Would We Be Better Off If John McCain Were President?

[Dawgs]

The article below lays out the case that progressives might be in a better position now if McCain would have won.

After reading it, the only reason I don't think progressives would be better off going into 2012 is that McCain would have appointed two more Republicans to the Supreme Court.

Please tell me why I'm wrong. And please read some of the article before posting.



http://www.alternet.org/world/151665/would_we_be_better...

And they were right. McCain as president would clearly have produced a long string of catastrophes: He would probably have approved a failed troop surge in Afghanistan, engaged in worldwide extrajudicial assassination, destabilized nuclear-armed Pakistan, failed to bring Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu to the negotiating table, expanded prosecution of whistle-blowers, sought to expand executive branch power, failed to close Guantanamo, failed to act on climate change, pushed both nuclear energy and opened new areas to domestic oil drilling, failed to reform the financial sector enough to prevent another financial catastrophe, supported an extension of the Bush tax cuts for the rich, presided over a growing divide between rich and poor, and failed to lower the jobless rate.

Nothing reveals the true state of American politics today more than the fact that Democratic President Barack Obama has undertaken all of these actions, and even more significantly, left the Democratic Party far weaker than it would have been had McCain been elected. Few issues are more important than seeing behind the screen of a myth-making mass media, and understanding what this demonstrates about how power in America really works—and what needs to be done to change it.

[mwb970]

1. If McCain were president, Palin would be VP.

Question asked, question answered.

[Dawgs]

6. Okay. So, that's one person that didn't read the article.

Anyone else want to try?

[jefferson_dem]

12. I advise DUers to not bother reading the article.

It's littered with unsubstantiated smears and silly false equivalencies.

[Dawgs]

15. Says one of the few Obama cheerleaders left on DU.

Read it. It's just asking a question.

[jefferson_dem]

22. Not believing McCain should have won in 2008 = Obama cheerleader.

Dude. Marginalized much? You're a real hoot. Please keep digging...

[Dawgs]

30. Digging? I'm asking an honest question.

You're the one that responded to a post about an article that you refused to read.

It's not my fault that you can't come up with a good reason why Democrats wouldn't be better off after 2012 if McCain had been elected.

[Kelvin Mace]

2. The only "advatage" to a McCain presidency

would be that the 2010 elections would have greatly increased our numbers in the House and Senate to veto-proof majorities.

Of course, even with those majorities, the Vichy Dem wing would have fallen all over themselves to cave, like they are doing now. The only difference is that the caving would have been lead by Congressional Dems as opposed to the White House as it is today.

Also, McCain would have had to tack to the center if he truly expected to govern, which would have lead for calls for his assassination by Plain supporters anxious to get her in power.

[no_hypocrisy]

3. And "President McCain" might have this country involved in a third war.

Remember "Bomb/Bomb/Bomb, Bomb/Bomb Iran"?

[vi5]

5. So instead we got

a third war in the form of "Bomb Bomb Bomb, Bomb Bomb Libya?

I don't agree with the premise of the OP or the article that was posted. But of all the ways that it would have been different, I don't think that having more wars was really the one to point out.

[ProSense]

13. Bernie Sanders co-sponsored a resolution calling for a no-fly zone over Libya.

I doubt Bernie Sanders believes the no-fly zone is the same as McCain's "bomb, bomb Iran."

[ProSense]

4. Wow

"A President McCain may have at least triggered a true progressive fight."

...evidently, the President's detractors have lost their fucking minds.

Their argument has sunk to "at least if McCain had won we'd have started a movement!"

[Dawgs]

10. A progressive movement might be the only thing that saves us.

Speaking of weak arguments, it's certainly better than 'vote for Obama because he doesn't suck as much as the Republicans'.

[ProSense]

20. Hmmm?

"Speaking of weak arguments, it's certainly better than 'vote for Obama because he doesn't suck as much as the Republicans'."

So you're saying voting for a Republican would have been better than voting for Obama?

McCain's record would look no different from Obama's? McCain would have re-regulated Wall Street and triggered a progressive movement to "save us"?

Miss opportunity? Squandered?

Lunacy!

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProSense]

33. "Who's voting for a Republican?"

"It's asking the question, 'Would Democrats be better off in 2012 if McCain had been elected.'. It's NOT asking, 'Should Democrats have voted for, or wished that, McCain had been elected.'."

How would McCain have won? Is it asking if it would have been better if Democrats had stayed home and "McCain had been elected"? Or is it asking if it would have been better if more Republicans than Democrats had turned out so McCain would have won?

It's asking a fairly idiotic question.

[jefferson_dem]

7. Yay!

We should have lost (elections and policy fights) earlier because we might win later. Lordy... Do people really take this sheer inanity seriously?

[Dawgs]

11. I see you haven't read the article either.

What did we win in 2008 that will actually create real change in this country?

[jefferson_dem]

19. Oh, I read the first few paragraphs before realizing I would never get those wasted minutes back.

"Progressives for McCain! It would have been awesome!"

[Dawgs]

27. Thanks for proving my point. n/t

[jefferson_dem]

35. Actually, you are proving your own point...

Only it's not the point you think you're proving.

[young but wise]

8. I feel sick reading this bullshit.

[Dawgs]

16. Truth hurts, huh? n/t

[young but wise]

28. Lmao.

Hoping for a Repuke to win isn't something I can do. I want the Democratic party to win all time.

The article is dumb, just face it.

[Dawgs]

31. Who said that they wanted a Repuke to win?

I didn't say it. The article doesn't say it.

[nevergiveup]

9. Where can I get my "PROGRESSIVES FOR ROMNEY" bumper sticker?

[Dawgs]

14. PLEASE read the article.

Because your response makes you look stupid if you actually did read it.

[billh58]

52. Posting flame bait and

claiming that bat-shit crazy McLame would have made this country "better off" is right in line with the rest of the Obama haters who never miss a chance to spread half-truths and innuendo about our Democratic president.

Your claim that there are just a few "cheerleaders" left is so very telling, and in fact wrong. President Obama has more supporters in this country than the handful of very vocal haters on DU would like anyone to believe. Republicans are the enemy, and not a sitting Democratic president.

And no, I didn't read the article, just like I don't read most articles about bat-shit crazy Republicans (Sarah, Michelle, etc., etc.).

[Cirque du So-What]

17. Specious argument

Of what value is an 'energized' progressive movement if the world is in ruins? I'm reminded of a phrase that summarized the arrogance & hubris of military aggression in SE Asia: 'we had to burn the village in order to save it.' Excuse me all to hell, but I'm unwilling to burn the village on a bet that progressives will emerge triumphant at some nebulous later date.

Thinly-veiled advocacy for voting against Democrats, unrecced, and alerted.

[Dawgs]

25. How much worst would it be is the question of the article.

None of us could know, but it's something to think about.

Would eight+ years of progressive legislation with a super majority really be able to fix the catastrophe of Republicans and keep things stable for decades to come? Maybe.

Would ending all wars, passing single payer, cutting military spending, drug reform, passing a real stimulus, and fixing the wealth gap be enough to fix what McCain caused? And, is their a big difference between what Obama did and what McCain will do?

[kstewart33]

18. There's so much more nonsense that would have happened.

Ever hear of DADT? McCain fought hard to keep it. Gay rights would have been stymied if he was elected.

Do you think Osama would have been killed under McCain? Not a chance.

Geez, I wish you guys would stop lobbing bombs here to stir up worthless debate about Obama.

So tired of the endless angry arguments between progressives and moderates here about Obama.

It does nothing but damage the DU community and for no good reason.

[Dawgs]

26. I'm wondering if you even read it. The article isn't about Obama at all.

It's not saying that McCain would have been better than Obama. It's asking the question, 'If McCain were elected, would Democrats be able to accomplish everything they want after McCain was replaced with Democratic super-majorities and a Democratic president?'

With a filibuster proof Congress, the Democrats could repeal EVERYTHING that discriminated against the gay community.

They could pass single payer health care reform.

They could end all of the wars and cut military spending.

They could end tax cuts for the rich (if they still existed) and work on eliminating the wealth gap.

It's just a question. And it's not an anti-Obama one.

[kstewart33]

38. Super majorities?

Bush was arguably the worst president in US history. And how did the Dems do re super majorities?

And if we could not get them in that instance, how would a McCain presidency produce them?

Complete nonsense.

[Dawgs]

42. So you're saying we're fucked forever? n/t

[kstewart33]

50. No, not at all.

Something short of super majorities is not 'fucked forever.'

I'm saying that super majorities are not possible in today's politics. The enormous power of special interests on both sides are capable of enough media spinning and distortion in TV ads, talk radio and such that a complete presidency failure can be disguised/distorted sufficiently to prevent a tidal storm that results in super majorities.

The best that either side can work toward is a majority.

My wish that is DUers would refrain from posting articles that are fundamentally illogical and irrational. It does nothing to promote worthwhile discussion and often gets people worked up for no good reason.

[Township75]

21. To be honest, I don't think much would be different.

The US would still have killed Osama, we would still be bombing Yemen and Libya.

We would still be drilling the Gulf and tearing up Appalachia.

What might have changed are the bailouts for GM, and a few other small things, but overall, not much to be excited about.

The only thing to be excited about is Palin is not VP, though they coudl have put her on a plane to some country we haven't heard of and she would be gone and not heard of much like Biden is now.

[Richardo]

23. "...except for two more Republicans on the Supreme Court"

Pretty big fucking exception.

[Richardo]

24. No. Next question.

[bigwillq]

29. No (nt)

[great white snark]

34. If you've ever wondered if fingers can vomit, I suggest you read this.

Has the author made the case? Hell no. Never.

[chrisa]

36. This article kind of reminds me of Brian from Family Guy

He needed to complain about the Presidency after Bush left office so badly that he became a Limbaugh Republican so that he could bash the President.

That's kind of what this article wants: A Republican in office so that they can whine without feeling guilty. It's complete, unabashed tripe.

[Dawgs]

39. There is no way you could have read the article because it doesn't bash Obama AT ALL.w

And that is not the point of it.

[ProSense]

44. "Would We Be Better Off If John McCain Were President?"

"Although Democrats and the country would have been better off if McCain had won in 2008"

Sound like praising Obama to you? Reading the article alone isn't enough, one has to also be able to comprehend what they're reading.

[Peacetrain]

37. BULL HOCKEY! I have heard this type of specious argument from religious fundies

who "learn to be more giving" by reading about droughts and deaths in 3rd world countries..


Oh yeah, we would be united as the right did the finishing knots on the hands and ankles as they threw us all overboard.

Get real

[Dawgs]

40. The right couldn't have done anything with a Democratic congress.

Unless you don't trust that the Democrats could have kept McCain in check.

[Peacetrain]

43. The whole country including the press took us into an illegal war in 2003

we signed off on a patriot act including some of our most beloved in the Democratic party.

I do not need to jump in with a bunch of snapping alligators to know their teeth are sharp.

[woo me with science]

41. I have said all along that it was a stroke of genius to put a faux Democrat in office.

They are accomplishing things they could not have dreamed of with a united Democratic opposition.

[Peacetrain]

45. I have been down the road with political purists before who denounce everyone but them

and only they are the "right ones"

Thanks but no thanks..

[ProSense]

46. The brilliance

"They are accomplishing things they could not have dreamed of with a united Democratic opposition."

...is astounding!

Everyone knows that the only way to have a "united Democratic opposition" is to elect a Republican President.

A progressive movement and a Democratic President cannot co-exist!

The country doesn't need a Republican President. What it needs is for the loudest people to be smarter.

[JoePhilly]

47. McCain / Palin 2012!!!!!!!

What nonsense.

[CrispyQ]

48. If McCain had won, Palin would have shoved him down a flight of stairs by now. --nt

[woo me with science]

49. LOL! nt

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

51. The hatred for this president is so palpable that there are DUers wishing for McCain!

That's so telling.

[ncrainbowgrrl]

53. Locking.

Moderator consensus is that this thread is a giant attack fest, and not conducive with DU's policy on civility.