May 16, 2008
Photo Of The Day
Isn’t this a great photo? I think I’ll call it “The Ticket.”
Consider this your Friday night open thread.
http://race42008.com/2008/05/16/photo-of-the-day-2/trackback/
Isn’t this a great photo? I think I’ll call it “The Ticket.”
Consider this your Friday night open thread.
May 16th, 2008 at 9:43 pm
ugh
May 16th, 2008 at 9:52 pm
May 16th, 2008 at 9:53 pm
Lieberman said he won’t accept the Vice Presidency this year.
May 16th, 2008 at 9:54 pm
They look lovely.
May 16th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
I call it defeat..
May 16th, 2008 at 10:21 pm
Lieberman could be a strong candidate for VP and would be an excellent point man on Iran. I believe that this election will be decided on regime change in Iran. Lieberman could also be a good governing pick because he would be a knowledgeable asset if we ever had to draft a new Iranian constitution or plan for the rebuilding of a democratic Iran.
This would also be a Unity ticket that would attract many Democrats.
May 16th, 2008 at 10:30 pm
Honestly, I would love that ticket. I think it would be great for America and very instructive for many democrats to see how serious real men, adults take defending this country. To see the man their party spit out. To see him crossover and to see us accept him.
May 16th, 2008 at 10:36 pm
I accept this.
I’ll think of it as a placeholder for a real small government team.
This will be the “make the American people stop whining” administration.
May 16th, 2008 at 10:37 pm
This pic is from the guy who just wrote an article saying McCain needed to moderate his stance on the war. Now you are all excited about him picking someone who is liberal on everything BUT the war.
May 16th, 2008 at 10:46 pm
Sigh.
McCain’s stance on the war is now acceptable to the American people because McCain says he can win the war and be out in four years.
Lieberman supports winning the war, and I’m sure he’d prefer to do it sooner rather than later, and would thus support McCain’s goal of winning it during his first term.
So Lieberman’s war position would not be a liability and Lieberman would represent a symbolic gesture to centrist indies and Dems who don’t want to vote for Barack Obama.
Lieberman’s domestic record is moderate.
May 16th, 2008 at 10:50 pm
We need someone like Lieberman, who has no political stake in the vice-presidency (no need to worry about re-election or appeasing either party, or any constituents) to give the American people a wake-up call about Iraq.
A defeat there would be a call to arms for jihadists around the world.
We cannot afford to lose.
May 16th, 2008 at 10:55 pm
#11 good one
May 16th, 2008 at 11:04 pm
Huckabee would be better.
May 16th, 2008 at 11:08 pm
WiseGuy, anyone would be better! John McCain’s running mate will be a pro-life, conservative Republican. That’s my prediction, and speaking of predictions, I predicted Hillary would win by 40 points in a post. She won by 41. Pardon my gloating:)
May 16th, 2008 at 11:08 pm
Given the likely Democrat gains in Congress we won’t be at war next year. No matter who is elected President, a 245 seat Democratic House won’t fund the war. Neither will a 56 seat Democratic Senate.
If you’re voting based on the war you’re probably wasting your vote.
May 16th, 2008 at 11:10 pm
Is the GOP so desperate, so defeated (in May) that a pro-choice, pro-affirmative action, pro national healthcare liberal, who is hawkish on Iran and Iraq because he’s jewish, is the best choice for VP?
I would bet Obama would see a Lieberman pick as McCain waving the white flag and conservatives would view it as a betrayal.
May 16th, 2008 at 11:18 pm
Don’t forget his ties to the bankers in Geneva and Zurich who really run the show.
I don’t see why the GOP would be desparate when their candidate currently leads Obama by 2 in the Gallup Poll.
In fact, Obama should be the one who’s desparate. On Tuesday, the democratic nominee will fail to top 30% for the 2nd straight week in a state that the democrats won twice with Bill Clinton at the top of the ticket.
He’ll see his popular vote lead slip away by June 2nd.
He’s already polling at historic lows among key demographics that democrats rely on to win elections.
he’ll be facing a convention floor fight.
He’ll be a wounded nominee, a man who more than 50% of the party voted against, and whose nomination occured only because of a 90% monopoly of the black vote, being able to rig the caucus system, and the pure fate and luck of the calendar.
as for lieberman, i just don’t it happening for any number of reasons. He’d be a great SecDef though and McCain could actively tout him for a cabinet position.
May 16th, 2008 at 11:58 pm
Clarence, yes, anyone would be better than liberal lieberman.
Where is Zell Miller these days?
May 17th, 2008 at 12:16 am
</conservatism
May 17th, 2008 at 12:43 am
Lieberman Talks About McCain, Hamas, and the Democrats
In an interview with U.S. News, the Connecticut senator talks about his support for a Republican and the presidential election
http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/campaign-2008/2008/05/16/lieberman-talks-about-mccain-hamas-and-the-democrats_print.htm
May 17th, 2008 at 1:05 am
I have a better idea. McCain and Obama split 269-269. Lieberman announces that he will now caucus with the Republicans who split 50/50, leaving Dick Cheney to cast the deciding vote for President John McCain, who imediately becomes a lame duck, seeing as the GOP has stolen the election again. Actually, the whole Republican party all the way down to Justices of the Peace. As radioactive as Chernobyl. (LOL)
I’m not really in favor of this or laughing at the demise of the party, just imaging the really ironic twist this would be.
May 17th, 2008 at 1:42 am
Hey - if McCain and Obama are both so into bipartisanship and reaching across the aisle…what if they were each other’s running mates?
I’m maybe, 15% serious. Is there any way that could actually happen?
May 17th, 2008 at 1:58 am
Rick, that’d only work for the Veep position. The House chooses the Pres on a state delegation basis. The Senators vote separately though so of course Lieberman would vote for himself… which means Lieberman would be Obama’s Veep… sick isn’t it?
May 17th, 2008 at 3:22 am
I want to pick up on a thought Act-blog shared in DaveG’s Iraq position thread. Of the remaining candidates, Dem and GOP, guess whose campaign is NOT keeping an eye on the state conventions and is NOT ensuring their people get to the Twin Cities? McCain may not have full control over his VP pick. If McCain gives the finger to conservatives the way DaveG is fantasizing, conservatives at the convention are in a perfect position to screw him back. Heck, they could throw their lot in with the Ron Paul people. How’d you like that DaveG, the convention forcing the nomination of Ron Paul as VP in response to a Lieberman nod?
May 17th, 2008 at 5:49 am
If Independent and Democrats really do not want to vote for Mr. Obama, we do not need to give them a joint ticket.
May 17th, 2008 at 8:42 am
Heck, if he tries to put a Democrat on the ticket, there might even be a movement to bounce McCain off the ticket himself.
–
“McCain says he can win the war and be out in four years.”
Yes, how nice for McCain to introuduce a timeline for getting out.
Filthy hipocrite.
May 17th, 2008 at 8:50 am
This is not a time line, it is a wish. The problem is that people are assuming it is a time line.
May 17th, 2008 at 9:06 am
#22 Jack, I actually like the idea of an Obama and McCain ticket (Peggy Noonan floated this idea a few weeks ago), but who would be at the top?
Can there be any honesty in politics? Of course its a timeline, and it was meant to be.
May 17th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
Lately, its been hard to identify this site as a Republican blog site. Enough said!
May 17th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
Seriously, your sore sore loser “act” is getting extremely old. McCain didn’t call for timelines. Oh and Romney DID flip flop. A lot.
May 17th, 2008 at 10:54 pm
This is a unconventional election. Calls for some unconventional choices. id
May 18th, 2008 at 8:14 am
This has nothing to do with being a sore loser! Its that this site has become extremely liberal in recent months, apparently in the hope of reaching across to get as many independents and democrats as possible. They seem to either not believe, or forget, that conservatives are not going to turn out in Novemember to vote for McCain and certain of those being offered as VP. I honestly don’t recognize it as being the same site, or the same people, apparently because most of the conservative voices have either quit coming or are just too disgusted to respond.
Mitt Romney never had a public time line…that’s simply a lie….McCain was on record stating he favored a time line, even while he was accusing Romney of favoring one, but the media continually covered that up and allowed McCain to keep lieing about Romney having one. Romney’s would have been private, with intermediate goals, which would be changed if situations changed, or if the original dates became unrealistic.
Mitt flipped on one issue only, years before running for President. He governed 100% pro life. Others, especially McCain and Huckabee flipped on things during the campaign, especially Huckabee’s flip on immigration and Cuban policy. The media barely mentioned those.
May 18th, 2008 at 10:24 am
oh, crap.
I’d feel fine with Joe Lieberman making Presidential decisions, if we didn’t have any conservatives to choose from.
May 18th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
I wonder how many who are willing to accept a ticket like this would be unwilling to accept McCain/Giuliani. The latter would be more conservative (if that’s your goal), and would also have a great appeal to moderates.
May 18th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
Illinoisguy: I honestly don’t know where to start. McCain is not calling for a timeline, he is simply stating what he hopes to accomplish in 4 years in Iraq and what he hopes Iraq will look like. He is only in favor of timelines based on the MSN’s twisting of his actual words. And — unlike Romney (or Rudy or anyone else for that matter) — McCain stuck his neck out in favor of the surge when support for the war was at its nadir, and continued to do so while it almost sunk his Primary campaign. He has EARNED credibility on the Iraq issue that Romney did not have.
Also, while I don’t criticize every person who is critical of McCain’s record, and in fact share the criticism on certin issues (global warming), calling him a liar because of how he characterized Romney’s position gets under my craw. I happen to agree with his fundamental point — that Romney was angling to keep his options open so that he could call for withdrawl in the general election if he felt he needed to. And whether you agree or not, the charge was effective largely because Romney’s shifting positions throughout the campaign made it plausible.
As for whether Lieberman should be on the ticket, I’ll say this. If I thought it would make the difference between disgruntled Romney supporters bolting or staying put, I’d say don’t pick him. But if the disgruntled Romney voters are going to leave anyway, then he might as well get the job. And constant harping over the Primary election three months ago is starting to make me think that you and act will be leaving anyway.
May 18th, 2008 at 9:45 pm
We’re not only talking about Romney voters bolting if the wrong VP is picked. A huge number of Huckabee, Romney, and Thompson supporters will bolt if he is stupid enough to go with any pro-choice candidate, especially if they are also liberal on other issues such as gay marriage.
So, please quite singling out Romney supporters as those who might bolt.
The point I made about McCain claiming that Romney favored a time line was this: During that same timeframe, McCain had made a statement even more certain than Romney regarding ultimatums and time lines, and the media hardly aired it; most never saw it; even those on here apparently didn’t either. Fox played it a couple times, and thats all I saw. So, for him to mischaracterize what Mitt was saying was simply dirty politics, along with other things he was claiming a few days before the Florida vote. It was dirty; most of us know it was; I’ll still vote for him unless he goes pro-choice; I can never go there. I have to face my maker someday!
May 18th, 2008 at 9:48 pm
#34 - I’ll have to agree with you on one thing. Even though I can’t vote for McCain/Rudy, I think it would be a better ticket to get McCain elected than McCain/Lieberman. The reason is that a huge number will vote third party if he uses Lieberman, and a lot fewer would go that route if he uses Rudy. I don’t like Rudy because of his pro-choice position, and he certainly didn’t catch on with the voters, but Lieberman would be a catastrophe I think.