Of Course John McCain Will Lose
In his latest column for the New York Times, hyperpositive Bill Kristol argues that Sen. John McCain could very well win tomorrow. This while McCain is trailing in just about every single important poll in every single important state.
Although Kristol’s column may encourage some McCain supporters to stay home Tuesday to go vote nonetheless, I agree with Robert S. ‘the other’ McCain that he and people like Kristol are unlikely to help their own party and / or ideology and are living in a fantasy world.
Rationally, one will have to assume that Obama wins, unless God would suddenly intervene. In other words: Obama’s going to win this thing. If for nothing else, than because the numbers just don’t add up for John McCain. It does not take a genius to figure that one out.
The only question is whether Obama will win in a landslide or not. That is the question, and it should matter. If he wins in a massive landslide he and his fellow liberal democrats will claim to have a mandate, and they will pursue the most liberal policies one can imagine in the coming two to four years.
Blue Dog Democrats will give in, out of fear of being ‘left out’ later.
If, however, Obama will win by a reasonably small margin – with less than 50% of the popular vote and less than 300 electoral votes – Blue Dog Democrats may be willing and able to resist their more liberal colleagues. Obama, Pelosi, Frank and Reid will know that alienating Blue Dog Democrats means alienating a large and above all important part of the electorate, which will come back to punish them only a few years later.
So, your vote does matter. The outcome of the election matters. But kidding yourself by believing that John McCain could win tomorrow is useless and counterproductive. If the Republican Party and the American conservative movement want to recover and reinvent themselves, as they have to if they want to be able to compete in the coming years, they should be realistic.
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Comments are closed.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
“…and they will pursue the most liberal policies one can imagine in the coming two to four years.”
I don’t know, I can imaging a lot.
“Blue Dog Democrats will give in, out of fear of being ‘left out’ later.”
I very much doubt that since most of them come from more conservative areas and will care more about reelection by their constituents than party loyalty.
What I want to know is this: when Obama turns out to be a middle-of-the-road Democrat, and no more a socialist/Communist/Muslim terrorist/Anti-Christ than Bill Clinton was, what do you right wing nutcakes say then? Do you apologize for believing and spreading lies? Or do you “explain away” Obama’s failure to destroy the US, as God’s mercy on the US to give us a chance to repent and voter for President Palin?
Don’t think I’m jumping on the Kristol Exuberance Bandwagon but what if the polls are as wrong this time around as they were in 2000 and 2004?
We know the polls have generally been weighted more heavily toward Democrats. We also know that the youth vote polls very enthusiastically but never, ever lives up to the pre-election hype. Lastly, we know that the media has been heavily downplaying any positive effect that Sarah Palin has had on Republicans. They say she’s a drag on the ticket, but she’s been drawing huge and very enthusiastic crowds at her rallies. Stacy McCain had an instructive column in the American Spectator on a rally last week in Shippenberg, PA, where thousands of folks waited for hours outside on a wind-racked frigid day to see her.
I’m not saying that a big win is in order, but it would not surprise me even a little bit to find that John McCain is our President-Elect Wednesday morning. Just consider the possibility that what the media is telling us is as wrong as it’s been the last two Presidential elections.
“what if the polls are as wrong this time around as they were in 2000 and 2004?…consider the possibility that what the media is telling us is as wrong as it’s been the last two Presidential elections.”
Where does this meme come from? They were not wrong in 2000 or in 2004. Below is a link to the presidential polling data for 2000, 2004, and 2008
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/campaign_08_vs_04_and_00_updat.php
you mean like his current Senate voting record?
oh wait.