Quote:
Originally Posted by blankall
I will give McCain credit for voting outside of party on stem cell and immigration, but I have to disagree with your perception of his abortion views.
"On June 26, 1984, McCain voted for H.AMDT.942, the Siljander amendment, to H.R.5490, "An amendment to define "person" as including unborn children from the moment of conception"
This amendment would not allow states to allow abortion in any way. Defining all unborn feotuses as persons would essentially make abortion of any kind equivalent to murder.
Of course, that was 24 years ago, and since then it is not outside the realm of possibility that his views have moderated with the general population to the point where he doesn't like it, but feels its a State jurisdiction. Yes, its on public record, and that will get him in trouble, you're right. Like any long standing senator, his record is his biggest adversary, even if his views have, shall we say, progressed.
As for gay marriage, yes he has said each state should be given the right to decide, but he also supported an outright ban on gay marriage in Arizona. So despite the fact he believes it should be a state policy, he is still very much opposed to gay marriage.
Well, he doesn't like it, and he represents Arizona, who vote him in with fairly good numbers. Therefore he feels Arizona doesn't like it either. If Arizona doesn't like it, they'd vote Democrat or Liberal. He's saying nothing should stop any sufficiently motivated state, but he's opposed to dragging everyone one way or another. That's just good federal system democratic thinking.
"He's also a soldier, he's seen hell incarnate in Vietnam, and he's not exactly willing to send more guys to a meatgrinder unless he has to."
Well apparently there are a lot of situation where he believes he "has to" send in troops. He is constantly pressuring the government to send in more troops to Iraq. Publicly stated that Israel should not have used any restraint agaisnt Lebanon. He has also been extremely hawkish towards, Russia, Iran, and just about any other US problem. The man is a hawk pure and simple.
The only time his experience as a POW has shown through is his stance on torture. He has aggresively fought the use of torture by the US and deserves credit for that.
Well, McCain is actually correct about Iraq. Many retired generals and other strategic studies pundits have pointed to the fact that there aren't enough US troops there to protect the civilians, restore order and destroy the insurgency. Ever since more troops were deployed, casualties have levelled off. He's far from a dove... I don't think many military men aren't, but he's not a fan of going in half-cocked and sending young men to die.
Yes you are right I am looking at it from a Canadian perspective. That still does not change the fact that although he is left of centre on a couple of issues (which may give him an overall rating of being centrist) he is extremely right wing on many issues. Considering there are so many posters who complain about polarization and the US military, this seems absurd to me that these same posters then support McCain. |
Well, again, compared to Huckabee, Romney etc. he's a blue liberal. What he is, is a compromise candidate. He's left of Bush and right of Kerry, Edwards, Clinton and Obama.
As for Flamey's response... you definitely said a lot, but I'll comment on your attack of my societal analysis of voting. People tend to vote for their own or who best represents them... up until recently in Canada, that has been Christian and British (or French... because of that large population). In the US, that has been primarily the WASP. Those also happen to be the largest percentages of population.
People vote for who they can trust... in the past, and in particular in the US, that has been connected to christian morals. Its not a coincidence, its a fact. Is it fair? Probably not, but I'm not debating that.
The Liberal party used to have a tradition of switching between anglophone and francophone candidates, which they still appear to be respecting. This has proven most successful until now.
You're right that the evangelical is very powerful in the southern United States, but its not just there. People in Canada and the US like who they consider to be a moral man (or woman).
There is a school of thought that Kim Campbell's demise was due not only to a dismally ran campaign, the Rise of Reform, or her gender, but that people did not like her "history" (having been from a broken home and divorced twice) and considered her to be "less morally upstanding" than Jean Chretien, this was exacerbated by the smear campaign of Chretien indirectly making fun of his stroke paralysis in his face. Its a pretty disgusting theory, but its not without ground.
