I am posting this again, since we are having such a poor showing from BJ readers. Only 45 votes? Piffle.
Patrick Ruffini has his September Straw Poll up. Go vote, and let’s see who Balloon Juice readers would prefer as the Republican nomineee.
Here are the Balloon Juice results as they happen.
Here are the overall results.
Steve
45 votes? Did all your conservative readers vote 5 times each? :)
Krista
That’s not really surprising…there are quite a few left-leaners on this site, and McCain, as the most moderate one of the bunch, is the only one on that list who is at all palatable to many of us.
kchiker
I would have voted but Alan Alda is not on the list.
Nathan Lanier
I went for the safe vote and the catty vote.
srv
Curious all this Republican interest in a 2008 candidate when they already have their Messiah…
It’s going to be a long, hard 3 years for you guys.
DougJ
I’m still holding out hope for a Brownback-Tancredo ticket.
Marcus Wellby
I am holding out for a Kane-Kodos ticket myself.
EricH
I’m always puzzled over the liberal/left’s “semi-embrace” (if we can call it that) of McCain, particularly in light of their intense hatred of Bush and the neocons.
McCain was THE candidate of the neocons back in 2000 and he’s every bit, if not more, conservative than Bush. In fact, I think on most issues he’s more to the right. Certainly on spending and taxes, he’s a deficit hawk while Bush is a deficit chicken hawk.
McCain fully supports the Iraq war and, although we’ll never really know, would have, in my opinion, invaded Iraq just as Bush did.
McCain is stronly pro-life or anti-choice, supports vouchers for education, et cetera.
I remember conversations I had with my more leftist friends in the 1990s about McCain. They essentially viewed him as a war criminal because of his actions in Vietnam. Granted, these more hardcore leftists and not mainstream liberals.
Still, what do liberals like in McCain? I’m not talking about the lesser-of-two-evil view. I’m talking policies.
EH
jobiuspublius
What the hell sort of choices are those?
Complete with 1960s era leather flak jackets. Oooo, how posh of him.
Pb
I’m pretty puzzled by the right’s embrace of Condi Rice (even as a fantasy), particularly in light of her utter lack of qualifications for the job of President of the United States. I know they love her, but what is it besides that and name recognition? If you can explain that to me, I’ll try to explain about McCain to you. :)
Now I wouldn’t vote for McCain for President, unless the alternative was a real disaster. But were I a registered Republican, I’d probably vote for him in the primaries. It’s not that I agree with most of his politics, although I probably have more common ground with him than I do with the Bush administration. It’s that I think he’d actually be a competent President who I could respect.
I think he’d be more fiscally conservative. I think he’d be more responsible. Most importantly, I think he’d be more likely to change his mind when he’s made a mistake. Maybe he’d be in Iraq too–I don’t know–but I don’t think he’d keep on doing the same things when it’s clear that the same things aren’t working. It just comes down to competence.
As for Giuliani, maybe his politics are more in line with mine–but I just don’t know that I could trust the man. Also, all things being equal, I’d much rather have a former US Senator running the show than a former City Mayor–although we are talking about New York City here, so it’s more of a close call than it would be for a smaller city.
srv
Re: McCain
If I channel liberals, I don’t think view him as a baby killer. More war hero. Not that this site is really populated by libs. I can channel moderates, so more:
He’s a hothead, but so is Bush. In Austin, GW’s temper was legend. But McCain has a brain, and has demonstrated a history of having reasoning facilities.
Regardless of his support, I don’t think McCain would have been stupid enough to invade Iraq. At least not w/o a post-war plan. Bush (and apparently most of his appointees) had no idea what they were getting into. McCain could not be that stupid if he tried to.
srv
McCain has also always been a media darling. If he’s a nut, he hides it pretty well with them. So no doubt his coverage is more positive to the MSM.
When you got people like Tancredo, Delay, Frist, etc as competition, you really don’t have to rise above that much.
EricH
“But what is it besides that and name recognition?”
I think those on the Right who are enamored with Rice do so because of her remarkable life experience. Remember, she grew up in Birmingham, Alabama in the 1960s and lived I believe in the same general neigborhood of the two little girls who died in the church bombing.
Despite tremendous obstacles – granted not extreme poverty – she has gone on to make about as much of herself as she could. I mean, given all the obstacles in her way, how much further could one person get?
She’s got a Ph.D, was President of a university, is an accomplished musician, speaks fluent Russian, is attractive, et cetera.
On the other hand, most of us know almost nothing about her political views. I believe she is pro-choice but supports some regulations (e.g., parental notification, ban on late-term abortions).
So it seems to me that those on the Right who support here project on her other views. But its pretty clear that the support is almost exclusively her resume. In some cases, it might be the same reason some on the liberal side support McCain. They like him personally, like his background while maybe not really liking (or knowing about) his policies.
Just a hunch.
EH
Mr.Ortiz
I’m a much bigger fan of Connie Rice, Condoleeza’s cousin (or Bizzaro-world doppelganger, depending who you believe).
Steve
I find it hard to believe that most of Giuliani’s supporters are voting for anything but a caricature. Yes, he’s heroic, blah blah blah, but in the course of a campaign, you get to know a guy a little better. And I just have real trouble believing he will play in a lot of places outside of New York.
EricH
I lived in New York (well, near there) during Giuliani’s reign and the liberals just loathed him. Absolutely, positively loathed him.
He was called a Nazi, a Hitler, a fascist et cetera. Sort of what Bush is going through.
This was all pre 9/11. Since then, I guess they just replaced his name with Bush’s.
The tribalism of politics is very odd. People do strange and say strange things. Left, right, center, Dems, Repubicans, Whigs, whatever.
What was the line?: Politics is the systematic organization of hatreds? See that a lot in particular at this site.
EH
The Disenfranchised Voter
Christopher Shays is the only republican I would vote for President at this time.
Not only does he have the courage to attack the President’s decision to appoint Micheal Brown, he was one of the 5 Republicans who voted against the Schiavo bill in the House. He made this statement about the situation:
Now THAT is a Republican I can vote for.
David Rossie
Disnefranchised voter, what about former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson? I would vote for him. But alas, good (well as far as I know he’s good) men don’t take make serious attempts at the presidency.
stickler
I’m not a liberal so perhaps I shouldn’t respond. But I supported McCain in 2000 so I will anyhow.
My support is based on his competence, his blunt and honest speech, and his pragmatism. EricH is correct: McCain is a hell of a lot more conservative than most libertarians and “leftists” imagine. But he’s pretty honest about it and flexible. He’s a damned sight more fiscally responsible than George W. “Deficits as far as the eye can see” Bush.
Say, just f’rinstance, that he had won in 2000 (which, if matched against Gore, he would have done — and handily). Would we now be in Iraq? I don’t know. But I’d bet you almost any amount of money that McCain wouldn’t have fired Shinseki for estimating that we’d need hundreds of thousands of troops. And it’s hard to imagine McCain doing a worse job massaging the international community than Bush did. I mean, come on, who reading this site wouldn’t prefer to have a few tens of thousands of Bangladeshi or Pakistani blue helmets patrolling the streets of Baghdad today? Or, better, in summer 2003 when law-n-order would have been damned handy?
Regarding Giuliani: remember that he hired and promoted Bernie Kerik. And that Rudy had a very public and messy divorce (including shacking up in Gracie Mansion with his mistress). So for any national campaign, that means serious baggage; corruption, Mob ties, and troubled family life. How’s Dobson going to sell that to his minions?
Mike
“So for any national campaign, that means serious baggage; corruption, Mob ties, and troubled family life.”
SO is he secretly a Kennedy?
EricH
“How’s Dobson going to sell that to his minions?”
Good point. And even if he does, can you imagine what Hillary and Sidney Blumenthal would do with that stuff?
Dick Morris said that under Clinton that Blumenthal was completely free to dig up dirt on the Republicans. Had an entire staff conducting opposition research to smear critics.
And you know that Sidney would love to help Hillary again.
EH
CaseyL
And you believe anything Dick Morris says because….why?
EricH
“And you believe anything Dick Morris says because….why?”
Because he was the top political adviser to President Clinton. He worked with the Clintons for more than 25 years including when they lived in Arkansas.
And because Sidney Blumenthal is known in Washington as a hatchet guy.
And because it was shown that the Clinton W.H. did opposition research on Republicans and that Blumenthal was involved.
If Karl Rove came out and said that the Bush White House was doing opposition research on Democrats, would you believe him?
EH
Bob
I liked the Republican mayor of New York. No, not that one.
La Guardia.
rayabacus
I voted. Do I get a sticker for my shirt?
I think the reason that Rice gets so many votes is because out of all the candidates listed, she could win. She would , for the most part, retain the Republican base and soak up a significant portion of the Black Democrat vote. There are a significant number of black voters who would vote for her simply because of her race. Colin Powell, if he ran as a Republican, would probably get the same kind of support. Just my opinion.
eileen from OH
rayabacus sez
Really? “Significant numbers” of black voters would ignore issues, positions, history, experience, party affiliation and everything else as long as the candidate was black?
Wow. They must be REALLY stoopid, eh?
eileen from OH
Evilbeard
I am a moderate liberal and what I like about McCain is that he doesn’t seem to try and hide who he is or what he stands for. I don’t agree with much of his politics but if the left is to lose the next presidential election I would much prefer it be to a man of integrity.
Mike
“eileen from OH Says:
Really? “Significant numbers” of black voters would ignore issues, positions, history, experience, party affiliation and everything else as long as the candidate was black?
Wow. They must be REALLY stoopid, eh?”
Hey, they keep voting for Democrats.
Baron Elmo
I suspect that a sizable number of red-staters would feel uneasy about supporting a black woman for President, no matter how conservative she is. I have hard right-wing relatives in Alabama, for example, who would be physically incapable of pulling the lever for Rice.
And no, I’m NOT saying that all Republicans are racist, so don’t get your knickers in a bunch.
metalgrid
wtf? McCain of McCain-Feingold fame and ‘stick-my-nose-in-baseball’ is the most socialist, nanny-statist of the entire bunch.
circlethewagons
Three of you folks put Cheney in as your fantasy candidate.
Now THAT’s funny.
Cyrus
RE: McCain, his popularity is partly because of that “Straight Talk Express” or whatever he called it in 2000, and partly because he seems (seems) much more principled. It could be all an act and he might be every bit the evil bastard so many politicians are, of course, but when such a stalwart Republican is one of the louder critics of Bush’s torture policy, it means a bit more.
RE: Rice, I don’t think this is fair, or true:
I can’t read rayabacus’ mind, so maybe he meant what he said in the negative way you took it. But I agree with him that Rice or Powell would get a lot of black votes, just because they are as progressive as you’ll get in the Republican party. They’re as hawkish and as partisan as every other Republican in government, sure. But they both support affirmative action, for example, at least in theory. If 2008 turns out like 2000 (Ack!) and both candidates run to the center, quite a few people will vote for the candidate they sympathize with best and have personal background in common with the most.
Mike
“Baron Elmo Says:
I suspect that a sizable number of red-staters would feel uneasy about supporting a black woman for President, no matter how conservative she is. I have hard right-wing relatives in Alabama, for example, who would be physically incapable of pulling the lever for Rice.”
I’ve lived in the South all my life and I’m unconvinced of this. Sure, there are the unrepentant knuckledraggers, but they are a very small minority.
I actually think there’d be more Red-Staters voting for Connie than there would Blue Staters. Certainly more than would vote for Hillary for example.
rayabacus
I debated posting my thoughts on Rice and Powell just because of the response above. I knew someone would jump on it and take it the wrong way. If you don’t think, Eileen, that a significant number of black people, particularly those that are not politically attuned, would vote for the first black candidate to run for president, then you are naive. And I am discounting Alan Keyes as a viable candidate and Jesse Jackson as a viable candidate. Both in my opinion have marginalized themselves.
Rice and/or Powell would have the backing of a major party should they choose to run. They would be very tough to beat. I also agree with the comment that some Red Staters would rather kill their dogs than pull the lever for a Black person. There are individual racists out there, I just don’t happen to think the Republican Party has a significant number of them. They inhabit both parties in the southern states.
Steve
Rice and Powell would win over a number of black voters not simply because they are black, but because they are black and moderate on domestic issues. But do you think Clarence Thomas enjoys much support in the black community?
I think Rice would have a chance to win Michigan, for example. But then again, I think any moderate Republican would have a chance to win Michigan.
Many Republicans seem to have a very childlike view of race and race issues. It’s like, “Yay, we have a black candidate! Now when someone attacks them, WE get to play the race card!” Or, “Let’s nominate Janice Rogers Brown to the Supreme Court, because blacks will leave the Democratic Party in droves if they oppose her!” Or, “Let’s nominate a Hispanic, because that one nomination will lock up the Hispanic vote for generations!”
By this kind of logic, every black person in America should be a Dodgers fan.
eileen from OH
rayabacas, let me try here. . . Would you say there are significant numbers of women who would vote for a female candidate on the basis of gender alone? Would a Catholic or Jew do the same for a Catholic/Jewish candidate? Would a Hispanic or an Asian candidate be assured of a significant number of voters who would ignore everything else except their ethnicity, religion, gender, or race? Certainly, there are the “voting blocs” and candidates are fielded to appeal to them. But do you think that there are “significant numbers” of voters in any of those groups who would base their vote SOLELY on the fact that the candidate shared their religion, color, or gender?
As to those who would NOT vote for any of the above simply BECAUSE they are female, or black, or Asian, etc., no argument here. There are boobs of every color and party.
eileen from OH
rayabacus
I think Rice, Powell and Thomas are all quite similar during the nomination phase. I do believe, if my memory serves me correctly, that Thomas enjoyed wide support from the black community during his confirmation hearing. I do believe that Powell and Rice would both garner significant support in the black community just because of their race.
I say that not to denigrate the black voters, but because it is something I believe to be true. Most voters are not politically savvy – voters or all races and political pursuasions. Hence, that is why we have single issue voters, ie, abortion, gay marraige, terrorism, war in Iraq, etc. Some voters select “one issue” that determines who gets their vote, regardless of where the candidate stands on all other issues. I believe that many would vote “race” as a single issue – on both sides. However, I believe that both Rice and Powell would enjoy a significant bump in the black vote.
I don’t know where you get this idea. Although I am not a Republican, I do know many of them and I have not heard this before. Perhaps the Political Strategists feel this way, I don’t know; but I don’t think this view is prevalent in the rank and file of the party.
I don’t know that much about Brown other than what I read on some of the law blogs. She apparantly is viewed with respect in the legal community and from what I read would make good member of SCOTUS. Is she the best qualified for the job that is available? Or is she the best qualified that has the best chance of confirmation?
Estrada, in my opinion, was well qualified and got trashed by the Democrats. If I were Bush, I would name him and let the chips fall where they may.
TallDave
Many Democrats seem to have a very childlike view of race and race issues. It’s like, “Yay, we have [insert black tragedy here]! Now we get to play the race card!”
Tim F
Funny, I was just wondering whether I should take TallDave seriously. Thanks for clearing that up.
Tim F
Ah, reading upthread I see that he was paraphrasing some other guy. NM.
Tim F
Regarding the poll, there was once a time when I busted my ass for the Republican in a fairly significant state-level race. He was a fine guy, had a lot in common with McCain and Wesley Clark, and western PA Democratic politics needed some shaking up. Judging by the guy they ran (cyril Wecht, if that name rings a bell) they needed it badly. That earlier me would have gladly tossed a bone to McCain and thought about voting for them against a sufficiently atrocious Democrat.
You could say that time has passed. The only way I would support a national-level Republican today would be if the executive branch, the entire congressional leadership and the nuttier rank-and-file collectively took a hike. There is no way that I’d endorse a Republican if it meant giving the tiniest boost to DeLay or Frist, who I don’t hate so much as pity, or the goons in the White House.
So when a poll like this comes along I’m a Frist man. It’s possible that one or another B-J favorite will snag the nomination, but if so it will be a Republican party barren of its fundie fringe. In that case the electoral map will look like 1992, which should mute a lot of the triumphalism that we’ve heard recently. If the party wants to keep the fringe the candidate will look like Frist (the post-Schiavo Frist) or Brownback, and after the country’s had eight years to sample those goods I’m confident that it will be happy to bring them back for a refund.
Krista
Sadly enough yes. And I think much of the reason for this is because the election process is such an unrepentant clusterfuck that the actual issues get completely and utterly lost. After awhile everything is so muddled from all of the attack ads, advocacy groups, etc, that people just give up. Your average voter, who is busy working, raising kids, keeping house, and living life, does not have time to wallow through all of the muck to look up voting records to figure out where candidates actually stand. So, a lot of them truly do vote for the one that they identify with the most, or like the most. A lot of people cited Bush’s personality as the reason why they voted for him in 2004 — you want someone with whom you can identify, because it makes you feel that they might actually be empathetic to your problems, and might influence policy in a way to help you.
Veeshir
McCain as the biggest vote getter for here is absolutely what I expected. Hagel making a fine showing is another thing that doesn’t surprise me.
I would like to see a poll including all presidential likelies that included Dems and Nader as well as the GOP.
I predict Hillary edging out Kerry. Barely.
lauren
What about a McCain/Shays ticket in ’08? I disagree with some of McCain’s more conservative decisions on issues such as abortion, but Shays perfectly complements that with his very open support for abortion and family planning.