"Bush Clone"?

[William Haskins]

the democrats' main weapon against mccain in the general election will be tying him, both materially and philosophically to george w. bush.

obama, in fact, has already alluded to a mccain presidency as "bush's third term". and one of our own obama partisans has referred to him as a "bush clone".

so i thought i'd start a thread for both sides to make their arguments that either a) mccain is a "bush clone" or b) mccain is a republican, yes, but has parted ways with bush on many issues and will bring a unique (read: non-bushy) philosophy to the white house.

hopefully the debate will enlighten us all, and give us some indication as to which notion is correct and who might be peddling empty rhetoric void of real substance.

[James81]

McCain himself already openly ties himself to being just like Bush. lol There really is no work involved for the Dem candidate here, because McCain is pretty upfront about what he intends to do, and it's just more of the same.

[William Haskins]

documentation?

[Tink]

I agree w/James81.


And my opinion is...
IT IS TIME FOR A CHANGE!!!

[mscelina]

McCain himself already openly ties himself to being just like Bush. lol There really is no work involved for the Dem candidate here, because McCain is pretty upfront about what he intends to do, and it's just more of the same.


More of the same what? Economic policies? Foreign affairs platforms? Domestic spending? Assistance programs? Taxes?

What is your generic 'more of the same?'

[William Haskins]

I agree w/James81.

And my opinion is...

IT IS TIME FOR A CHANGE!!!


it's fine you agree and it's fine that you want "change" - however that's defined.

the purpose of this thread is to either tie mccain to bush philosophically or distinguish him from bush philosophically.

that requires more than sloganeering and drive-by posts.

if you have issues that you believe do either mentioned above, please share them.

[William Haskins]

More of the same what? Economic policies? Foreign affairs platforms? Domestic spending? Assistance programs? Taxes?

What is your generic 'more of the same?'

take your pick. ultimately your vote in the poll would be (should be) a synthesis of all of those things and some realization or contention that one is more true than the other.

[Takvah]

Obama will line my pockets with gold.....

http://www.pakwatan.com/business_img/gold_19.jpg

and booty....

http://www.blogforadults.com/images/big-bouble-butt.jpg

YARRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!

http://blog.tp.org/stacy/archives/piratekitty.jpg

McCain is his own man... he'll keep us in Iraq, he'll maintain the tax cuts but he'll do it his way :D Oh and we won't be kissing Iranian ass and appeasing thugs.

[mscelina]

take your pick. ultimately your vote in the poll would be (should be) a synthesis of all of those things and some realization or contention that one is more true than the other.


...actually, I was asking James. I should have quoted him--my bad. ;)

[ClaudiaGray]

Personally, I'd like to know when it became "elitist" to have a good education and speak well. If not wanting more "leaders" who proudly declare their ignorance and use sound bites and ridiculous gas-tax pandering instead of decent policy is "elitist," then I am one.

[Seaclusion]

McCain has stated that he will keep us in Iraq for a hundred years if nescessary. That's more of the same as far as the occupation of Iraq is concerned.

Richard

[rugcat]

I wouldn't call him a clone. His economic ideas, as far as I can tell, are similar to Bush's, but that's the Republican position in general. But I think he's quite different in his thinking about energy and environmental issues.

But as regards foreign policy, he is nearly identical. Being from a military background, he clearly believes that the best way to deal with enemy nations like Iran is through the threat of military force and is willing to follow through on that threat. And to me, this is his greatest failing -- the idea that in this increasing complex world, military might should drive our policy as not only an option, but as the first and preferred solution to international problems.

[robeiae]

McCain has stated that he will keep us in Iraq for a hundred years if nescessary.
That is pretty much the only positive I see in McCain.

[paprikapink]

Sorry no documentation. Just going on my personal responses to the candidates:

I don't think McCain is like Bush. I've always suspect Bush and crew of having greedy, self-serving ulterior motives. I don't get a vibe like that from McCain at all. I think he truly wants America to be the world's hero. I'm sorry that over the course of the past four years he's been willing to align himself more and more with Bush when before he seemed willing to take the political heat generated by opposing the president. And now he's in a bit of pickle since Bush has managed to become that rare thing: the sitting-president-who-is-a-political-liability. I don't agree with McCain's world view. I also love the idea of being the world's hero, but I'd rather see our focus be to do it without tanks and bombs. But McCain doesn't give me the feeling that an evil force has taken over the most powerful office on Earth and doesn't care if it destroys us all in pursuit of its agenda.

[William Haskins]

McCain has stated that he will keep us in Iraq for a hundred years if nescessary. That's more of the same as far as the occupation of Iraq is concerned.

Richard

http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=98214&highlight=Hundred

[whistlelock]

While I am not convinced that McCain would churn out a "3rd" term- all the posturing he's doing now lends itself to that. However, this is politics and he's doing all that he can to cement his base- which is a party he's been at odds with sometimes.

So, as of right now it does look like he'd be a "3rd Termer". But there's not telling what will really happen if he gets to say, "so help me God."

[paprikapink]

Then there're the spouses. Laura's not scary. She's even sweet. Cindy's a scarier possible First Spouse (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/08/cindy-mccain-i-will-never_n_100769.html) than Bill even. I wonder why she doesn't want to release her tax returns? Poor John is having to do the best he can on only $400K last year. Does she make him reimburse her for jet fuel?

[James81]

That is pretty much the only positive I see in McCain.

:roll:

[donroc]

Obama will line my pockets with gold.....

http://www.pakwatan.com/business_img/gold_19.jpg

and booty....

http://www.blogforadults.com/images/big-bouble-butt.jpg

YARRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!

http://blog.tp.org/stacy/archives/piratekitty.jpg

McCain is his own man... he'll keep us in Iraq, he'll maintain the tax cuts but he'll do it his way :D Oh and we won't be kissing Iranian ass and appeasing thugs.

And he has a score to settle with a certain Cuban interrogator.

[chartreuse]

Personally, I'd like to know when it became "elitist" to have a good education and speak well. If not wanting more "leaders" who proudly declare their ignorance and use sound bites and ridiculous gas-tax pandering instead of decent policy is "elitist," then I am one.

Nicely said, and I agree entirely.

I think what's happened is that a significant portion of the country has resigned themselves to living down to their lowest potential, and they want "leaders" that will do the same. They're much more comfortable with someone who is grammatically challenged, thinks it's fun to shoot crows with a BB gun, snickers everytime someone mentions Brokeback Mountain, and actually has an opinion on which is better deep-fried - Oreos or Twinkies.

[mscelina]

OOOOOH! LOOKIE!

A thread about the election!

IT MUST BE TIME TO SLAM GEORGE BUSH!

*rolls eyes*

[Shadow_Ferret]

...he clearly believes that the best way to deal with enemy nations like Iran is through the threat of military force and is willing to follow through on that threat. .
Thanks, I've been undecided about who to vote for until you just made it clear that McCain is the one.

[Bravo]

in his own words:


“I haven’t changed. My record is the same on all issues, which is that of a conservative Republican. Not a liberal Republican, not a moderate Republican.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/02/AR2006050201482.html

[chartreuse]

OOOOOH! LOOKIE!

A thread about the election!

IT MUST BE TIME TO SLAM GEORGE BUSH!

*rolls eyes*

I hope that wasn't directed at me.

Because George Bush, IMHO, is yesterday's news. Much more relevant now is the mindset of voters who are threatened by anyone who can speak not only correctly but eloquently and who enjoys cultural activities any more refined than American Idol or NASCAR.

[Shadow_Ferret]

IBecause Much more relevant now is the mindset of voters who are threatened by anyone who can speak not only correctly but eloquently and who enjoys cultural activities any more refined than American Idol or NASCAR.
Who can speak eloquently? I haven't heard any yet. They all have annoying speech mannerisms that annoy the heck out of me.

[rugcat]

Thanks, I've been undecided about who to vote for until you just made it clear that McCain is the one.Yes, that philosophy has worked really well for the last eight years. But I'm glad to see you understand where he's coming from -- that's exactly the type of issue the election should be decided on, not flag pins and pastors and pantsuits.

[Bravo]

McCain himself already openly ties himself to being just like Bush. lol There really is no work involved for the Dem candidate here, because McCain is pretty upfront about what he intends to do, and it's just more of the same.

documentation?


Well, let me just say that I’d be honored to have President George Bush’s support, his endorsement. And I’d be honored to be anywhere with him under any circumstances.

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/02/18/mccain-bush-term/

on the war:


“no one has supported President Bush on Iraq more than I have.” “Let me emphasize that there are many national security issues that I have strongly supported the president and steadfastly so,” added McCain.

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/04/02/mccain-no-one-has-supported-president-bush-on-iraq-more-than-i-have/

on sex ed:

Q: “So no contraception, no counseling on contraception. Just abstinence. Do you think contraceptives help stop the spread of HIV?”

Mr. McCain: (Long pause) “You’ve stumped me.”

Q: “I mean, I think you’d probably agree it probably does help stop it?”

Mr. McCain: (Laughs) “Are we on the Straight Talk express? I’m not informed enough on it. Let me find out. You know, I’m sure I’ve taken a position on it on the past. I have to find out what my position was. Brian, would you find out what my position is on contraception – I’m sure I’m opposed to government spending on it, I’m sure I support the president’s policies on it.”

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/03/16/mccain-stumbles-on-hiv-prevention/

on tax cuts mccain has slowly come over to the bush side as well:

"I cannot in good conscience support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us at the expense of middle-class Americans who need tax relief."[/I]--John McCain, May 2001

[I]"He voted against tax cuts in 2001, 2003, 2004 and 2005, and this year he's for the tax cuts in the reconciliation bill. It looks like he did it for political reasons."--Grover Norquist, on McCain’s conversion

now take a look at his website:

http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/0b8e4db8-5b0c-459f-97ea-d7b542a78235.htm

[William Haskins]

thanks, qaz, for actually adhering to the purpose of the thread. for those keeping score at home, we now have:

like bush, mccain doesn't want to cut and run from iraq, and
he now supports the bush tax cuts

[johnnysannie]

Who can speak eloquently? I haven't heard any yet. They all have annoying speech mannerisms that annoy the heck out of me.

And who doesn't?

[johnnysannie]

Personally, I'd like to know when it became "elitist" to have a good education and speak well. If not wanting more "leaders" who proudly declare their ignorance and use sound bites and ridiculous gas-tax pandering instead of decent policy is "elitist," then I am one.

Bravo, Claudia! If that is indeed what defines "elitist", I'm happy to join you on the elitist corner of the forum!

[James81]

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/02/18/mccain-bush-term/

on the war:



http://thinkprogress.org/2008/04/02/mccain-no-one-has-supported-president-bush-on-iraq-more-than-i-have/

on sex ed:


http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/03/16/mccain-stumbles-on-hiv-prevention/

on tax cuts mccain has slowly come over to the bush side as well:





now take a look at his website:

http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/0b8e4db8-5b0c-459f-97ea-d7b542a78235.htm

lol

Thank you my brother. :D

[blacbird]

"Clone" is an inappropriate term, just because I have confidence McCain wouldn't be as blitheringly stupid as Dubya. He would tolerate an Alberto Gonzales for about thirty seconds before physically throwing him out of the Oval Office.

But regarding policies, it's hard to see much divergence from the Bush White House. In fact, McCain is in danger of being a one-issue candidate. That issue is a big one (national security), but it isn't even at the top of most voters' radar right now. Do I even need to mention the war in Iraq?

On economic issues, he doesn't seem to have a clue, and has essentially admitted that. He's going to be a standard social conservative, because his party obviously expects that, and the hot-button social issues of four years ago ain't very hot-button this go-round.

But even most Republicans look on John McCain as a place-holder for one term while they scramble around to find a shinier conservative candidate. This is especially true of the bruised and battered Christian Right coalition that is unused to not having their fingers clamped on the candidate's privates. Some of their principal spokesmen (they're almost all men) have ventured as far as to hope for a Dem win this year, so they can begin to build an all-out attack for 2012.

Democrats inevitably seem headed for big gains in the U.S. Senate, and probably fair-sized ones in the House as well. Nothing about the Obama-Clinton war of attrition for the nomination has altered that situation a bit. So if McCain does win, he'll start with a very unfriendly Legislative Branch, which will severely limit his effectiveness at pushing a conservative agenda.

Bottom line, it's hard to see much changing from the status quo in a McCain presidency. It will be a malaise-ridden look back, and not with much nostalgia attached.

caw

[Bravo]

thanks, qaz, for actually adhering to the purpose of the thread. for those keeping score at home, we now have:
like bush, mccain doesn't want to cut and run from iraq, and
he now supports the bush tax cuts

you forgot about sex.

as usual.

[Shadow_Ferret]

And who doesn't?
I can think of any number that don't. Unfortunately, just like those who actually are qualified for the Presidency, they don't run.

[William Haskins]

you forgot about sex.

as usual.


i told you... i was too drunk that night...

[GeorgeK]

McCain has stated that he will keep us in Iraq for a hundred years if nescessary. That's more of the same as far as the occupation of Iraq is concerned.

Richard

and Obama has said that he will keep the troops in Iraq as well

[StephanieFox]

A new type of administration does not mean better, but at least McCain is not a retarded person, like Bush.

[InfinityGoddess]

Bravo, Claudia! If that is indeed what defines "elitist", I'm happy to join you on the elitist corner of the forum!


Elitists unite! :D

[Don Allen]

MCcain wasn't too fond of Bush in 2000 as I recall... John is more adaptable and definitly his own man. I see Bush as a puppit, first and foremost to Rove, the switching to Cheney, then to Rumsfield, back to Cheney. MCcain will listen but he's got a bit of Harry Truman in him.
Bush has alwys struck me as an arrogant know-it-all who is wrong as much if not more than he is right. MCcain takes measure of his positions to a greater extent and to his credit reaches out accross both parties to arrive at a decision. Big difference.
McCain is in an uncomfotable position and he knows it, he has to pander to a conservative base he has never identified with to have any chance of winning the election, that means he must appear to be in step with Bush, but his history dosen't really bear that out. The problem for john is that he's caught between the proverbial rock and hard place with no where to go.

[clintl]

He's also touting a health care "reform" plan that is very similar to what Bush has proposed (and failed to get passed).

And that he'd look for judges like Roberts and Alito to appoint to the Supreme Court.

Policy-wise, I think the only area where we would see significant divergence from Bush is on global warming.

But he'll be more honest and less secretive than Bush while doing most of the same things.

[billythrilly7th]

Hopefully, for the most part, choice A.

More dead terrorists and low taxes.

Go Johnny go!

[Meerkat]

I'm not a republican, but I did meet McCain over a decade ago. He struck me--no, wait-- not that "temper" thing... he struck me as a very deep thinker, who waits until he has a decent bottom line formulated before proceeding. He would tend to have a coherent vision statement, for example. So he would probably represent a wiser republican administration.

Then he struck me.

[Bartholomew]

I'm of the opinion that McCain will be more Bushy than anything else. He's more eloquent, at least. (That isn't say much, though.)

The Washington Post ran an article about this very topic.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/23/AR2008032301550.html

PARIS -- Standing along the edge of the Gaza Strip and flanked by a hero of the Israeli military, Sen. John McCain last week invoked the tough rhetoric of President Bush, warning of Iranian influence in the Middle East and cautioning against negotiations with terrorists.

A day later, standing outside London's 10 Downing Street, McCain found himself arguing against his president as he eagerly recounted for reporters his lengthy conversation with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown about the need for worldwide action to prevent global warming...

[SHBueche]

I was just about to post the fact that his wife, Cindy, refuses to release their tax returns, when I saw someone beat me to it. I know that she is a millionaire in her own right so I'm assuming this is the reason, but don't know for certain.

[InfinityGoddess]

I was just about to post the fact that his wife, Cindy, refuses to release their tax returns, when I saw someone beat me to it. I know that she is a millionaire in her own right so I'm assuming this is the reason, but don't know for certain.

She's the heiress to a beer distribution company. So yeah, she has deep pockets, all right. Her hubby probably wanted to show how "regular Joe" he was and that's likely why they would hide it. That would be my guess, anyways.

[Upbeat]

[quote=Don Allen;2335693]MCcain wasn't too fond of Bush in 2000 as I recall... John is more adaptable and definitly his own man. I see Bush as a puppit, first and foremost to Rove, the switching to Cheney, then to Rumsfield, back to Cheney. MCcain will listen but he's got a bit of Harry Truman in him.
Bush has alwys struck me as an arrogant know-it-all who is wrong as much if not more than he is right. MCcain takes measure of his positions to a greater extent and to his credit reaches out accross both parties to arrive at a decision. Big difference.
McCain is in an uncomfotable position and he knows it, he has to pander to a conservative base he has never identified with to have any chance of winning the election, that means he must appear to be in step with Bush, but his history dosen't really bear that out. The problem for john is that he's caught between the proverbial rock and hard place with no where to go.[/quote

Exactly !! McCain's his own man fully willing to, and capable of, bringing together opposing Congressional factions to move our country forward.

[William Haskins]

the poll results are quite interesting.

thanks to everyone who participated.

[blacbird]

I am curious for some follow-up, though (and I'm not being sarcastic or anything here). I posted my own view earlier in the thread, essentially that, while not being a "clone" of Bush, McCain is kind of trapped into not deviating very far from Bush policies in most areas. Therefore projecting a McCain administration as being, in many ways, a continuation of the Bush years.

Now, what I'm curious about, is how those who voted for option #2, a "new kind of Republican administration", see that as happening. I may have missed some of it in the thread, but how do you see it being expressed in actual policies and actions?

caw

[William Haskins]

personally, i see him deviating from bush on immigration, on stem cell research, on the climate.

these are three important issues, but acknowledging that mccain would pursue quite different paths in these areas is inconvenient for those who would see his hawkish views on foreign affairs and his (well explained, in my opinion) change of heart on making the bush tax cuts permanent as slam-dunk proof that he would be, as obama put it, bush's third term.

[Bravo]

personally, i see him deviating from bush on immigration...

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/05/06/mccain-secure-borders/

[Bravo]

he wouldn't have voted for his own immigration bill:

HOOK: Senator McCain, let me just take the issue to you, because you obviously have been very involved in it. During this campaign, you, like your rivals, have been putting the first priority, heaviest emphasis on border security. But your original immigration proposal back in 2006 was much broader and included a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants who were already here.

What I'm wondering is -- and you seem to be downplaying that part. At this point, if your original proposal came to a vote on the Senate floor, would you vote for it?

MCCAIN: It won't. It won't. That's why we went through the debate...

HOOK: But if it did?

MCCAIN: No, it would not, because we know what the situation is today. The people want the border secured first. And so to say that that would come to the floor of the Senate -- it won't. We went through various amendments which prevented that ever -- that proposal.

But, look, we're all in agreement as to what we need to do. Everybody knows it. We can fight some more about it, about who wanted this or who wanted that. But the fact is, we all know the American people want the border secured first.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/30/GOPdebate.transcript/

[Bravo]

he's hawkish on foreign policy, he's anti-gay rights, he's anti-abortion, he's pro-abstinence only education, he's flipped to being hawkish on immigration, he's for indefinite tax cuts, he's against bailouts for homeowners (but for bailouts for big banks), and finally, he's courting the fanatical religious right of the republican part.

but no, he wont lead a different kind of republican administration.

the same crap, just different BSer.

[InfinityGoddess]

he's hawkish on foreign policy, he's anti-gay rights, he's anti-abortion, he's pro-abstinence only education, he's flipped to being hawkish on immigration, he's for indefinite tax cuts, he's against bailouts for homeowners (but for bailouts for big banks), and finally, he's courting the fanatical religious right of the republican part.

but no, he wont lead a different kind of republican administration.

the same crap, just different BSer.

Agreed with all of this. And he's flip-flopped on his abortion position again (http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=4824779&page=1), saying now he's perfectly fine with forcing rape and incest victims to gestate against their will and making no exceptions to the mother's life and health. Lovely.