February 17, 2007

THE CONSERVATIVE ALTERNATIVE:

McCain to Preach Abstinence in S.C. (JIM DAVENPORT, 2/16/07, Associated Press)

Most presidential candidates are trying to get people to say "yes." Republican Sen. John McCain will be encouraging South Carolina students to say "no."

The Arizona lawmaker is scheduled to speak Sunday night to about 1,500 middle and high school students about abstaining from premarital sex. Abstinence and abortion loom large as issues in this first-in-the-South primary state in the heart of the Bible Belt.

"Senator McCain has a long legislative record of supporting abstinence-based initiatives in his record in the U.S. Senate," said Trey Walker, McCain's South Carolina campaign director. "He thinks that abstinence is healthier and should be promoted in our society for young people."

Posted by Orrin Judd at February 17, 2007 4:19 PM
Comments

The only abstinence McPain can expect is an abstinence of voters who cast their ballots for him in the primaries. Guiliani is ahead of him by over 10 points - and he hasn't even officially declared himself a candidate yet.

Posted by: obc at February 17, 2007 5:14 PM

Rudy's slogan for the primary:

Abstain from McVain

Posted by: Jim in Chicago at February 17, 2007 6:10 PM

(cheap shot warning)

If McCain really wanted to win over religious voters, he'd go to San Francisco or Minneapolis or Austin or Miami or midtown Atlanta to give his obligatory message on abstinence.

I suspect McCain's best hope at a good slogan will be "Deign to vote McCain - Please".

Posted by: ratbert at February 17, 2007 7:38 PM

"John McCain - A Caretaker President for America"

Posted by: Bryan at February 17, 2007 8:18 PM

John McCain will not get the Republican nomination for 2008.

Posted by: Bartelson at February 18, 2007 9:25 AM

I met McCain in Chicago last Friday evening.

Knows his stuff, won't pander, reaching out to religious right, still dead wrong on Campaign Finance.

I asked if he was 100% behind "ownership society." Gave an answer that made me think he'd be better than Bush at promoting it.

If he's Pro-school choice, he's got my vote.

Posted by: Bruno at February 18, 2007 9:42 AM

He won't even have any competition after NH and SC.

Posted by: oj [TypeKey Profile Page] at February 18, 2007 10:18 AM

Despite the pretensions of the hill people of NH to relevence, the state no longer matters to the Republican nomination, as 2000 showed. It's no different from the rest of the Northeast these days.

SC however will be very important.

Posted by: Jim in Chicago at February 18, 2007 11:09 AM

McVain admit he was wrong????

Posted by: Sandy P at February 18, 2007 2:00 PM

W didn't need to win NH, because he was the Southern conservative. What's the rationale for a Rudy or Mitt candidacy if they can't carry NH?

Posted by: oj [TypeKey Profile Page] at February 18, 2007 2:19 PM

Maybe it's that NH is irrelevant.

Posted by: erp at February 18, 2007 4:15 PM

Ask President Dean.

Posted by: oj [TypeKey Profile Page] at February 18, 2007 6:37 PM

Dean lost Iowa. NH was irrelevenant. It's always been irrelevant for DEms due to the myth of Yankee independence or ingenuity or whatever you hill people call it.

In reality now the whole state is a bunch of transplated Mass. dems unwilling to put up w/ Mass. taxes.

The lib republican always wins now in NH, just like in 2000.

Meanwhile CBS has Rudy how many pts ahead of McVain at this point?

I hold no brief for either -- just that I disagree that McVain has it locked up, and I think that Rudy would make a slightly less worse President than McVain, tho not a great one by any means.

Plus, I've met Rudy, hung with him in a private box at the Chicago House of Blues during a Bernie Williams record release party All-Star weekend a few years ago when the game was at RealSox Park

Posted by: Jim in Chicago at February 18, 2007 9:23 PM

It saved Reagan, Bush, & Clinton.

Rudy, like Obama and Colin Powell, ought to be winning popularity polls. No one knows what any of them stand for. It's only the campaign that Rudy can't withstand.

Posted by: oj [TypeKey Profile Page] at February 18, 2007 10:08 PM

The difference between Giuliani and McCain is that one doesn't tell lies for a living. That alone is enough to win my vote. Even white bread Romney, while maybe not outright lying, is trying to spin the past and not having his heart in it, is doing it badly.

Posted by: erp at February 19, 2007 9:42 AM

The difference between Giuliani and McCain is that one doesn't tell lies for a living. That alone is enough to win my vote. Even white bread Romney, while maybe not outright lying, is trying to spin the past and not having his heart in it, is doing it badly.

Posted by: erp at February 19, 2007 9:42 AM

erp:

It hardly seems fair to hold it against the Mayor that he makes such a good buck off his shtick.

Posted by: at February 19, 2007 1:03 PM
« THE THIRD FOUNDATION: | Main | PEAK STONE?: »