John McCain wouldn't be a "third term of President Bush."

John McCain has been known as a maverick, and is a moderately conservative Republican. He's actually more conservative than the perception by some Republicans, though he's also different from President Bush in some ways.

Here is John McCain on the issues:

National defense: Conservative (strong supporter of the troop surge in Iraq. Doesn't plan to withdraw the combat troops too soon)

Taxes: Moderate (doesn't always support unconditional tax breaks yet doesn't support any increases)

Government spending: Conservative (he's strongly against earmarks and "pork barrel" spending)

Supreme Court Judges: Conservative (supports appointing strictly constitutional judges)

Environment: Moderate (believes in global warming, though isn't radical about it like Al Gore)

Immigration: Moderate (believes in a guest worker program and this is one of the main reasons why some conservatives are annoyed by him)

So, I'm definitely voting for John McCain in November for three main reasons: Iraq war, government spending, and appointment of judges.:D

Almost all republican presidents starting with Reagan have come into their presidencies touting low taxes, and low spending. All of them have failed miserably, and massively increased the deficit. What make you think that McCain will be different?bman784

[QUOTE="bman784"]Almost all republican presidents starting with Reagan have come into their presidencies touting low taxes, and low spending. All of them have failed miserably, and massively increased the deficit. What make you think that McCain will be different?famicommander

[QUOTE="famicommander"][QUOTE="bman784"]Almost all republican presidents starting with Reagan have come into their presidencies touting low taxes, and low spending. All of them have failed miserably, and massively increased the deficit. What make you think that McCain will be different?bman784

[QUOTE="bman784"][QUOTE="famicommander"][QUOTE="bman784"]Almost all republican presidents starting with Reagan have come into their presidencies touting low taxes, and low spending. All of them have failed miserably, and massively increased the deficit. What make you think that McCain will be different?famicommander

The President doesn't have the authority to just do that :P

[QUOTE="famicommander"][QUOTE="bman784"][QUOTE="famicommander"][QUOTE="bman784"]Almost all republican presidents starting with Reagan have come into their presidencies touting low taxes, and low spending. All of them have failed miserably, and massively increased the deficit. What make you think that McCain will be different?duxup

The President doesn't have the authority to just do that :P

No, but he does have the power to veto any bills that would lead to new spending.famicommander

And that gets his poicy where? To the point where the government shuts down due to no budget?

It's just talk. The dude has to get congress to go along and even a dominate Republican congress in recent years has instead just chosen to spend like mad.

Republicans (including me) will rally for our nominee John McCain.Mr_Manikin52

Thank goodness that you said that! I'm getting a little tired of a lot of conservatives saying that John McCain isn't conservative enough. Sure, he's not the ultimate Reagan conservative, though he's far more conservative than Clinton or Obama. Newt Gingrich even said that "he's far more conservative" than the other two.

John McCain actually has a pretty solid conservative voting record over the years. Though he is still slightly more moderate than a lot of Republicans. Though it's mostly on things like immigration and the environment. I know that the McCain-Feingold (campain finance reform) didn't work out like it should have, though he can't be perfect. :P

[QUOTE="bman784"][QUOTE="famicommander"][QUOTE="bman784"]Almost all republican presidents starting with Reagan have come into their presidencies touting low taxes, and low spending. All of them have failed miserably, and massively increased the deficit. What make you think that McCain will be different?famicommander

[QUOTE="famicommander"]No, but he does have the power to veto any bills that would lead to new spending.duxup

And that gets his poicy where? To the point where the government shuts down due to no budget?

It's just talk. The dude has to get congress to go along and even a dominate Republican congress in recent years has instead just chosen to spend like mad.

Yes, and that's one of the main reasons why they lost control of congress in November of 2006.

[QUOTE="duxup"]

[QUOTE="famicommander"]No, but he does have the power to veto any bills that would lead to new spending.MayorJohnny

And that gets his poicy where? To the point where the government shuts down due to no budget?

It's just talk. The dude has to get congress to go along and even a dominate Republican congress in recent years has instead just chosen to spend like mad.

Yes, and that's one of the main reasons why they lost control of congress in November of 2006. It seems that a lot of Republicans stayed home. I didn't, because I though it was too important not to vote. The Republicans didn't really deserve to maintain the majority in the House and Senate, though the alternative would be even worse, and it is. The democratic lead congress has a VERY low approval rating right now.

Spending was the reason they lost congress?

Not the war?

[QUOTE="MayorJohnny"][QUOTE="duxup"]

[QUOTE="famicommander"]No, but he does have the power to veto any bills that would lead to new spending.duxup

And that gets his poicy where? To the point where the government shuts down due to no budget?

It's just talk. The dude has to get congress to go along and even a dominate Republican congress in recent years has instead just chosen to spend like mad.

Yes, and that's one of the main reasons why they lost control of congress in November of 2006. It seems that a lot of Republicans stayed home. I didn't, because I though it was too important not to vote. The Republicans didn't really deserve to maintain the majority in the House and Senate, though the alternative would be even worse, and it is. The democratic lead congress has a VERY low approval rating right now.

Spending was the reason they lost congress?

Not the war?

It was the main reason for Republican voters. Had conservatives shown up to vote in full force to match the enthusiam of the democrats and some independent voters upset with the war and other things, then things would be different.

So, unhappy conservatives with spending in congress, and the big opposition by the democrats and some independents is why the GOP lost the majority.

I think John McCain is the best choice.

As for the war thing...:0. I don't care for it.

Let's face it, Obama is for the rest of the world the better choice and the kind of politician this world clearly needs right now...Redgarl

A young and inexperienced leader in the midst of threats from terrorists (not just in Iraq), nuclear activity from rogue nations, and bickering from dictators such as Hugo Chavez and Raul Castro. Oh, and then there's that oil problem...

Now is the time to be firm, not cower. Peace through strength.

[QUOTE="Redgarl"]Let's face it, Obama is for the rest of the world the better choice and the kind of politician this world clearly needs right now...MayorJohnny

A young and inexperienced leader in the midst of threats from terrorists (not just in Iraq), nuclear activity from rogue nations, and bickering from dictators such as Hugo Chavez and Raul Castro. Oh, and then there's that oil problem...

Now is the time to be firm, not cower. Peace through strength.

cower? we spend about half of the entire world budget on military. do you really think increasing that at the expense of our economic future will change anything?

[QUOTE="Redgarl"]Let's face it, Obama is for the rest of the world the better choice and the kind of politician this world clearly needs right now...MayorJohnny

A young and inexperienced leader in the midst of threats from terrorists (not just in Iraq), nuclear activity from rogue nations, and bickering from dictators such as Hugo Chavez and Raul Castro. Oh, and then there's that oil problem...

Now is the time to be firm, not cower. Peace through strength.

lol, well this "peace through strength" strategy hasnt worked so far...maybe its time u tried sumthing new :wink:

McCain not a 3rd term of Bush, if you're right that means the Dems are lying, and we know that they never lie, only the Republicans lie. Lol.

well i am not voting for him, but I wont be the lest bit sad if he wins.

I think he could make a good president

Meh... Don't really care, I view them all as third bush term now that Ron Paul is out of the scene. :( Ron Paul where have you gone. :cry:

I'm just bored with these canidates... none of them want to get rid of the war on drugs, A war that kills and has killed more americans then the war in Iraq WILL EVER have. Get rid of that crappy war, none of them want to do it, screw them all...

People keep saying McCain "is not another Bush" but fail to convince me why. No way in hell I am voting for him.Engrish_Major

they only say that because of the war, which is the only thing Bush is known for. Just because McCain supports the way doesnt mean he will be the same as Bush.

I know it's throwing my vote to someone who really doesn't have a great chance of winning, but I'm praying for a Ron Paul/Bob Barr Libertarian Party ticket. McCain scares the crap outta me on illegal immigration, but he's got the right attitude on the war, the economy and believes strongly in the 2nd ammendment which is very important to me. I know he's not a Reagan conservative that we Libertarian/Conservatives desperately want, but he's leaps and bounds better then Barry Obama.

(disgusted:?) I guess I'm voting for Mac. Unless Dr. Paul makes a serious attempt and Bob Barr is on board, what else can we hope for?

[QUOTE="Engrish_Major"]People keep saying McCain "is not another Bush" but fail to convince me why. No way in hell I am voting for him.mrbojangles25

they only say that because of the war, which is the only thing Bush is known for. Just because McCain supports the way doesnt mean he will be the same as Bush.

It is the war and the same economic policy. We are going downhill, why would we want to continue? Obama is going to take money from the war (as well as former tax cuts from the rich) and put it into rebuilding our infrastructure while researching green energy. Why shouldn't we support that?

No I dont think we should stay in Iraq 100 more years or invade Iran.

Bomb bomb iran bomb bomb bomb iran.

I mean he has Henry Kissinger a war criminal supporting him for president.

That by itself is enough reason not to support him.

Remeber the keating 5 or all of john mccains lobbyist freinds?

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

[QUOTE="Engrish_Major"]People keep saying McCain "is not another Bush" but fail to convince me why. No way in hell I am voting for him.Engrish_Major

they only say that because of the war, which is the only thing Bush is known for. Just because McCain supports the way doesnt mean he will be the same as Bush.

It is the war and the same economic policy. We are going downhill, why would we want to continue? Obama is going to take money from the war (as well as former tax cuts from the rich) and put it into rebuilding our infrastructure while researching green energy. Why shouldn't we support that?

Engrish, this is where we disagree on our viewpoints, and I see why. You've played into their hands, They meaning the biased media and the misinformed public. People like Obama want you to associate the war in Iraq with the current economic struggles, but it just isn't that simple. We've spent roughly 600 billion on the war so far. This equates to 8/10ths of 1% of our GDP. There's a clear bias designed to indoctrinate you with disinformation about the war, to paint everything Bush as everything Bad and to prop up this empty suit named Barry Obama. He's shoveling more crap down America's throats and we're lining up at the trough asking "Please Sir, can I have some more?" How exactly is he going to fix our economy? With MORE government spending? By increasing the welfare state in America with idiocy like Socialist Healthcare, ending the Bush tax cuts, taxing the rich more, enabling the capital gains tax, etc. etc. etc. ? Where's the plan to guide America to a brighter future? Barry's more of the same garbage Washington has been pimping out to all of us for decades.:x

Engrish, this is where we disagree on our viewpoints, and I see why. You've played into their hands, They meaning the biased media and the misinformed public. People like Obama want you to associate the war in Iraq with the current economic struggles, but it just isn't that simple. We've spent roughly 600 billion on the war so far. This equates to 8/10ths of 1% of our GDP. There's a clear bias designed to indoctrinate you with disinformation about the war, to paint everything Bush as everything Bad and to prop up this empty suit named Barry Obama. He's shoveling more crap down America's throats and we're lining up at the trough asking "Please Sir, can I have some more?" How exactly is he going to fix our economy? With MORE government spending? By increasing the welfare state in America with idiocy like Socialist Healthcare, ending the Bush tax cuts, taxing the rich more, enabling the capital gains tax, etc. etc. etc. ? Where's the plan to guide America to a brighter future? Barry's more of the same garbage Washington has been pimping out to all of us for decades.:x

MarineJcksn

I think Bush is more of the same garbage Washington has been pimping out to all of us for decades. We are supposed to fear people different than us who want to change our lifestyle. Communists, Nazis, Muslims etc. while our own country is ignored. Katrina, the Big Dig, the Freedom Tower (NY) and the bridge collapsing etc are examples of what our country is NOT able to accomplish anymore because our attention, money, and able-bodied men and women are in the wrong place. More government spending is not necessary - it is just necessary to take what we are spending now and put it where it is needed. And that includes money we are forced to pay to insurance, pharmaceutical, and oil companies, among others who the current administration allows to run wild and bleed us dry.

No I dont think we should stay in Iraq 100 more years or invade Iran.

Bomb bomb iran bomb bomb bomb iran.

I mean he has Henry Kissinger a war criminal supporting him for president.

That by itself is enough reason not to support him.

Remeber the keating 5 or all of john mccains lobbyist freinds?

Yeah your right, Mccain isnt a bush clone... he could be something worse.

Amineve

I'm right with you on this. McCain is one of the greater of 3 evils. Hitlery, of course, takes the cake for supreme scumbag. I will not vote for Mccrazy when there are 3rd party candidates who EASILY best him. All 3 of these candidates are compromised, and I dont see why people dont acknowlege it. All 3 of the candidates plan to appoint ZBIGNEW BRZINSKY as a foreign policy advisor! The man is a true marxist traitor working for our government. WHY DO WE ACCEPT THIS KIND OF ****?! Because we are fools...

I say do not vote for ANY of these puppets. Vote for a real statesman.

Meh... Don't really care, I view them all as third bush term now that Ron Paul is out of the scene. :( Ron Paul where have you gone. :cry:

I'm just bored with these canidates... none of them want to get rid of the war on drugs, A war that kills and has killed more americans then the war in Iraq WILL EVER have. Get rid of that crappy war, none of them want to do it, screw them all...

Siofen

Ron Paul is still running and will continue to do so until he runs out of the money given to him by the people (not corporations unlike the other 3 fakes). However the corporate media scum dont want this man to win, so they have stopped covering him at all. This is a planned destruction of a mans platform on behalf of corporate (and of course the IRS/FED's) interests. Ron will continue to run all to spread the word of the misdeeds of this government and he plans to end it at the convention with a large freedom rally being held there. Even though the man will not succeed at being elected president, he will open many peoples eyes to the true intent of the constitution and to the failures of the people leading this government.

Yeah; it irritates me when people say that McCain would be "four more years of Bush". I sincerely hope that the people who can't differentiate between the two aren't old enough to vote.famicommander

Actually, more people are worried that John McCain has similar beliefs to Bush or that they're too friendly than worry that Obama and Wright share similar beliefs or are too friendly.

[QUOTE="Siofen"]

Meh... Don't really care, I view them all as third bush term now that Ron Paul is out of the scene. :( Ron Paul where have you gone. :cry:

I'm just bored with these canidates... none of them want to get rid of the war on drugs, A war that kills and has killed more americans then the war in Iraq WILL EVER have. Get rid of that crappy war, none of them want to do it, screw them all...

jer_1

Ron Paul is still running and will continue to do so until he runs out of the money given to him by the people (not corporations unlike the other 3 fakes). However the corporate media scum dont want this man to win, so they have stopped covering him at all. This is a planned destruction of a mans platform on behalf of corporate (and of course the IRS/FED's) interests. Ron will continue to run all to spread the word of the misdeeds of this government and he plans to end it at the convention with a large freedom rally being held there. Even though the man will not succeed at being elected president, he will open many peoples eyes to the true intent of the constitution and to the failures of the people leading this government.

I hope so. He did say some things that the other candidates are too afraid to say (even though they needed to be said). I do look forward to the day that we have more independent-minded serious candidates that are not the product of corporations and media.

I think John McCain is the best choice.

As for the war thing...:0. I don't care for it.

SouL-Tak3R

One thing i'm learning fairly quickly is these forums have a majority of liberal/democrat and/or socialist posters. Trying to get any pro-conservative point accross is pointless in these forums, as the majority here have their own democrat agenda of their own, and will slap down anyone who goes against that. :roll:Tolwan

It's called debate. It does work both ways.

[QUOTE="famicommander"]Yeah; it irritates me when people say that McCain would be "four more years of Bush". I sincerely hope that the people who can't differentiate between the two aren't old enough to vote.Video_Game_King

Actually, more people are worried that John McCain has similar beliefs to Bush or that they're too friendly than worry that Obama and Wright share similar beliefs or are too friendly.

Heh, and it seems that a lot of liberals don't care that Obama's mentor is a radical racist. Yet many conservatives are called "bigots" without any proof. Hypocracy.

[QUOTE="Tolwan"]One thing i'm learning fairly quickly is these forums have a majority of liberal/democrat and/or socialist posters. Trying to get any pro-conservative point accross is pointless in these forums, as the majority here have their own democrat agenda of their own, and will slap down anyone who goes against that. :roll:Engrish_Major

It's called debate. It does work both ways.

A good debate has an equal number of partners on both sides so that each side has equal and ampt time to organize and present arguments and counter-arguments (Did it in college debate class).

Debates on these forums are what we refer to as "One sided debates" or in laymens terms "Gang bang". The republicans here are far outnumbered by democrats, and thus it gets hard relatively quickly to take in each view, counter, take in the counters for that, etc. etc. It becomes relatively onesided, and the voice of the republican debater get's drowned out very quickly.

[QUOTE="MarineJcksn"]Engrish_Major

I think Bush is more of the same garbage Washington has been pimping out to all of us for decades. We are supposed to fear people different than us who want to change our lifestyle. Communists, Nazis, Muslims etc. while our own country is ignored. Katrina, the Big Dig, the Freedom Tower (NY) and the bridge collapsing etc are examples of what our country is NOT able to accomplish anymore because our attention, money, and able-bodied men and women are in the wrong place. More government spending is not necessary - it is just necessary to take what we are spending now and put it where it is needed. And that includes money we are forced to pay to insurance, pharmaceutical, and oil companies, among others who the current administration allows to run wild and bleed us dry.

You got that right on Bush Engrish, I disagree with a lot of his viewpoints and think we needed a stronger president. But who were the alternatives, Gore and Kerry? Both of those idiots would've been just as mediocre as Bush has been. Here's where I think you're wrong on the stance that we're "supposed to fear" those who are different, however.

1. Communists and Nazis were terribly, terribly evil regimes in the past, there's no disputing that fact. No capitalist nation ever systematically murdered over 6 million people because they were Jews, or committed the Treuenbrietzen massacre, etc. etc.

Katrina (while it broke my heart for the victims) had much better support then the media reported. Private organizations such as the big, evil, corporate WALMART donated over a thousand truckloads of supplies, in fact, Walmart is the 3rd largest charitable organization in the world. And the bottom line is this: It sounds heartless, but the government wasn't to blame for people refusing to evaccuate. FEMA has issues, but our government is vastly better then most of the world at disaster assistance. Look at what's happening in Burma and China right now.

Corporations aren't the enemy. Big Oil, Big pharm and the like aren't evil, faceless mechanisms. They're publicly traded assets that make money, bottom line.

We don't always agree, but I respect your opinions Engrish. Heck, Jefferson and Adams didn't get along a lot of the time and look at what they accomplished!

A good debate has an equal number of partners on both sides so that each side has equal and ampt time to organize and present arguments and counter-arguments (Did it in college debate class).

Debates on these forums are what we refer to as "One sides debates" or in laymens terms "Gang bang". The republicans here are far outnumbered by democrats, and thus it gets hard relatively quickly to take in each view, counter, take in the counters for that, etc. etc. It becomes relatively onesided, and the voice of the republican debater get's drowned out very quickly.

Tolwan

Okay. Hard to see because I'm on the other side. I have had quite a few good debates, however, and people are always quick to show their conflicting opinions when I spout mine.

Anyway, if you really believe in what you believe in, you should show us no matter how outnumbered you are. The better people here should take other viewpoints for what they are worth.