South Carolina goes to John McCain
- Posted by Beth on January 19th, 2008 filed in 2008 election, Candidates, Fred Thompson, General, John McCain, Mitt Romney, Politics primaries · Republicans · South Carolina
Just caught it on teevee, and here’s the story:
John McCain took the early lead in the South Carolina primary Saturday, and never lost it.
With 82 percent of precincts reporting, McCain had 33 percent and Huckabee, 29 percent. Fred Thompson had 16 percent, Mitt Romney had 15 percent. Ron Paul was polling at 4 percent and Rudy Giuliani at 2 percent. Duncan Hunter, fairing poorly in both Nevada and South Carolina on Saturday, was returning to San Diego and planned to drop out, FOX News learned.
At this point, I’m hating it for Fred–he may stay in it for Super Tuesday, but I think he’s done. If he couldn’t do better than this in South Carolina…well, you know. :sigh:
Meanwhile, the McCain campaign celebrates.
WASHINGTON (AP) - Republican John McCain called his victory in South Carolina’s presidential primary on Saturday evidence that his campaign “can carry right through” Florida into the giant round of caucuses and primaries on Feb. 5. “I know it’s not easy,” he told The Associated Press, “and we’ve got a long way to go.”
South Carolina was where McCain’s presidential prospects died eight years ago, and he savored the victory this time.
“It just took us awhile, that’s all,” he said in the interview. “Eight years is not a long time.”
This time, he said, “It sure was nice to have a lot of our old friends be happier that we won.”
Asked if he was now the front-runner for the GOP nomination, McCain demurred.
“I don’t know,” he said, “we like to run from behind.”
Still, he expressed optimism going forward.
“I’m very confident that we’ll win in Florida,” he said.
“We showed that the first-in-the-South primary is a very important victory, and it gives us a very important progress that we can carry right through Florida and February 5th,” he said.
McCain said he planned to stress pocketbook and national security issues going forward.
“People care about our nation’s security and they’re worried about our economy,” McCain said. “I’m going to be talking to them about those issues and how I’m best qualified to lead the nation.”
A few thoughts:
Looking around the blogosphere, I’ve seen people going for the “stupid voters” thing again, as they did after Iowa. Those people ought to be ashamed of themselves, and frankly smacked upside their narrow-minded heads.
Whatever. They can tell that to the military who are voting for McCain. Maybe they aren’t as wound up about illegal immigration or whatever as others are. So they’re stupid now. Got it.
Apparently some people don’t realize it, but the military is NOT as monolithically conservative as people on the blogosphere are. Mostly, they’re defense hawks and pretty socially moderate/agnostic. I suppose it’s news to the civilian world that people in the military really do care about the war too. The fact that they’d vote for McCain is absolutely no surprise to me, and after having served for 11 years, I assure you, it’s not due to their being “stupid.” In fact, I’d say a lot of them know more about the issues and real life than even the geniuses in the blogosphere (and especially the media) do.
Some seem to think people are voting for CMDR John McCain, POW. Those people would, of course, be wrong. In fact, I’d say that some (not all, but many, based on the things I’ve read) of those attacking McCain haven’t even bothered to do any real, honest investigation of the issues. Well, I think it’s time to do just that, starting now.
Congratulations to John McCain, and to Mitt Romney for his resounding win in Nevada. Well done!
Chris says:
For pity sake. 29% for Huckabee? People can be so freaking stupid.
Hopefully this is Hucksters high water mark.
Chris says:
BTW, I would not comment “Stupid voters” for anyone but Huckabee. The guy is a bigger fraud than Bill Clinton.
You are absolutely correct that the war is probably foremost on their mind. As far as sealing the borders and all, they probably realize that there isn’t much difference between what’s left. That being known, go for the best CIC in the pack. A war hero who has been in the battles would be that person.
Still, 29% for Huckabee? Ugh.
Beth says:
Yep, that’s how I’m going, too.
I cannot believe Huckabee did that much better than Fred. That’s just f’ing SAD. Bleh.
And yeah, the immigration issue–there isn’t much difference between those left at all, aside from Fred (who’s just on life support at this point, if he even stays in). I don’t care how they TALK about immigration, when you look at the details, there’s not much difference. McCain is really the only one who is being brutally honest about it.
At least Duncan Hunter’s presence had the effect of pulling them all closer to his position, although they’d have a long way to go to get there.
raz0r says:
Nothing I can do now. I mailed off my ballot for Fred! on Friday. If he drops out, well, I hope he hangs for a bit longer. But he can’t keep playing for third or fourth.
LindaSoG says:
A McCain presidency would be a disaster.
Have you forgotten McCain’s amnesty plan for the illegal aliens?
Have you forgotten that McCain support of touchy feely terrorist relations?
McCain had nothing but praise for Jimmy Carter for getting Israel to relinquish the Sinai.
He sided with Ted Kennedy against President Bush’s tax cuts of 2001 and 2003.
McCain voted in favor of the 1999 Kosovo Resolution authorizing air and missile strikes so that another terrorist state could be created.
How much harm could he do as POTUS?
The thought scares the living daylights out of me.
Anonymous,Somewhere,MI says:
Oh, I’ll bite. . . .
“Have you forgotten McCain’s amnesty plan for the illegal aliens?”
vs. What? Build higher walls that illegals will dig under? Bush and McCain backed comprehensive immigration reform for one reason and one reason alone, no force on heaven or earth is going to stop impoverished Mexicans from coming to this country for work. I have a joke with my brother who’s one of the “build a wall” advocates. Mexico already has not track, high jump, or swimming team. . . were you trying to take out the pole vault team next? At least C.I.R. re-establishes the rule of law, which the Hobbesian in all of us should support. Incidently, if some of them want to stay here and be citizens, is that such a bad thing? Wouldn’t you rather have 10 million Mexicans who want to be here instead of a million San Fransicans who don’t?
“Have you forgotten that McCain support of touchy feely terrorist relations?”
Bomb Iran is not touchy-feely. I have little doubt that if McCain, a soldier, had been president US troops would have gone into those caves in Tora Bora and walked out with bin Ladens head on a pike. Other than that, I can only assume that you’re thinking about the fact that this former tortured POW has condemned the use of torture against America’s POWs. Have you ever stopped to think that maybe he has a point? I know it produces results, but waterboarding is only cosmetically different than holding someone’s head in a bucket of water till they talk.
“McCain had nothing but praise for Jimmy Carter for getting Israel to relinquish the Sinai.”
And the result? There’s peace between Israel and Egypt, with the added benefit that Egypt is a US ally today. And, qualitatively, Carter and the Sinai pales in comparison to Bush telling Israel to back off the settlements in the P.A.
“He sided with Ted Kennedy against President Bush’s tax cuts of 2001 and 2003.”
Fiscal conservatism isn’t just about cutting taxes, it’s about cutting spending too. Right now we have huge deficits and an ever-growing debt that is devaluing our dollar abroad. I like paying less in taxes too (boy do I ever), but without the attending spending cuts the tax cut had the effect of undoing the hard work of the 1994 revolution that produced the surpluses. Gingrich and the Republicans then took the hard steps and cut spending like crazy, now that’s fiscal conservatism.
“McCain voted in favor of the 1999 Kosovo Resolution authorizing air and missile strikes so that another terrorist state could be created.”
Actually, it was authorization for the use of ground troops, Clinton favored only the use of Air Power and actually worked to kill the bill. Clinton was going in anyways, with or without McCain.
J Rob says:
Sorry I’ve been away for so long. Part of that time has been recouperating from a near fatal auto accident (had I not turned hard left when I did it would have been fatal. Drunk driver ran a stop sign and broadsided us)
I went and voted for Fred yesterday. I was dismayed by the results yesterday as well. Remember one thing about the SC primary. It is open. There is absolutely nothing to keep Democrats from voting in it. If enough of them were comfortable with whoever their nominee will be I can see them doing mischief enough to put McAmnesty and Latter-day Jimmy Carter at the top.
Anonymous,Somewhere,MI says:
“There is absolutely nothing to keep Democrats from voting in it.”
Sure there is. If they vote in our primary they can’t vote in their own, which is going to be hotly contested. Democrats have more of a stake in the outcome of their own race than they have in ours.
cargosquid says:
I’m not calling ALL of the voters idiots. Just the “self proclaimed conservatives” that did not vote for the conservative:
“The other candidates are winning because you are voting for them. Yes, Fred could have run a more “exciting” race, but, you knew that he wouldn’t pander to the crowd when he started. If you wanted a conservative, why do you have to be convinced? Just vote for the CONSERVATIVE. Who cares about the “campaign?”
The Reagan Revolution is dead. Long live the liberals. When you get a liberal president, don’t blame the Fred Heads.
Fred Thompson misjudged the electorate. He listened to the GOP and thought that there was support for him. His qualities match EVERY SINGLE THING we’ve asked for in the last 20 years. And you turned it down. Because you couldn’t get excited….
Small government? Federalism? Repeal McCain-Feingold? Immigration? 2nd Amendment?
Abortion? Non-activist judges? AND fighting the GWOT?
What if……
Too late now. Should’ve voted for the conservative when you had the chance.”
And McCain? He’s not a conservative. Look
McCain-Feingold — the most brazen frontal assault on political speech since Buckley v. Valeo.
McCain-Kennedy — the most far-reaching amnesty program in American history.
McCain-Lieberman — the most onerous and intrusive attack on American industry — through reporting, regulating, and taxing authority of greenhouse gases — in American history.
McCain-Kennedy-Edwards — the biggest boon to the trial bar since the tobacco settlement, under the rubric of a patients’ bill of rights.
McCain-Reimportation of Drugs — a significant blow to pharmaceutical research and development, not to mention consumer safety (hey Rudy, pay attention, see link).
And McCain’s stated opposition to the Bush 2001 and 2003 tax cuts was largely based on socialist, class-warfare rhetoric.
McCain-ACLU — the unprecedented granting of due-process rights to unlawful enemy combatants (terrorists).
McCain has repeatedly called for the immediate closing of Guantanamo Bay and the introduction of al-Qaeda terrorists into our own prisons — despite the legal rights they would immediately gain and the burdens of managing such a dangerous population.
But I don’t expect well informed conservatives to vote for him. I know they will, to the detriment of Thompson, but, hope springs eternal….
cargosquid says:
How did I end up with a Mohammed bombhead pic for mine name? I don’t mind. Just suprised, since I didn’t put it there.
cargosquid says:
Oh, they change. Never mind….
J Rob says:
Way to lift one line out of context there. Legally there is absolutely nothing to prevent it and every four years there are those foolish enough to try voting both. Followed by the public whining that they were disenfranchised. Since we do not have partisan registration there are technicaly neither Republicans nor Democrats as far as a voter’s registration is concerned.
Then right after the line you isolated I said, “If enough of them were comfortable with whoever their nominee will be I can see them doing mischief enough…”
Anonymous,Somewhere,MI says:
“Way to lift one line out of context there.”
Nothing was changed in the context of what you said vs. what I quoted. You stated directly that there is nothing to prevent Democrats from voting in the Republican primary. Quoting that alone and addressing it doesn’t alter its meaning even when inserted into context. In saying I took it out of context you insinuate that your quote had no directly addressable meaning. i.e., you made an idle statement. Yes, there are measures in place to prevent mischief cross-over. It’s called a voter roll. Once they mark you off as having voted in one of the contests they don’t allow you to vote in another. So, if they want a say in the Democratic primary, they can’t vote in the Republican primary. Any who might have voted in the Republican primary would have been doing so, more likely than not, out of direct support for a candidate.
“Since we do not have partisan registration there are technicaly neither Republicans nor Democrats as far as a voter’s registration is concerned.”
We have non-partisan registration in Michigan too, and yes, legally, you can only vote in one contest. This year Mr. Establishment favorite Romney won, despite their being virtually no contest in Michigan. This is despite liberals fixated on Mr. anti-war Ron Paul.
“Then right after the line you isolated I said, “If enough of them were comfortable with whoever their nominee will be I can see them doing mischief enough…”
Which was addressed enough when I explained that the Democratic contest in South Carolina is hotly contested and they have more of a vested interest in their own outcome than in ours.
Anything else?
Beth says:
Cargosquid,
Well informed voters will and have voted for McCain. Some have done so to stop Huckabee, and others simply HAVE A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION with you. Others just want to nominate the person who can “beat the bitch,” so to speak. I’m not sure how you come to the conclusion that such voters are not well-informed, but however that is, you’re wrong.
I could easily take down nearly every (not all, because there are some about which I agree with you) argument of yours that calls McCain a liberal, as well. Why? Because I’m well informed. I don’t buy into the demagoguery of the ideological leaders on these issues, and each issue deserves more than a simple sentence that is, in most cases, not even based in fact. I’m sorry, but you need to accept that some conservatives don’t agree with you about everything. It doesn’t make them–ME–”liberal” or moderate, either.
I’ve been a Fredhead waiting for his campaign to take off for a YEAR now, longer than just about anyone. I’m tired of waiting, and I have to cast my vote in a couple of weeks. At this point, I hate to say it, but I have to question the leadership and judgement of someone who’s let his campaign go to shit with so many fervent supporters waiting for him. You think the Bush administration has done a lousy job of selling the war to the American people? How exactly do you think Fred would do it, if he can’t even sell his candidacy to conservatives? How would he sell conservatism to the public? I wish I didn’t feel this way, but I don’t believe he could do it. His campaign decisions have proven it.
Beth says:
J Rob, I hope you’re doing much better since your accident. I guess that’s the only time “turning hard left” is a good thing, huh? ;-)
Thank God you survived!
I don’t agree that the Democrats are making a difference–they do that every election, and so do some Republicans. Those who have studied exit polling data say it doesn’t really have an impact. If there were Democrats voting in the GOP primaries in droves, you’d hear about it. The idiots at Kos wanted to do that in Michigan, and that’s really the only place they’d have a good reason to do it–yet their little plan still failed, based on exit polling.
Besides, I can’t imagine why a Democrat (other than in Michigan) would want to skip voting in their own party–not when the chances look good that a Democrat may win in November. I suppose if they had little hope of winning, like in 1984, it could be quite appealing, but not when the race is looking close. Also, with polling data showing McCain being the only candidate who could beat the Democrats today, I’d think McCain would be the LAST person the lefturd dirty tricksters would want to see as the nominee. That’s why the Left is salivating at the idea of a Romney or Huckabee nomination–they see him as easily beaten. Not so with McCain, and probably not so with Giuliani, for that matter (they just hate Giuliani’s guts).
Chris says:
I guess I am alone in thinking that the repub nominee with few exceptions, can and very well may beat either Hillary or Obama. Fred will beat her. Rudy will. McCain might, probably will. Romney will as well. Huck won’t, neither will Paul. Tancredo and Hunter would too. The Republican nominee always starts off with a deficit in the polls. W had no chance except in a few select polls. Reagan was too aloof to beat Carter. Nixon couldn’t win dog catcher. They all won. I think Dukakis polled ahead of Bush until the tank ride incident. Even in the latter days of Clinton’s election, Bush was pulling up and had nearly tied the thing up until the Iran-Contra October surprise.
When we have a nominee we’ll poll far behind. As the positions come clearer and the ads exposing Hillary/Obama start running, we will have a shot. The more the public sees of the democrats and their true positions, the more they vote republican. Fred, Rudy, Romney, McCain are still my order of preference. All of them will beat Hillary or Obama.
Anonymous,Somewhere,MI says:
“The Republican nominee always starts off with a deficit in the polls. W had no chance except in a few select polls.”
Actually, that’s not accurate. During the nomination contests polls showed Bush polling in a statistical dead heat with Gore (incidently it showed McCain stomping him). The end result was a statistical dead heat with Gore. If you want to see how the candidates will perform in November, pay attention to the polls right about now. Usually this far out in contested primaries they’re a good indicator. The candidates are already taking beatings and support is evaluated in a crucible rather than a lull.