Just left John McCain's rally at the Westin in Seattle tonight.
Got to ask some face-to-face questions with the rest of the Seattle media elite. Working on a transcript and should have further details when I return from my standard Friday night festivities.
About 400 Republicans showed up and most left either convinced or are talking themselves into supporting the man.
Also Hillary and Obama were in town. Treat this as a thread about any of those three candidates.
Behave you SP night owls...
Posted by DonWard at February 08, 2008 09:31 PM | Email ThisCan anyone verify?
Posted by: Andrew Brown on February 8, 2008 10:01 PMThe papers are reporting 18000 inside Key Arena with another 3000+ outside.
Posted by: M Sanchez on February 8, 2008 10:12 PMIf he was dumb enough to fly into Seattle in an Airbus 320, then he has truely wasted a trip.
He could have not been that F'n stupid.......
Into Boeing field.......In an Airbus plane
McCain! Do you have you no F'n clue what town you are in?
Hello Hello
Posted by: gs on February 8, 2008 10:14 PMWell played, McCain, well played
Posted by: Andrew Brown on February 8, 2008 10:16 PMDamn, how did I not hear about this thing at the Westin...
Don't flatter yourself Don.
Also Hillary and Obama were in town.
Glad you noticed. Let's see: 5000 with a turned away overflow crowd for Clinton Thursday night. Then another 6000 in Tacoma today. Then Obama pulled in 18,000 or more to Key Arena, with another 3000 unable to get in. Meanwhile McCain gets about 400. Ouch.
Posted by: Daniel K on February 8, 2008 11:13 PMThis country will go to hell, but at least history will record it was a Democrat and not a Republican that drove it into the ground.
Posted by: pbj on February 9, 2008 12:14 AMBy: Jeanne Cummings
Politico.com
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8397.html
excerpt:
With John McCain poised to win the Republican nomination, Democrats are already gathering ammunition to use against him in the general election.
In more than a few instances, the best fodder has been provided by the candidate himself.
A case in point: As the economy was rising late last year as a major issue for voters, McCain in New Hampshire delivered this grenade, with its pin still in it: "The issue of economics is not something I've understood as well as I should," he said. "I've got Greenspan's book."
Those are not the only words that will come back to haunt him in November.
I would like to for my friends, but I just can't do it. Nope, I have thought about it, but I just can't. I just can't. John McCain has done things that I just can't set off to the side.
I really don't know where to go from here, but I just can't. I must not, it's about my integrity which is more important than whether or not the country survives. I can brook someone who disagrees with me, but I just cannot be spit upon.
Hillary and I are not aligned politically, but she is honest with me. Barak and I are even further apart politicaly, and I think him a neophyte politically, but I think he is at least consistently where he is.
In order for someone to spit on you you have to be in close proximity to them McCain is the only one of the three who has had the opportunity and he has taken advantage of it. Hillary, Barak, they will never get that close but McCain did spit on my and did so repeatedly.
I don't like being spit on, and I remember it.
Posted by: JDH on February 9, 2008 12:28 AMThere were probably about 300 to 400 people at Janet Huckabee's event today.
Posted by: Cydney on February 9, 2008 12:33 AMI think you hit the nail on the head. McCain think we are all too damn lazy to pick lettuce for $50/hr. He said so himself:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1615112/posts
How in the blazes can anyone expect someone like this to inspire America when he runs her down at every opportunity? It is like an abusive father who smack his kid around. No sir, not me. Not McCain. I don't like being spat upon either by some creepy old man.
Posted by: pbj on February 9, 2008 12:40 AM
Perhaps we want in a president someone who knows something about economics rather than saying "The issue of economics is not something I've understood as well as I should,".
That sounded very funny after 7 years of George W.(for:Worse-President-Ever)Bush.
And you probably voted for the moron. Who is worse the moron or the guy who voted for him.
Posted by: CUR on February 9, 2008 01:16 AMI've not seen a candidate yet in either party that has addressed family issues the way they need to be addressed. There are over 350,000 non-custodial parents in Washington State, with 97% seeing their kids 4 days or less per month, much of it due to federal block grants from Title IV-D, your social security benefits.
We need a presidential candidate to stand up and say that bial in any courts is wrong, and our Feds need to back fighting this in all 50 states.
Our own Democratic Senator from District 24 - Jim Hargrove has single handidly held up shared parenting for 11 years.
Sign the petition - petition.WashingtonSharedParenting.com
Pray for a miricle candidae to appear at the convention and knock Mccain out. I'm beginning to pray now!
Posted by: JO JO on February 9, 2008 02:30 AMI've not seen a candidate yet in either party that has addressed family issues the way they need to be addressed. There are over 350,000 non-custodial parents in Washington State, with 97% seeing their kids 4 days or less per month, much of it due to federal block grants from Title IV-D, your social security benefits.
We need a presidential candidate to stand up and say that bial in any courts is wrong, and our Feds need to back fighting this in all 50 states.
Our own Democratic Senator from District 24 - Jim Hargrove has single handidly held up shared parenting for 11 years.
Sign the petition - petition.WashingtonSharedParenting.com
Pray for a miricle candidae to appear at the convention and knock Mccain out. I'm beginning to pray now!
Posted by: JO JO on February 9, 2008 02:30 AMYou know sometimes you guys just come across as really sad and unhappy individuals. For God's sake lighten up.
This year, Romney would have been a compromise, Giuliani even more so, and I would certainly have voted for Romney, and probably for Giuliani (though I would have hated myself Wednesday morning). McCain would be a surrender. He was the one candidate least congenial to conservatives, the one candidate who had deliberately placed himself in an adversarial relationship to conservatives. And now the moderates call us names if we so much as suggest that the Republican Party has not earned our votes this year. Kind of reminds me of the debate over enforcing our immigration laws.
I'll actually vote for McCain if the Dems nominate Hillary (nothing is more important to me this year than stopping the return of the Clintons), so I won't sneer at those who make the same calculation about the need to stop Obama. But we need to recognize the message that this will send: that conservative votes belong to the Republican Party by right.
I would prefer to send the message that my vote must be earned.
Come on, Obama!
Posted by: ScottM on February 9, 2008 05:51 AMHe got bleeped in South Carolina by the Bushies in 2000 and now he has to deal with the stinky-poo. He is a great American who deserves better than having to grovel for conservative votes.
Posted by: Jim on February 9, 2008 06:07 AMI could go on, but suffice it to say, Hillary's hard work has touched all of our lives.
Thank you, Hillary
I could go on, but suffice it to say, Hillary's hard work has touched all of our lives.
Thank you, Hillary
Still voting for her or Obama though, as our likely nominee admits he doesn't know how to run an economy and loves to insult conservatives (at least when he is not trying to "unite" the party).
Posted by: John McDonald on February 9, 2008 06:18 AMPlus most conservatives have jobs and families to take care of.
Posted by: CrazyFool on February 9, 2008 06:19 AMWhat a brilliant parody of McCain's own arrogance, sense of entitlement, and contempt for constitutional democracy! Bravo, sir!
Seriously, I think this post captures is a nutshell exactly what bothers me about McCain on a level deeper than any particular policy. This idea that ordinary politics is somehow beneath McCain because of his "greatness" is very disturbing and smacks of a personality cult.
Go Obama!
Posted by: ScottM on February 9, 2008 06:35 AMObama the Ringmaster, with booming voice and flailing arms, searches the audience with his piercing eyes, seeing who will buy into his center-ring, contradictatory and foolish promises of free healthcare, lower taxes and no more wars.
Hillary, jilted by the "free lunch" hordes swarming to Obama's big tent, entertains her ever-faithful feminazi pals by growing a beard and cursing George Bush in seven languages.
McCain the Strongman, pumped up on MSM steroids, twirls barbells like batons and breaths fiery ephthets of his awe-inspiring, single-handed conquests.
Huckabee, a frightened boy who ran away from his family's farm in Arkansas to join the circus, frantically searches the trodden ground for the nickels, dimes and pennies he needs to stay barely alive.
Yet in all this, not a conservative in sight......a sad circus indeed
Posted by: Saltherring on February 9, 2008 07:30 AMWould you buy a used car from this woman?
Posted by: russell garrard on February 9, 2008 08:52 AMEven though I don't consider constantly being kicked in the teeth by the likes of John McCain and then refusing to provide him support when requested as 'losing the game' ... go ahead. Knock yourself out.
Create your 'republican party' that goes out of its way to piss off the base, cuts deals with Democrats that undermine the basic principles of conservatism and then takes great glee in being praised by the likes of The New York Times simply because you stuck it to conservatives.
If that's the party you want, you can have it. Good luck. You'll need it.
Posted by: jimg on February 9, 2008 09:01 AMCan one of you math geniuses explain something to me?
Everytime I hear the pollsters talk about what group is for/against Hillary/Obama, when they break it down by age, Hillary only wins in the plus-65 group. Ok, I just assumed that since this country is full of geezers waiting around on their Social Security checks, that that would be enough people to elect her.
But wait a minute...check out these numbers:
Click Here:Survey USA Democrat
Look at the age category.
Hillary leads in only one age category: plus 65. But it also says that plus 65 is only 16% of likely voters!
So, how can she possibly have any support at all? And if you go by the number of people who come to the Clinton versus Obama rallies, you would have to think that Obama would be a 7 to 1 favorite in almost any state!
So, my question is: where do these Clinton votes come from?
That's a poll of Virginia's electorate. If you look at the totals, Obama leads 59%-39%. I don't see any inconsistency.
Posted by: ScottM on February 9, 2008 09:21 AMThe unintended consequences of an Obama Presidency would be as a result of his passivity on Radical Islam, we would be transformed into another France, that is out to convert a new generation on college campuses to embrace Islam and Sharria law. An important point that ought to be considered.
This may sound radical and politically incorrect, but so be it.
By contrast, John McCain vows to continue the fight against radical Islam and never surrender.. Something to be considered.
What Sen. McCain also needs to continue to do and did reasonably well last night is distance himself from the policies of GW Bush that have proven to be detrimental.
#31 - Do you think our economy would be as good with Hillary or Obama who both will be out to ramrod Universal Health Care down our collective throats.
With all due respect, you exemplify a reactionary to the tee. Coupled with the unintended consequences an Obama presidency would bring (read #43), me thinks you have been howling at too many full moons..
Posted by: KS on February 9, 2008 09:33 AM"What Sen. McCain also needs to continue to do and did reasonably well last night is distance himself from the policies of GW Bush that have proven to be detrimental."
His weak link is his policy on the borders and hopefully other conservatives will continue to drive that point home about enforcement of illegal immigration laws (along with securing the borders as he vowed to do) that will cause illegal aliens to self-deport.
Posted by: KS on February 9, 2008 09:38 AMIf Hillary is elected president, we'll have had a Bush or Clinton in the whitehouse (at least!) from 1989-2013 -- that's 24 years....that's a generation -- I thought the purpose was to avoid royal families...
Posted by: BIll Anderson on February 9, 2008 09:43 AMBesides, McCain has assured us "that Senator Clinton would make a good President", "no doubt" about it.
Posted by: ItTakesAVillageToConveneAGrandJury on February 9, 2008 10:05 AMObama and Hillary will tell you what you want to hear just for your vote.
Posted by: George on February 9, 2008 11:02 AMMy gosh, McCain Derangement Syndrome.
Posted by: Doug on February 9, 2008 11:06 AMNow he is telling everyone what they want to hear regarding the border and to forget when he was meeting in back rooms beyond the public eye forging shamnesty with the liberals.
If pointing out the facts about McCain, as distasteful as those facts may be for those nonthinker Republicans who mindlessly look for the 'R' behind the name, if that is McCain Derangement Syndrome, put me down for an extra super duper helping of it. When McCain has lost, and he will, you all will blame us, but those of you who foolishly follow this liberal Republican to gain power at any cost regardless of principles, it is YOU who are to blame.
Posted by: pbj on February 9, 2008 11:15 AMBad plan, if you want to preserve America instead of seeing it change into a different country to appease the Secular Progressives spend us into oblivion and be more friendly to radical Islam ? Not only No, but HELL NO !
Posted by: KS on February 9, 2008 11:33 AM#53 - So what is your solution ? Allowing a Clinton or a Barack Hussein Obama to be elected ?
Posted by: KS on February 9, 2008 11:36 AMGet your asses out there and support the guy. We can always use grassroots pressure the help keep things relatively honest and conservative once he is in office. We will not have that choice when Hillary or Obama has majorities in both houses.
Posted by: Calvin A on February 9, 2008 11:37 AMThat is a lie. McCain has called Alito "too conservative".
Here is your proof:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59979
Don;t like WND? Well here is another source that confirms the same thing:
More recently, Mr. McCain has told conservatives he would be happy to appoint the likes of Chief Justice John Roberts to the Supreme Court. But he indicated he might draw the line on a Samuel Alito, because "he wore his conservatism on his sleeve."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1960759/posts
So we can tell ourselves lies and choose to believe them and end up regretting it after the election. Or we can face thr TRUTH about McCain and tell ourselves that we won't let history record a Republican was at the helm when those dark days befell us. McCain will happily od the bidding of the liberals which is great for liberals. They get to implement all their destructive policies and can blame them on the Republicans.
Besides, McCain thinks all you are too lazy to pick lettuce for $50/hr so he must keep the border open for illegals.
Posted by: pbj on February 9, 2008 11:47 AMhttp://online.wsj.com/article/SB120146652798920519.html?mod=opinion_journal_political_diary
" More recently, Mr. McCain has told conservatives he would be happy to appoint the likes of Chief Justice John Roberts to the Supreme Court. But he indicated he might draw the line on a Samuel Alito, because "he wore his conservatism on his sleeve."
Therein lies the problem that many conservatives have with John McCain. It is the nagging feeling that after all of his years of chummily bonding with liberal reporters and garnering favorable media coverage from them that the Arizona senator is embarrassed to be seen as too much of a conservative."
Go ahead and vote for someone who thinks you are too damned lazy to pick lettuce at $50/hr and is embarrased to be seen with the likes of you.
Perhaps that is why there were only 400 people at McCain's rally (he flew in on an Airbus plane BTW). He we too embarrased to be seen with the his other 50 supporters.
Posted by: pbj on February 9, 2008 11:52 AMSpend us into oblivion? That is rich considering we spend a billion/day now for the Iraq War. The president's budget is $3 trillion!! We are already spent to oblivion.
Posted by: pbj on February 9, 2008 11:58 AMBeyond that though. I smell a lot of cut-your-nose-to-spite-your-face stuff in here. Yeah, show that rotten McCain and vote for Hillary, that'll show 'em. While you're at it, shoot yourself in the foot with 2 liberal supreme court appointments, nationalized health care with 6 month waits for MRIs and cancer operations. But don't stop there, let's get our *ss out of Iraq so we can get the rag heads over here detonating dirty bombs in Elliot Bay and 5 bucks a gallon gas tax so we can pay 128 bucks a fill-up instead of 50. Don't forget the adios of the Bush tax cuts. That'll cost you a 1200 or so. Oh yeah, she said she'd garnishee wages if you don't get on the health care band wagon. That won't cheap. And this short list is only the start of her laundry list of chicken in every pot politics.
Yeah, vote for that Hillary, that'll show 'em.
Whiners.
Posted by: G Jiggy on February 9, 2008 02:26 PMIt seems to me that you're doing as much whining as anyone. I'm not sure why complaining about McCain is any more whiny than complaining about people who complain about McCain.
And I have no idea how you think having troops in Iraq keeps Muslim terrorists from coming to this country, but I do know that McCain's policy is to let them in along with all the other illegal aliens. And if a private citizen wants to protest this policy during an election by criticizing McCain or his fellow officials by name, McCain wants that citizen punished for his impudence.
All three of the remaining candidates are appalling. True, Hillary is most appalling, but that has less to do with her policies than with her corruption and her husband. As between Obama and McCain, they are appalling in different ways, and it seems to me to be just about a wash.
Posted by: ScottM on February 9, 2008 02:58 PMEasy to call someone a liar when you sitting anonymously behind your computer. Be careful what you say to me if we meet face to face.
For your information, although John McCain might not nominate an Alito to the bench, he did in fact support and fight for Alito once nominated. So regardless of what you think, it is not a lie.
Posted by: Calvin A on February 9, 2008 03:34 PM1. Iraq - McCain was right. Democrats would have us withdraw immediately. The war's not over if only one side quits fighting.
2. Pork/Entitlement reform - He's railed against pork for years and years (but needs to knock it off with the drunken sailor story, getting old). When you compare him to either Democrat, he's CLEARLY much better.
3. Immigration - The comprehensive immigration reform did include a passage that said the borders must be secure before any of the other provisions took effect. McCain now says he understands the border must be secure before any other discussion can take place. All that being said, the paths to citizenship and especially the DREAM Act part of the bill are not things I can support.
4. Judges - Say what you want, McCain voted for Alito and Roberts. Hillary and Obama didn't. Do you really think letting the Democrats fill possibly three spots on the SCOTUS is a good thing?
5. Health Care - This normally isn't one of my top issues, but if you watch how obsessively the Democrats talk about it you have to realize it's a big one. To those of you who claim there's no difference between McCain and Hillary/Obama, look at their ideas on reforming health care.
I vehemently disagree with McCain's cap and trade ideas on global warming. It's nice in the various debates when he starts talking about energy policy and brings up nuclear power. It's not so nice when he keeps talking about climate change and how we need to "fix" it.
I don't like McCain-Feingold, but I can't recall it being much of an issue at all while McCain appeared to be finished. McCain has vigorously opposed reimplementation of the Fairness Doctrine, he should get credit for that.
Ok McCain haters, tell me why I'm wrong!
Posted by: mike on February 9, 2008 04:25 PMAre you threatening me? How pathetic. If you don't like liar, I will agree that you are simply misinformed. And to date, you have provided zero evidence that McCain would nominate an Alito. Contrast that with the WSJ article I provided that quoted McCain saying he though Alito was too conservative.
John McCain has a track record of siding with the opposition against our party. If that is what you want, I suggest you simply elect a Democrat as they will do that much more efficiently and predictably.
Posted by: pbj on February 9, 2008 04:37 PM- He excoriated Samuel Alito as too "conservative."
-- He promoted amnesty for 20 million illegal immigrants.
-- He abridged citizens' free speech (in favor of the media) with McCain-Feingold.
-- He hysterically opposes waterboarding terrorists and wants to shut down Guantanamo.
- He denounced the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
-- He opposes ANWR and supports the global warming cult.
-- He thingk Americans are too damned lazy to pick lettuce for $50/hr and wants open borders for illegals to come in, commit crimes, get government benefits and take your job.
I don't want to end up with buyers remorse AFTER the election.
But he defended Kerry from the Bush campaign's suggestion that Kerry was not tip-top on national security, saying on the "Today" show: "No, I do not believe that he is, quote, weak on defense." So that was helpful.
Posted by: pbj on February 9, 2008 04:47 PMIf McCain is elected president, we'll have a four-year disaster, with the Republicans in Congress co-opted by "our" president, followed by 30 years of Democratic rule.
There's your choice, America.
Posted by: pbj on February 9, 2008 04:49 PMwhine (hwìn, wìn) verb
1.To utter a plaintive, high-pitched, protracted sound, as in pain, fear, supplication, or complaint.
2.To complain or protest in a childish fashion.
I didn't see any of that in my post. By your definition, you're whining as well. In fact, by your definition everybody here is whining. Better shut the board down.
Care to discuss the points?
One curious (sort of) item, Obama still has less caucus votes than the number that turned out for his rally. Clinton has more votes than supporters that turned out for her rally.
Posted by: SouthernRoots on February 9, 2008 06:10 PMYeah pjb. You call me a liar to my face you'd better be prepared to back it up with facts. So far you are pretty pathetic. I never once have said that McCain would nominate an Alito. You said that I said it twice and you called me a liar about it once. I said that when Alito was nominated he fought to get him confirmed. I said that he fought to confirm Bork, Roberts, and Alito. This is indisputably true. If you don't think so, you are the one who is misinformed.
So maybe you should think twice in the future about calling someone a liar over your misreading or misrepresentation of the facts.
Posted by: Calvin A on February 9, 2008 09:17 PMHow about I ask you directly:
Calvin A, YES or NO, will McCain nominate judges like Alito???
I doubt you have the courage to answer the question.
Posted by: pbj on February 9, 2008 10:38 PMYou don't have to vote for anyone either if you can't handle the choices. Just consider who will protect your butt from Radical Islamists and who won't.
Posted by: KS on February 10, 2008 12:00 AMIf you are a Bush supporter, then you are a hypocrite because exactly what you claimed about McCain is attributable to Bush.
Posted by: KS on February 10, 2008 01:42 PMI will answer your question. I don't know whether Judge Alito's clone will specifically be nominated to the SCOTUS by President McCain. However given McCain's support for Bork and Roberts I do know this. Anyone McCain nominates will be better than Chuck Shumer and Dianne Feinstein, the two people who I believe will be first nominated by President H. Clinton. Who will they be? Well, here's what McCain has to say.
Christian Science Monitor
"When some conservatives attacked McCain for remarking that he was reportedly troubled because Justice Alito "wore his conservatism on his sleeve," he set the record straight: "I will try to find clones of Alito and Roberts."
Wall Street Journal
"In fact, there is no reason to believe that Mr. McCain will not make excellent appointments to the court. On judicial nominations, he has voted soundly in the past from Robert Bork in 1987 to Samuel Alito in 2006."
CPAC speech
"I intend to nominate judges who have proven themselves worthy of our trust that they take as their sole responsibility the enforcement of laws made by the people's elected representatives, judges of the character and quality of Justices Roberts and Alito, judges who can be relied upon to respect the values of the people whose rights, laws and property they are sworn to defend."
CBN News
McCain sat down with CBN News senior correspondent David Brody on Monday to make it clear where he stands on the issue of judges.
He first pointed out that he voted for both Roberts and Alito, whom pro-life advocates see as votes three and four on the high court in overturning Roe v. Wade.
"I'm so proud of Justice Alito. I'm so proud of playing a role in getting his nomination through the United States Senate, he and Justice Roberts," McCain told CBN.
"And I've said many times that my nominees as President will be people like Roberts and Alito," McCain added. "They're the role model for what we're going to do when I am President of the United States because I have the greatest admiration for him and Chief Justice Roberts."
McCain pointed out that there could be two or three judicial picks for the Supreme Court during the next four years. McCain said he was proud of working with pro-life Sens. Lindsey Graham and Jon Kyl on shepherding President Bush's picks through the Senate.
"I will only appoint or nominate judges who have a clear record - not statements, but a clear record of strictly interpreting the Constitution of the United States," McCain promised CBN News.
"We all know there's been legislating from the bench that has harmed, or I think, threatened some of the fundamentals of the constitutional role of the judiciary," he concluded.
Posted by: Calvin A on February 10, 2008 02:25 PMBTW - how do you feel about the current President ?
Posted by: KS on February 10, 2008 02:55 PM