594176
"...it is the weak who are cruel, and...gentleness is only to be expected from the strong." - Leo Reston
"Cruelty might be very human, and it might be cultural, but it's not acceptable." - Jodie Foster
We watched the NH Debates tonight, with an eye to understand the American psyche, better.
These people are incredibly out of touch.( The US is winning the war?) I have just finished a scathing article on Guilani, and was surprised to see that he hasn't been driven out of town. Ron Paul, new to me, made some sense( he got the only near-applause of the evening), but the man *whines*. Romney is good-looking and earnest, but a loser, Thompson seems too far right, for believability, and Huckabee, who only looks good, is a complete idiot.
Those who are not Americans and wish to understand the race better are advised to see all debates. It is fascinating that these men are so -- out of it.
McCain, not so much a hero as a hypocritical hack.
THE NATION
Return of the Swift Boaters
by CHRISTOPHER HAYES
[posted online on January 2, 2008]
More than three years after John Kerry's bitter defeat, at the dawn of what looks like a far more promising campaign cycle for the Democrats, the party is still haunted by the specter of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. Once upon a time, "Swift boat" denoted an obscure military vessel, but thanks to the activities of this group it has come to represent movement conservatism's penchant for ruthlessly (and effectively) smearing any and all political opponents, from a sitting senator and war hero to an 11-year-old boy with a cranial fracture.
Research by The Nation into Federal Election Commission records of the group's top twenty donors reveals that they've been remarkably active in this cycle, contributing and bundling nearly $200,000 to presidential candidates. This does not bode well. During the last presidential campaign, the wealthy backers of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth--now rebranded as Swift Vets and POWs for Truth--didn't do their real dirty work until the general election, where as a tax-exempt 527 group they operated outside the restraints of direct campaign contributions. We may wish we were done with the Swift Boaters, but they aren't done with us.
In 2004 the top twenty donors all gave (with one exception) at least $50,000 to the group. The top three--Houston home builder Bob Perry, Texas oilman T. Boone Pickens and billionaire drugstore impresario and investor Harold Simmons--gave a combined $9.5 million ($4.45 million, $3 million and $2 million, respectively). Calculating the influence of these and the slightly less wealthy Swift Boat donors during this cycle is a touch more complicated than simply adding up their contributions. Each one exerts far more influence as a bundler, given the federal restrictions on individual giving, which limit donors to a maximum of $4,600 per cycle. So The Nation looked not only at the contributions of the donors themselves but also at those of their family members and employees. It's an imperfect method, since some employees are clearly contributing of their own volition (such as one employee of a Simmons company who gave money to Hillary Clinton), but it gives a rough estimate of who's backing whom and to what extent.
The most notable recipient of Swift Boat largesse is John McCain, erstwhile front-runner and Stand Up Guy. When the Swift Boat ads were first unleashed, McCain was alone among his Republican colleagues to condemn them. A fellow Vietnam veteran, a good friend of Kerry's and a former target of smears about his own service, McCain called the ads "dishonest and dishonorable," a "cheap stunt," and he urged Bush to condemn them. But in pursuit of the GOP nomination, McCain ditched the mantle of maverick for that of hack, and his once-floundering, possibly rejuvenated campaign has been aided along the way by $61,650 from Swift Boat donors and their associates. "There is such a thing as dirty money," said Senator Kerry in a statement, after The Nation informed him of McCain's FEC records. "I'm surprised that the John McCain I knew who was smeared in 2000 and thought so-called Swift Boating was wrong in 2004 would feel comfortable taking their money after seeing the way it was used to hurt the veterans I know he loves." (McCain's office did not return calls for comment.)
McCain's Swift Boat bounty is exceeded only by that of Mitt Romney, who has raked in $70,550. Romney's success with Swift Boat donors is significant because he has surpassed even McCain in his demonstrated willingness to do or say anything in pursuit of the presidency and because he has emerged as the GOP establishment's favored candidate. Last year, when McCain held that position, the Arizona senator received significant backing from Swift Boat donors. But many have subsequently switched their allegiance. Pickens, who donated to McCain in June 2006, is now an enthusiastic Giuliani donor and fundraiser (Giuliani ranks third in Swift Boat funding, with $47,950). Perry, who also recorded several donations to McCain's PAC in 2005 and 2006, is now a major donor and fundraiser for Romney. If the list of top Swift Boat donors is expanded to fifty, Romney's fundraising edge is even more pronounced. (Neither Romney nor Giuliani's campaign returned calls for comment.)
Also noticeable among the recipients of Swift Boat largesse is one who received only a single donation: Mike Huckabee. Despite meager fundraising and little national name recognition, the former Arkansas governor has experienced a bubble-like expansion of support and media attention, taking the lead in Iowa and approaching a steady lead in national polls. But the lack of Swift Boat contributions lends credence to the claim that Huckabee is viewed warily by the money men who call the shots in the modern GOP. Despite proposing a radically regressive tax change and taking Grover Norquist's antitax pledge, he's been attacked savagely by the Club for Growth and eviscerated by columnist George Will for "comprehensive apostasy against core Republican beliefs," among them "free trade, low taxes, the essential legitimacy of America's corporate entities and the market system allocating wealth and opportunity."
This all supports the notion that the people behind the Swift Boat operation are chiefly concerned with the continued upward redistribution of wealth that is, more or less, the contemporary GOP's raison d'être. In 2006 Perry ponied up $5 million to start the Economic Freedom Fund, a 527 group devoted to attacking Democratic incumbents, and landed a large donation from prominent Swift Boat donor Carl Lindner. All of which is to say that the Swift Boaters aren't some kind of side show, a coterie of vicious mudslingers operating at the edges of respectability. They are the show. They are modern conservatism's core funders and beneficiaries. With conservatives staring straight into the abyss, their activities in this election cycle could very well make the Swift Boat smears look tame by comparison.
