Posted by Charity on January 30th, 2008

McCain? McCain? How did this happen?

Last summer, McCain was out of money and no one thought his campaign would last.

Now, he is a front-runner.

With rumors that Giuliani is dropping out, it looks like the race is between McCain and Romney.

How on earth did this happen? That’s all I want to know.

16 Responses to “McCain Wins Florida”

  1. Republicans did this to themselves I think. Bush fractured the party, and then you guys ended up getting this hodge-podge of candidates…none of whom were perfect. Perfection is a rarity in politics anyway I think.

    Smokey the Bear might say something like, “It’s better to fight a wildfire when it’s 3 acres than when it’s 3000 acres”. Your boy Fred (did he ever endorse anyone BTW?) and Giuliani seriously miscalculated by not coming on strong in the early states during this front-loaded cycle. That let the McCain wildfire smolder and take root in NH and SC, and now it’s off to the races. It isn’t over yet, but it’s getting there. Two balding, old, white guys down…one more to go… :)

  2. How did it happen? That’s easy, out of all of them he seems the least insane. Duh. And dare I say ‘moderate’ (although I don’t buy that crap, he’s still in the top 5 conservative senators.

    Mister Guy…. between not pandering to the Godidiots and not being able to control his 9-11 tourettes, Giuliani never had a chance.

    Thompson seemed to forget he was running sometimes. Plus his record (tolerant of abortion, K-street lobbyist, ) more than likely turned off a few of those who actually were paying attention. Plus, there’s really nothing charismatic about the guy, he’s about as compelling as burnt toast. Good thing though, we’ve already had one B-movie actor trash the country, we didn’t need another one.

  3. It happened because McCain was steadfast in a) not losing in Iraq and b) advocating for the correct strategy before it was fashionable and then not wavering.

    According to Fred Barnes in his Weekly Standard piece ” How Bush Decided on the Surge “

    the loudest voice for a change in Iraq was Senator John McCain of Arizona. He and his sidekick, Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, traveled repeatedly to Iraq. McCain badgered Bush and Hadley with phone calls urging more troops and a different strategy. Together, McCain, Keane, Petraeus, the network of Army officers, and Kagan provided a supportive backdrop for adopting a new strategy.

    Then there is the fact that the Republican Party is not what most people think it is. I have a piece today where I analyze the makeup of the Republican Party that voted in the primary yesterday with the (reasoned, I think) assumption that it is reflective of the Republican Party nation wide.

  4. Ok, well considering ’staying in Iraq till we win’ is most certainly not the majority position anymore, I don’t see that working out too well for McCain. The Republican brand is less popular than dogshit in most areas of the country that have huge amounts of people.

  5. ’staying in Iraq till we win’ is most certainly not the majority position anymore

    Why do you say that? I think you will have a hard time backing up that statement with facts if you tried.

    The Republican brand is less popular than dogshit in most areas of the country that have huge amounts of people.

    A recent Rasmussen poll contradicts that

    The number of Americans who consider themselves to be Republicans jumped nearly two percentage points in December to 34.2%….At the same time, the number of Democrats fell to 36.3%. That’s down a point compared to a month ago.

  6. I love when McCain goes on and on about how “we are winning in Iraq, and Al-Qaeda in on the run…” He feels it so strongly that I usually hear him say it twice in a row…although that might just be because he’s so old he forgets what he just said. I also love how good, ole Rummy has become McCain’s fall-guy for Iraq. That poor bastard was only doing what he was told to do…I don’t think he’s ever had an original idea of his own.

    The War in Iraq has been unpopular in this country for years now. Remember the election in 2006? Al-Qaeda is stronger now than it was in 2001. We are losing this useless war, and just about everyone knows it.

    I can’t wait for the fall when the GOP will be offering more war without end and the Dems will be offering a way out of the absolute mess that we’re in overseas.

  7. Mister Guy says

    The War in Iraq has been unpopular in this country for years now.

    It may very well be unpopular, but it doesn’t mean people want to lose. An Opinion Dynamics poll conducted almost a year ago concluded

    …most Americans believe the situation in Iraq makes a difference to their security here in the United States

    This was before “the surge” and people were skeptical about how effective it would be. And an interesting thing about this poll is it demonstrated that simply because people didn’t like what was going on in Iraq, didn’t mean they thought we should give up. Some people were frustrated that we weren’t doing more

    In addition, the poll finds that people believe the military should use more force against the insurgents. While 1 of 10 Americans think the military’s response to the continuing violence in Iraq has been too aggressive, a 44 percent plurality thinks it hasn’t been aggressive enough. A third (32 percent) think the military’s response has been “about right.”

    Republicans (56 percent) and independents (46 percent) are more likely than Democrats (35 percent) to think the military should be more aggressive in responding to the insurgents.

    As if to prove that Americans overwhelmingly wanted us out of Iraq, Mister Guy says:

    Remember the election in 2006?

    I think one of the biggest mistakes the Democratic Party made was to assume that they were swept into power because of anti-war sentiment. This despite the fact that people were upset with Republicans for overspending and the fact that the Democrats made a point of campaigning on cleaning up Congress by killing pork (a promise they failed to keep).

    But if it was true that there was such an overwhelming majority who wanted us out of Iraq how come they couldn’t force Bush to pull out of Iraq?

    I mean how many times did they try and fail? Each time getting fewer and fewer of their own caucus to go along?

    Clearly, their majority was hardly overwhelming.

    And you know what? If a Democrat gets elected President, and I don’t care if it is Hillary or Obama, we won’t be pulling out of Iraq anytime soon.

    So much for the overwhelming majority.

  8. LOL…who likes to lose? I newer liked it when my Little League team used to lose, but it still happened though.

    “most Americans believe the situation in Iraq makes a difference to their security here in the United States”

    Yea, a whole year ago, and gee, it’s from FOX “News”…nice try. Then it gets even better…”Even so, a majority continues to oppose the President’s plan to send more troops to Iraq.” And then, “Opinion Dynamics Chairman John Gorman…’This war has lasted a long time and Americans are tired of the apparent lack of progress.’” LOL…you are rapidly rising on my “hilarious GOPers list” Frank.

    The surge failed…it was all about providing enough cover (read that as gimmick) for a political solution, which hasn’t happened. Bush doesn’t care what anyone else thinks about what we should do in Iraq…haven’t you listened to anything that he’s said? “So long as I’m the President”…we’re not withdrawing from Iraq…that’s was what I kept hearing.

    What’s happened since the election of 2006 has been an excellent civics lesson for America (I don’t know if anyone was paying attention to this lesson though). The Dems took back both houses of Congress, but they didn’t have enough votes to stop a GOP filibuster in the Senate or override a Presidencial veto on withdrawing from Iraq. So, if America elects more Dems to Congress and/or a Dem into the White House, America will withdraw from Iraq. Watch and learn my friend…

  9. Mister Guy

    Yea, a whole year ago

    That’s the point: That was the sentiment at the low point.

    and gee, it’s from FOX “News”

    ad hominum: attack the data, not the source.

    The surge failed

    By what measure? Denying reality is never good for making informed decisions

    The Dems took back both houses of Congress, but they didn’t have enough votes to stop a GOP filibuster in the Senate or override a Presidencial veto on withdrawing from Iraq.

    Not to mention they couldn’t even get all Democrats to withdraw

    So, if America elects more Dems to Congress

    No. If America elects more anti-war Dems to Congress.

    But of course. That’s my point. America didn’t elect enough anti-war members of Congress putting the lie to the idea that the 2006 election was a mandate to end the war in Iraq.

    You may or may not have noticed, but not all Democrats are for defeat in Iraq.

    and/or a Dem into the White House

    I predict that neither of the Democratic Candidates will precipitously withdraw from Iraq.

    I also predict that we’ll never know if I was right or not….

  10. “attack the data, not the source.”

    Yea right, cuz FOX “News” is a real news source…who’s living is a fantasy world now?

    “By what measure? Denying reality is never good for making informed decisions”

    I already told you that…read it again. By Bush’s own measure.

    We lost the War in Iraq sooooo long ago…I don’t even remember when it happened. Get your head out of your ass Frank…it stinks up there. I predict that you’re in for a bout of depression soon enuff.

  11. Mister Guy

    “attack the data, not the source.”

    Yea right, cuz FOX “News” is a real news source…who’s living is a fantasy world now?

    Further ad hominum attacks do not enhance your position. Why not just provide counter data to supprt your position?

    “By what measure? Denying reality is never good for making informed decisions”

    I already told you that…read it again. By Bush’s own measure.

    You did no such thing. Please enumerate Bush’s measure which confirms failure

    Get your head out of your ass Frank…it stinks up there.

    Nice.

  12. Oh, Frank…Frank, Frank, Frank…

    “I think one of the biggest mistakes the Democratic Party made was to assume that they were swept into power because of anti-war sentiment. This despite the fact that people were upset with Republicans for overspending and the fact that the Democrats made a point of campaigning on cleaning up Congress by killing pork (a promise they failed to keep).”

    Whatever it takes to help you fall asleep at night, bro. Peopl ewer just so much more angry about those nasty overspendin’ Repubs than all of those dead American soldiers dyin’ for the lie right now. Not every one’s a member of the Club for Growth, you know.

    “ad hominum: attack the data, not the source.”

    Well, when that source has a proven track record of lies and distortions, it is completely relevant. And BTW, that’s not ad hominem – that would be “attack the argument, not the man”. He didn’t say you were FOX news.

    Kinda hard to end anything when you have a congress that filibusters more than they change their underwear, hard to overcome with the slim majority the Dems change (of course, that’s not going to be a problem after ‘08). If you were to say “well, how come this huge majority can’t even get all the Dems to vote to end it”, it’s like me saying “How come all of the Republicans couldn’t end abortion? or How come they couldn’t get their gay-hating coded into law?” The congress doesn’t ever fully reflect the interests of the people. That’s not a lib or a con thing.

    “I predict that neither of the Democratic Candidates will precipitously withdraw from Iraq.

    Right with you on that one.

    Ever think that some of us aren’t concerned about winning or losing? We just want the troops home. Considering how much the US has srewed things up I’m certainly not holding onto some chest-beating “pride” nonsense. Are those soldiers really worth it? And we lost the minute we started the thing. And how can one be an “insurgent” in one’s own country? Were the Jews at the Warsaw Uprising “insurgents”?

    And the surge has failed, there’s still no political stability in Iraq. That is the most important thing to peace, not a few less soldier deaths. Because they’re still dead while you get to sit in comfort and cheerlead the war.

    “Opinion Dynamics Poll’? Puh-leaaze. A year ago a lot of people still were stupid enough to think that Saddam had something to do w/9-11. ANd like Mister Guy said, it’s FOX “news” fer Chrissake.

    It’s gotta be tough knowing your movemnt’s almost outa gas. Keep chasing that rainbow.

  13. Ah, jeez, Charity. I didn’t mean to bold all that. You should get the Tiny MCE comments.. it gives commenters buttons for Bold ad Italic and links.. you can get it here…http://mk.netgenes.org/my-plugins/mcecomments/

  14. Read this again Frank:

    “The surge failed…it was all about providing enough cover (read that as gimmick) for a political solution, which *hasn’t happened*. Bush doesn’t care what anyone else thinks about what we should do in Iraq…haven’t you listened to anything that he’s said? ‘So long as I’m the President’…we’re not withdrawing from Iraq…that’s was what I kept hearing.”

    I can help with the big words if need be. :)

    Not everything is so black and white like winning and losing. Maybe, just maybe, in order for others around the world to get what they need…our selfish interests might need to take a back seat. This isn’t the Roman Empire. The only people that can “win” in Iraq are the Iraqis…it’s their country now.

  15. I know, I know, JD. I hope to have some time to work on the blogs this weekend.

    It would also help if you didn’t surf blogs drunk at 1 AM ;)

    I hope I ended the bold tag in the right spot.

  16. Yeah, you nailed it. Unfortunately I wasn’t drunk. I have one of those cordless keyboards that’s a bit temperamental at time.