Who will (not should) be the Republican presidential nominee in 2008?

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Galaxy: They haven't waited eight years. They only got the story a few months ago. And of course the story is of more interest now that McCain is the presumptive nominee.

As to the story being thinly sourced, you're right. I don't think there's nearly enough evidence to make the suggestion of a sexual relationship. The question that should be asked to the reporters is, do you believe they had a sexual relationship and if so why? If they don't have any more info than what was printed it's really bad reporting.

According to the article, there is absolutely no evidence. As the article stands, it seems more likely that the New York Times "dan rathered" McCain here.

[JPhillips]

Well not exactly no evidence. There are quotes from former staffers, but certainly no enough to run that story. That's why I wonder if there is other info they didn't publish. It still wouldn't forgive the story, but at least it would explain it a bit.

[Ksyrup]

This is great!

John McCain, yesterday:

"I'm a proud conservative liberal republic -- conservative Republican. Hello, easy there. Let me say this. I am a proud conservative Republican and both of my possible or likely opponents are liberal Democrats."

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Well not exactly no evidence. There are quotes from former staffers, but certainly no enough to run that story. That's why I wonder if there is other info they didn't publish. It still wouldn't forgive the story, but at least it would explain it a bit.

Quotes from former staffers. No names. It's pretty much going on a haunch that may or may not be true.

Don't you find it odd that the NYT endorsed McCain, then just as he has pretty much sealed the GOP bid; they bring out a story, with basically nothing to back it up, to try to tarnish him? Why wait until exactly that moment? Doesn't it strike you bias that some of the journalists involved in the story are Democratic donors? Now they are running off on his natural-born citizenship.

[Ksyrup]

The "natural born" citizen thing is actually a pretty interesting legal issue. It revolves around interpretations of the 14th Amendment and various immigration statutes, and to what extent there is a legal difference between "citizen by birth" and "citizen at birth." The issue is whether he is a citizen by law given the unique cirucmstances of his birth, and not a citizen by birth. One of the complicating factors is this, from the Foreign Affairs Manual:

“Despite widespread popular belief, U.S. military installations abroad and U.S. diplomatic or consular facilities are not part of the United States within the meaning of the 14th Amendment. A child born on the premises of such a facility is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and does not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of birth.”

The issue has never been resolved conclusively, since this issue has never been brought before a court in the context of a presidential candidate, especially with McCain's particular facts.

That said, I see no way on earth he would be found to not be eligible to run for president, given where we are in the process. Even if the law suggested otherwise, my guess is circumstances would dictate the decision.

[Swaggs]

Somewhat related... Barry Goldwater was the 1964 presidential candidate for the Republicans. He was born in Arizona in 1909, but Arizona did not become a state until 1912.

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

The "natural born" citizen thing is actually a pretty interesting legal issue. It revolves around interpretations of the 14th Amendment and various immigration statutes, and to what extent there is a legal difference between "citizen by birth" and "citizen at birth." The issue is whether he is a citizen by law given the unique cirucmstances of his birth, and not a citizen by birth. One of the complicating factors is this, from the Foreign Affairs Manual:

“Despite widespread popular belief, U.S. military installations abroad and U.S. diplomatic or consular facilities are not part of the United States within the meaning of the 14th Amendment. A child born on the premises of such a facility is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and does not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of birth.”

The issue has never been resolved conclusively, since this issue has never been brought before a court in the context of a presidential candidate, especially with McCain's particular facts.

That said, I see no way on earth he would be found to not be eligible to run for president, given where we are in the process. Even if the law suggested otherwise, my guess is circumstances would dictate the decision.

Interesting perspective.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Somewhat related... Barry Goldwater was the 1964 presidential candidate for the Republicans. He was born in Arizona in 1909, but Arizona did not become a state until 1912.

But it was a US territory at the time he was born, so there was no real question whether he was a "natural born citizen."

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

Quotes from former staffers. No names. It's pretty much going on a haunch that may or may not be true.

Don't you find it odd that the NYT endorsed McCain, then just as he has pretty much sealed the GOP bid; they bring out a story, with basically nothing to back it up, to try to tarnish him? Why wait until exactly that moment? Doesn't it strike you bias that some of the journalists involved in the story are Democratic donors? Now they are running off on his natural-born citizenship.

It's way too thin to run the story, but for the record it wasn't nothing. Unfortunately the single anonymous source story is rather commonplace.

Is it bias, of course not. The whole timing issue makes no sense as it's easily the best time in the campaign for something like this. There's also no sensible reason why a Democratic conspiracy would work to put the most dangerous of the Republican candidates in the general.

I'll give you that the press is generally crap, but the problems aren't political bias. How do you explain the story on Obama's "patriotism problem" or the single anonymous source story on Clinton being responsible for the Somali garb picture or the Edwards' hair cut stories or numerous others.

The problems with the press are more about a hive mentality, general laziness and an obsession with making the story about themselves. The political bias angle may be convenient for your ideology, but it doesn't get at the real problem.

[RainMaker]

The sad thing about the NY Times story is that everyone is focusing on the wrong thing. The meat of the story for me is that McCain is bought and paid for by lobbyists (which isn't a surprise). I could careless who he has sex with, I just don't want him bending over for whoever donates to his campaign.

[Jas_lov]

What a night for John McCain. Huckabee drops out, he officially clinches the Republican nomination, and exits the stage to Johnny B. Goode. But that's not all, my friends. John McCain will have lunch with George W. Bush tomorrow and get his official endorsement which I'm sure will carry a lot of weight with the American people.

[Raiders Army]

Good story.

The Pledge of Allegiance
By: Senator John McCain

As you may know, I spent five and one half years as a prisoner of war during
the Vietnam War. In the early years of our imprisonment, the NVA kept us in
solitary confinement or two or three to a cell. In 1971 the NVA moved us
from these conditions of isolation into large rooms with as many as 30 to 40
men to a room.


This was, as you can imagine, a wonderful change and was a direct result of
the efforts of millions of Americans on behalf of a few hundred POWs 10,000
miles from home.

One of the men who moved into my room was a young man named Mike Christian.
Mike came from a small town near Selma, Alabama He didn't wear a pair of
shoes until he was 13 years old. At 17, he enlisted in the US Navy. He later
earned a commission by going to Officer Training School Then he became a
Naval Flight Officer and was shot down and captured in 1967. Mike had a keen
and deep appreciation of the opportunities this country and our military
provide for people who want to work and want to succeed.

As part of the change in treatment, the Vietnamese allowed some prisoners to
receive packages from home. In some of these packages were handkerchiefs,
scarves and other items of clothing.

Mike got himself a bamboo needle. Over a period of a couple of months, he
created an American flag and sewed on the inside of his shirt.

Every afternoon, before we had a bowl of soup, we would hang Mike's shirt on
the wall of the cell and say the Pledge of Allegiance.

I know the Pledge may not seem the most important part of our day now, but I
can assure you that in that stark cell it was indeed the most important and
meaningful event

One day the Vietnamese searched our cell, as they did periodically, and
discovered Mike's shirt with the flag sewn inside, and removed it.

That evening they returned, opened the door of the cell, and for the benefit
of all of us, beat Mike Christian severely for the next couple of hours.
Then, they opened the door of the cell and threw him in. We cleaned him up
as well as we could.

The cell in which we lived had a concrete slab in the middle on which we
slept. Four naked light bulbs hung in each corner of the room.

As I said, we tried to clean up Mike as well as we could. After the
excitement died down, I looked in the corner of the room, and sitting there
beneath that dim light bulb with a piece of red cloth, another shirt and his
bamboo needle, was my friend, Mike Christian. He was sitting there with his
eyes almost shut from the beating he had received, making another American
flag. He was not making the flag because it made Mike Christian feel better.
He was making that flag because he knew how important it was to us to be
able to Pledge our allegiance to our flag and country.

So the next time you say the Pledge of Allegiance, you must never forget the
sacrifice and courage that thousands of Americans have made to build our
nation and promote freedom around the world. You must remember our duty,
our honor, and our country.

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands, one nation under God , indivisible, with
liberty and justice for all."

[Ksyrup]

Good Lord! What's wrong with people?

[Greyroofoo]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Good Lord! What's wrong with people?

Good Lord! The democrats will stop at nothing to sabotage the Republicans!

[MikeVic]

I think John McCain will be the Republican presidential nominee in 2008.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Greyroofoo

Good Lord! The democrats will stop at nothing to sabotage the Republicans!

Someone would vote (or not) for a candidate based on a video? All I see is personal embarrassment for the people in it.

[Greyroofoo]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Someone would vote (or not) for a candidate based on a video? All I see is personal embarrassment for the people in it.

Actually what I wonder is if those girls actually voted for McCain.

[Ksyrup]

I know. I was reacting to your suggestion that this could be some sort of "sabotage." I'm questioning why someone would go through the trouble of "faking" a video like this to make McCain look bad. Would something like this really dissuade voters? And isn't it giving him press anyway? It would be one thing if it was created by his campaign - considering how ridiculous it is - but this appears to be just ordinary people.

[Buccaneer]

Chief Rum, I think you asked about McCain and Gitmo. According to NPR this morning, they said McCain reiterated his view on closing down Gitmo. I can't find a news article about it, just what I heard.

[CamEdwards]

I was just getting ready to post that video with the comment of "Dear Lord."

[JeeberD]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I know. I was reacting to your suggestion that this could be some sort of "sabotage." I'm questioning why someone would go through the trouble of "faking" a video like this to make McCain look bad. Would something like this really dissuade voters? And isn't it giving him press anyway? It would be one thing if it was created by his campaign - considering how ridiculous it is - but this appears to be just ordinary people.

Isn't it just a comedic take on the "Obama Girl" (and its copycats) video? Seems to me something that something in the opposite camp would produce and put out there...

[Mac Howard]

Originally Posted by Greyroofoo

Good Lord! The democrats will stop at nothing to sabotage the Republicans!

You Americans really do have the irony bone removed at birth, don't you?

[ISiddiqui]

A great article on McCain's relations with the media on the NY Times Op-Ed page (and this is from someone that really likes McCain and may just end up voting for him in the end):

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/26/op...gabler.html?hp

March 26, 2008
Op-Ed Contributor
The Maverick and the Media

By NEAL GABLER
Amagansett, N.Y.

IT is certainly no secret that Senator John McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, is a darling of the news media. Reporters routinely attach “maverick,” “straight talker” and “patriot” to him like Homeric epithets. Chris Matthews of MSNBC has even called the press “McCain’s base” — a comment that Mr. McCain himself has jokingly reiterated. The mainstream news media by and large don’t cover Mr. McCain; they canonize him. Hence the moniker on liberal blogs: St. McCain.

What is less obvious, however, is exactly why the press swoons for him. The answer, which says a great deal about both the political press and Mr. McCain, may be that he is something political reporters really haven’t seen in quite a while, perhaps since John F. Kennedy.

Seeming to view himself and the whole political process with a mix of amusement and bemusement, Mr. McCain is an ironist wooing a group of individuals who regard ironic detachment more highly than sincerity or seriousness. He may be the first real postmodernist candidate for the presidency — the first to turn his press relations into the basis of his candidacy.

Of course this is not how the press typically talks about Mr. McCain. The conventional analysis of his press popularity begins with his military service. If campaigns are primarily about narratives, he has a good and distinguished one, and it would take a very curmudgeonly press corps to dismiss it, even though that is exactly what a good portion of it did to Senator John Kerry’s service record in 2004. Reporters also often cite Mr. McCain’s bonhomie as the reason for their affection. As Ryan Lizza described it last month in The New Yorker, a typical campaign day has Mr. McCain rumbling from one stop to another on his bus, the Straight Talk Express, sitting in the rear on a horseshoe-shaped leather couch surrounded by reporters and talking “until the room is filled with the awkward silence of journalists with no more questions.”

The Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen, citing the conviviality during the 2000 campaign, wrote that “a trip on his bus is, well, a trip.” And as the party master, Mr. McCain is no longer the reporters’ subject. He is their pal.

While other candidates have tried to schmooze reporters this way without success, what has made Mr. McCain’s fraternization so effective is that it comes with candor — or at least the illusion of it. Over the years, reporter after reporter has remarked upon his seemingly unguarded frankness. In 1999, William Greider wrote in Rolling Stone that, “While McCain continues examining his flaws, the reporters on the bus are getting a bit edgy. Will somebody tell this guy to shut up before he self-destructs?”
Imagine, reporters protecting a candidate from himself! But, then again, since the reporters on the bus liked Mr. McCain too much to report on his gaffes, he really didn’t need protection. His candor was without consequence. It was another blandishment to the press.

Yet however much his accessibility, amiability and candor may have defined the news media’s love affair with him in 2000, and however much they continue to operate that way in 2008, there is also something different and more complicated at work now. Joan Didion once described a presidential campaign as a closed system staged by the candidates for the news media — one in which the media judged a candidate essentially by how well he or she manipulated them, and one in which the electorate were bystanders.

By this standard, Mr. McCain’s joviality and seeming honesty with the press in 2000 constituted a very effective scheme indeed, until it came time to woo actual Republican voters. As Time’s Jay Carney once put it, “You get the sense you’re being manipulated by candor, rather than manipulated by subterfuge and deception, but it is a strategy.”

What makes 2008 different — and why I think Mr. McCain can be called the first postmodernist presidential candidate — is his acknowledgment of the symbiosis between himself and the press and, more important, his willingness, even eagerness, to let the press in on his own machinations of them. On the bus, Mr. McCain openly talks about his press gambits. According to Mr. Lizza, Mr. McCain proudly brandished an index card with a “gotcha” quote from Mitt Romney that the senator had given Tim Russert of “Meet the Press,” a journalist few would expect to need help in finding candidates’ gaffes. In exposing his two-way relationship with the press this way, he reveals the absurdity of the political process as a big game. He also reveals his own gleeful cynicism about it.

This sort of disdain might be called a liberal view, if not politically then culturally. The notion that our system (in fact, life itself) is faintly imbecilic is a staple of “The Daily Show,” “The Colbert Report,” “Real Time With Bill Maher” and other liberal exemplars, though they, of course, implicate the press in the idiocy. Mr. McCain’s sense of irony makes him their spiritual kin — a cosmological liberal — which may be why conservatives distrust him and liberals like Jon Stewart seem to revere him. They are reacting to something deeper than politics. They are reacting to his vision of how the world operates and to his attitude about it, something it is easy to suspect he acquired while a prisoner of war.

Though Mr. McCain can be the most self-deprecating of candidates (yet another reason the news media love him), his vision of the process also betrays an obvious superiority — one the mainstream political news media, a group of liberal cosmologists, have long shared. If in the past he flattered the press by posing as its friend, he is now flattering it by posing as its conspirator, a secret sharer of its cynicism. He is the guy who “gets it.” He sees what the press sees. Michael Scherer, a blogger for Time, called him the “coolest kid in school.”

The candidates who are dead serious about politics, even wonkish, get abused by the press for it. Mr. McCain the ironist gets heaps of affection. In this race, though, it has forced some press contortions. While John McCain 2000 was praised for being the same straight talker off the bus as he was on it, John McCain 2008 is praised precisely because he isn’t the same man. Off the bus he plays to the rubes (us) by reciting the conservative catechism; on the bus he plays to the press by giving the impression that his talk is all just a ploy to capture the Republican nomination.

Yet the reporters, so quick in general to jump on hypocrisy, seem to find his insincerity a virtue. When an old sobersides like Mitt Romney flip-flops, he is called a panderer. When Mr. McCain suddenly supports the tax cuts he once excoriated, or embraces the religious right, or emphasizes border security over a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, we are told by his press acolytes that he doesn’t really mean it, that his liberal cosmology will ultimately best his conservative rhetoric. “Discount his repositioning a bit,” Jacob Weisberg, the editor of Slate, wrote two years ago, “and McCain looks like the same unconventional character who emerged during the Clinton years.” The article was subtitled “Psst ... He’s Not Really a Conservative.”

This suggests that love is blind. It also suggests that seducing the press with ironic detachment, the press’s soft spot, may be the best political strategy of all — one that Mr. McCain may walk on water right into the White House.

Neal Gabler is the author, most recently, of “Walt Disney: The Triumph of the American Imagination.”

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

Chief Rum, I think you asked about McCain and Gitmo. According to NPR this morning, they said McCain reiterated his view on closing down Gitmo. I can't find a news article about it, just what I heard.

Apparently he repeated it today in LA

“We can’t torture or treat inhumanely suspected terrorists we have captured,” he said. “I believe we should close Guantanamo and work with our allies to forge a new international understanding on the disposition of dangerous detainees under our control.”

[Dutch]

Not a whole lot of excitement right now from the Republican side of things. I guess we have to wait until Obama formally defeats Clinton for the last battle of this campaign season to get underway.

The way I see this breaking down is this, IMHO, McCain trumps Obama on the issues, but Obama trumps McCain on electability. So for me to get my guy in office, I am obviously concerned about the fact that he is gonna have a tough time getting elected.

I think the first big choice McCain and Obama will make is their running mate. I have no idea who Obama wants, but I'm guessing John Edwards has a shot at it. I guess that's good, but I'm not sure. For McCain, like the '08 candidate list, there isn't much to get excited about. Or is there? I hope McCain asks Colin Powell to run with him. A McCain/Powell ticket is about as moderate as you can get from either side of the spectrum.

Now, Obama is preaching "change you can believe in" and I wonder if the change America wants is radical, away from Bush to Obama or if the change America wants is just "away from Bush"? If it's the later, a McCain/Powell ticket could actually have a legitimate shot at the Presidency.

[ISiddiqui]

I hope McCain asks Colin Powell to run with him. A McCain/Powell ticket is about as moderate as you can get from either side of the spectrum.

Regardless of Powell's problems with the WMD claims, Powell would result in McCain winning big. However, I doubt if Powell wants to get into politics again. From what I've read, he really didn't like butting heads in the White House with people like Cheney and Rumsfeld... and while they'll be gone, there will still be the butting heads over different views on things.

[st.cronin]

I'm pulling for McCain/Rice. And no, not Jim Rice.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I'm pulling for McCain/Rice. And no, not Jim Rice.

That would be great for me, but I think most people think Rice is too close closely tied to Bush, whereas Powell has distanced himself thoroughly from Bush. But as of right now, Powell is strongly pro-family and without his wife's blessings, he ain't running. However, if he's moping around the house all day, he might just be annoying enough for her to let him run.

[ISiddiqui]

McCain/Rice would never happen. As Dutch said, Rice is too close to Bush (but a moderating force). And Rice doesn't seem to be all that happen with the politiking. She's a wonk and will be happy at NSA or State, but not with pressing the flesh and making speechs on a variety of subjects.

[JPhillips]

Powell has also danced around with praise for Obama. I would think it very unlikely that he'd run against him.

I wouldn't be surprised to see McCain pick a Latino to try and split the Hispanic vote. Maybe Martinez in FL?

[JPhillips]

Aside from Rice being a black woman, what's the appeal? She has been average at best at State and in her role as coordinator/assimilator of U.S. foreign policy/advice as NSA she was abysmal. There was never a single coherent vision emerging from the executive. I don't particularly despise her, but I really don't she what she's done that gets conservatives so excited.

And while this is rumor, the possibility that she's a lesbian will come up if she runs for office. Does McCain have time to deal with that? My guess is Rice stays away from elective office so she can avoid answering those questions.

[Buccaneer]

There is no way McCain will pick anyone tied to Bush2's administration. In the election, that is already partly the equalizer running against a black Dem. There is no reason for McCain to pick a black running mate since it wouldn't matter but I think JPhillips has a good thought in a Hispanic running mate (I am putting my money on an Obama/Richardson ticket). If theree is a Hispanic conservative from the South, that would be a slam dunk but I am still thinking that a Southern conservative with no ties to Bush2 will be the logical choice.

[flere-imsaho]

I actually think it'll be Huckabee or Romney.

On another topic, once the Democratic nomination is over, will we see more of McCain's involvement in the S&L scandal as one of the "Keating 5" as a related topic to the subprime implosion?

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

I actually think it'll be Huckabee or Romney.

On another topic, once the Democratic nomination is over, will we see more of McCain's involvement in the S&L scandal as one of the "Keating 5" as a related topic to the subprime implosion?

No, that's ancient history in this attention deficit times. And no way it'll be Huckabee or Romney, imo.

The reasons I said that are 1) McCain only recognizes 2 of the 3 pillars of Reagan conservatism (social con being the one he ignored) and 2) bad blood between he and Romney (just like Obama and Clinton).

[Vegas Vic]

McCain just released his first campaign video for the general election.

[JPhillips]

Buc: And putting a Mormon on the ticket will only further alienate religious conservatives.

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Buc: And putting a Mormon on the ticket will only further alienate religious conservatives.

Forgot about that. Besides, with flere so hostile against (R), I wonder why he said what he did.

[st.cronin]

I think there's a decent chance the veep is Huckabee, in fact I think he's actually the most likely name right now - not that I think he's particularly likely, just more likely than anybody else you could think of. I don't think it would be a very creative pick, however.

[JPhillips]

Something I said in the Dem thread really applies here. McCain has a difficult decision because he needs to fire up the base somehow if he wants to spark his fundraising. In February he only raised 11 million while Clinton/Obama raised 80 million. That disparity won't last one on one, but it's clear that the tepid support from the Republican base is keeping people's wallets closed.

With that in mind a Latino may not work. Does McCain have to pick a VP that pacifies the base and gets them to donate?

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

McCain just released his first campaign video for the general election.

That's a pretty good first campaign ad.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Dutch

That's a pretty good first campaign ad.

Agreed. Very good ad

SI

[TazFTW]

Powers Boothe FTW

[stevew]

Isn't it actually hard to find a viable latino right now?

I don't think he's going to find anyone better than Crist personally.

[JPhillips]

Psst! Crist is gay. Won't work.

[Toddzilla]

Originally Posted by Dutch

McCain trumps Obama on the issues

McCain = "100 more years in Iraq" isn't trumping anyone on the issues.

Campaign Finance? McCain is openly breaking the law with his name on it.
Anti-Torture? Despite being tortured himself and publicly denouncing the use of torture bu the USA, McCain voted against banning torture.
Religious Freedom? He criticizes Obama/Rev. Wright while seeking out and getting the endorsement of a very prolific anti-Catholic, anti-Jewish Rev. Hagee.
Anti-Lobbyist? His campaign manager, chief political adviser, and senior advisers are all lobbyists.
Foreign Policy? He doesn't even know who were fighting in Iraq.

If this trumps Obama, then we're all fucked.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Toddzilla

McCain = "100 more years in Iraq" isn't trumping anyone on the issues.

Campaign Finance? McCain is openly breaking the law with his name on it.
Anti-Torture? Despite being tortured himself and publicly denouncing the use of torture bu the USA, McCain voted against banning torture.
Religious Freedom? He criticizes Obama/Rev. Wright while seeking out and getting the endorsement of a very prolific anti-Catholic, anti-Jewish Rev. Hagee.
Anti-Lobbyist? His campaign manager, chief political adviser, and senior advisers are all lobbyists.
Foreign Policy? He doesn't even know who were fighting in Iraq.

If this trumps Obama, then we're all fucked.

While I understand your points, I think Dutch was simply speaking to his opinion of the issues.

More broadly, if you simply draw a line, one end each representing either Obama's generic position or McCain's generic position, and identify the exact midpoint, it could be claimed that more Americans will fall on McCain's side of the line than on Obama's.

Undoubtedly in recent years the country has moved somewhat to the left, but how far to the left?

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by Dutch

The way *I* see this breaking down is this, *IMHO*, McCain trumps Obama on the issues, but Obama trumps McCain on electability.

Well, I tried to be as clear as possible out of respect for the liberal majority, I guess some need boldy parts to help them limp along in the conversation.

[Toddzilla]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Well, I tried to be as clear as possible out of respect for the liberal majority, I guess some need boldy parts to help them limp along in the conversation.

Point taken - and yes, I do need the bolded parts sometimes.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Something I said in the Dem thread really applies here. McCain has a difficult decision because he needs to fire up the base somehow if he wants to spark his fundraising. In February he only raised 11 million while Clinton/Obama raised 80 million. That disparity won't last one on one, but it's clear that the tepid support from the Republican base is keeping people's wallets closed.

I wouldn't go that far. While I think the tepid support is a small issue, I think it's more because the republican side race is done and the Dems are still fighting each other. Many republicans probably feel they don't need to do anything right now to fuel their cause as the democratic party infighting is doing enough as is.

Once the dems choose a candidate and the reps see who *could* be president, the money will come in as it always does. It may end up that McCain gets a decent bump around the convention (once things are settled) and the dem nominee is faced with a somewhat exhausted treasury after the summer fight internally.

With that in mind a Latino may not work. Does McCain have to pick a VP that pacifies the base and gets them to donate?

I don't think so. Once Clinton or Obama is chosen, there will be enough fear out there to get him through the fall. For VP, it will probably end up being a governor with strong fiscal or social conservative roots. If Obama ends up winning the nomination, I could see the party making a huge push for Coliin Powell as well.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by Toddzilla

Point taken - and yes, I do need the bolded parts sometimes.

Nicely played.