Why McCain now?

+1

 

Precisely. If y'all had run anyone other than Dunderheads....

 

mcain isnt a wing-nut, although hes a veteran and bush is, and republicans cant deny it a rich draft-dodger. so in affect the gop cares more about contrived talking-points than real veterans and patriots. thats the way i see it. im actually quite baffled about it, george is obviously a loony tune moron and mccain is a decent and hell of alot more intelligent guy and the fact that he didnt stomp bush in 2000 is very weird. even if he didnt play the moderate card, that has nothing to do with it, mccain is real unlike shrub jr. personally we have pretty damn decent candidates running and we are going to be so much better off no matter who wins. ohh i know that goes against the teenage-esque nihlism so popular in politics but then again look at the source.

 

Y'all who?

 

Why the Dems of course.

 

He was not my choice in 2000 and he was not my choice this time around, Mitt Romney was.

But since Mitt Romney did not win the nomination and Barack Obama is not qualified to be the President of a small University,much less The United States, and not voting is not an option for me, I will be voting for John McCain.

 

+2
Although in all honesty, who would have guessed it at the time?

 

+1,000,000

 

John McCain ran against Jimmy Carter??

 

So the last Democrat you voted for was??

 

Carter

Who was the last Republican you voted for in a national election?

 

O for. But you know I hated Reagan, but Bush I & II were in my opinion very weak.

But I voted for 3 republican govenors. Thompson, Edgar and Ryan. Ryan was a real tool.

 

I voted for McCain back in 2000 so I'm not gonna answer your question

 

I voted for Harvey Gantt over Jesse Helms back in the day and vote Democrat in state and local elections on occasion. Hell here in the south, at the local level, it often is not an option.

On the national level, I have too many issues with the usual Democrat party platform.

 

I still say that if Ralph Nader actually was winning the election he would have a nervous breakdown before election night was over. He's kind of like a dog chasing a car. He wouldn't know what to do with it if he caught it.

 

Are you talking about Nader or Obama?

 

He did say that some time ago, and we may get the chance to see if he's pulling our leg or not. I hope he's not, but;
Beware of the political language. Sometimes they're saying that that "lower tax" is just less of a tax increase than others will see. Obama will have to raise taxes if he wants to do all the things he's promised.

 

That would be called capitalism with good bookkeepers.

What would you call it if the bottom 1/3 kept paying no taxes, but kept demanding tax cuts, and higher taxes on the wealthy?

 

Actually its about the bottom half. Under the Bush tax cuts, the bottom bracket received a 33% reduction in their tax rate. The top Bracket was only about a 4% reduction in their tax rate. Oh, but its only a break for the rich.

If we just went to a Consumption tax, the rich would still pay and the poor would not. Only we would have control over the amount of tax we pay and it would be equal to all.

 

So what you are really saying is that when it comes to your money you want a Republican in Charge!

This reminds me so much of MA with all their liberal views but they don't entrust a Democrat to run their State. They call it balance, I call it know better.