From Politico
http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=782D24D3-3048-5C12-00BE624BB8A56090
By: John Bresnahan
November 25, 2007 05:37 PM EST
Iraq and electability once again dominated the Sunday talk shows as the race for the White House kicked into high gear, less than six weeks before the Iowa caucuses.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), fresh off his latest visit to Iraq, told This Week’s George Stephanopoulos that “significant progress” is being made in reducing sectarian violence thanks to President Bush’s decision to send an additional 30,000 U.S. combat troops to the war zone.
McCain, who is trying to ride the improved security situation in Iraq to an improved standing in the polls, took shots at several Democratic candidates, including Sen. Hillary Clinton (N.Y.) and former Sen. John Edwards (N.C.), for their suggestion that the United States should begin withdrawing its forces from Iraq soon.
“Is that the same Sen. Clinton that said she had to suspend disbelief in order to acknowledge to that the strategy of the surge was succeeding?” McCain said in reference to Clinton’s statement that the United States should stop trying to intervene in a “civil war” in Iraq. “Clearly, it’s succeeding. You would have to suspend disbelief to believe that it’s not.”
McCain later said Clinton’s support for a phased withdrawal from Iraq “would have been a catastrophe for the United States of America.”
“Look, now the same people who were saying seven or eight months were saying you can’t succeed militarily, we’ve succeeded military. Sen. Edwards used to call it the ‘McCain strategy.’ He doesn’t call it that anymore,” McCain claimed. “Their record is wrong on this. My record is right.”
But on the same ABC program, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson (D), who has advocated a complete U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, pointed out that dozens of Americans continue to be killed every month in Iraq, in spite of a lower overall level of violence.
Richardson, like other Democratic candidates and party leaders on Capitol Hill, also noted that there has not been significant political progress inside Iraq among competing Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish factions.
“Progress shouldn’t be measured by casualty counts, by body counts,” Richardson said. “There is no military solution to the war in Iraq. There is a political solution. And there’s little [political] progress.”
“I believe that no American death is worthy of saying the body count has gone down,” Richardson added.
On Fox News Sunday, the Iraq conflict, and U.S. plans for the future there, also provoked a sharp exchange between Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a member of the panel.
Levin and other Democrats have refused to provide Bush with an additional $200 billion to conduct military campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan during 2008, saying the president should not get the money unless he agrees to a “goal” of withdrawing most U.S. combat forces by Dec. 15, 2008.
Graham has been one of Bush’s staunchest supporters on the way and wants the new funds approved promptly.
“I think history will judge the surge as probably the most successful counterinsurgency operations in history,” Graham said. Graham accompanied McCain on the Thanksgiving trip to Iraq. “We’re on the right track with the surge.”
But Levin, like Richardson, echoed the Democratic line that the Bush surge has not brought about political reconciliation inside Iraq.
“The president’s policy very specifically had as its purpose . . . to give the Iraqi leaders breathing space to work out a political settlement, and that purpose has not been achieved,” Levin said. “Why in the name of heaven are we not willing to at least establish a goal for the removal of most of our troops?”
Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who has risen to second place in the GOP polls in Iowa behind former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, got the Sunday show treatment on CNN’s Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer.
Under questioning by Blitzer, Huckabee slammed Romney for changing his views on hot-button social issues. Huckabee said Romney’s shifts were a major reason he has closed to within four points of Romney in Iowa, according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll.
“Mitt has changed his position. He has been all over the board. But my conservatism has been consistent,” Huckabee said.
“When he was pro-abortion, I was still pro-life and always have been. When he was for gun control, I was against it. When he was against the Bush tax cuts, I was for them. When he was against Ronald Reagan's legacy and said he wasn't a part of that Bush-Reagan thing, I was a part of that Bush- Reagan thing.
“So it is not just about where we are now, it is where we have been and where we can be predicted to be if we are elected president,” Huckabee added. “People are looking for not just authenticity, but consistency. And that is one of the reasons that my numbers are surging, not only in Iowa, but in the other states as well.”
Huckabee responded to Romney’s charge that he was soft on illegal immigration, specifically for supporting tuition breaks for the children of illegal immigrants, stating that it was not his policy to “punish the children of those who break the law.”
Former Sen. Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.), during an appearance on Fox News Sunday, defended his campaign for the White House, as well as his support for allowing states to decide their own policies on abortion by repealing Roe v. Wade.
Thompson opposes efforts to enact a constitutional amendment to ban abortion, arguing that the effort is bound to fail because the proposal cannot garner enough support in Congress or the states to be enacted.
Instead, Thompson would like to see Roe abolished, allowing states to impose laws banning abortion, and thus shifting the abortion battle, in Thompson’s view, to those states that would retain access to abortion. “The game would be on the pro-life side,” Thompson said.
“What the situation is now is as follows — because of Roe v. Wade, all states are restricted from passing rules that they would maybe like to pass with regard to this area,” Thompson added. “If you abolish Roe v. Wade, you’re going to allow every state to pass reasonable rules they might see fit to pass.”
Thompson, who unveiled a new tax cut plan on Sunday to go along with his previous release of a Social Security reform proposal, even lashed out a Fox News during his appearance.
"This has been a constant mantra of Fox, to tell you the truth,” Thompson said when asked by Fox’s Chris Wallace if he is really running hard for the White House. Numerous conservative commentators on Fox and elsewhere have questioned Thompson's will to win and his work ethic.
“From Day One, they said I got in too late, I couldn't do it ... wouldn't raise enough money, and that sort of thing. And that's their opinion. They're entitled to their opinion. But that doesn't seem to be shared by the cross section of American people. If you look at the national polls, you'll see that I'm running second and have been running second for a long time."
Showing posts with label mccain clinton. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mccain clinton. Show all posts
Sunday, November 25, 2007
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
General Election Match Ups - McCain Wins
Time’s Real Clear Politics Blog: OR Head To Heads
By Tom Bevan
SurveyUSA is out with general election matchups in Oregon. Once again, the fact Hillary Clinton loses to McCain, is in a dead heat with Giuliani, and can muster only 50% against one potential GOP opponent in a blue state like Oregon has to be setting off warning sirens among Democratic voters:
Clinton 45 - McCain 48
Clinton 46 - Giuliani 45
Clinton 48 - Romney 44
Clinton 50 - Huckabee 40
Meanwhile, Obama is over 50% and handily defeats everyone but McCain:
Obama 45 - McCain 45
Obama 51 - Giuliani 40
Obama 52 - Romney 37
Obama 54 - Huckabee 33
By Tom Bevan
SurveyUSA is out with general election matchups in Oregon. Once again, the fact Hillary Clinton loses to McCain, is in a dead heat with Giuliani, and can muster only 50% against one potential GOP opponent in a blue state like Oregon has to be setting off warning sirens among Democratic voters:
Clinton 45 - McCain 48
Clinton 46 - Giuliani 45
Clinton 48 - Romney 44
Clinton 50 - Huckabee 40
Meanwhile, Obama is over 50% and handily defeats everyone but McCain:
Obama 45 - McCain 45
Obama 51 - Giuliani 40
Obama 52 - Romney 37
Obama 54 - Huckabee 33
McCain Leads - and can Defeat Clinton
Washington Post --Dan Balz
Sunday night speeches rarely get much attention but the address John McCain delivered in New Hampshire last night deserves a closer look. It was his most cogent argument for why he should be the Republican nominee and a blueprint for how he would run against Hillary Clinton, if she were the Democratic candidate.
McCain couched his criticisms of the Democratic front-runner in civil tones, eschewing some of the hotter rhetoric coming forth from other Republican candidates and particularly from GOP partisans anxious to demonize her. "I intend this to be a respectful debate," McCain said. "She and I disagree over America's direction, and it is a serious disagreement. But I don't doubt her ability to lead this country where she thinks it should go."
That said, McCain proceeded to draw a series of bright and highly unflattering distinctions between the two of them -- in their worldview, in their approach to government's role in health care and the economy and especially on two of the most difficult issues likely to face the next president, Iraq and Iran.
McCain promised a respectful debate, but he was scornful of Clinton's position on Iraq. He implied that she had voted for the 2002 resolution authorizing the war because of polls and that she has abandoned that position because the war has become highly unpopular.
"I wouldn't surrender when we can still succeed, and accept the terrible consequences that would ensue, because I feared the polls more than history's judgment," he said, according to the prepared text of his remarks.
McCain recalled, critically, Clinton's comment to Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, during congressional testimony in September, when she said that his optimistic assessment of progress on the ground required "the willful suspension of disbelief."
Instead, McCain said, it is Clinton who has suspended belief in the face of positive reports about the effect of the troop surge policy in Iraq. He accused her of succumbing to "her rivals and the fringe of her party" in allowing her to be jerked "toward a position she knows is irresponsible."
McCain stacked up his record against hers -- highlighting his opposition to the policies of former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his advocacy for the surge policy proposed by President Bush and implemented this year by Petraeus. In contrast to Clinton, McCain suggested that he had taken the honorable but more difficult course.
"I took abuse from members of my own party -- some of it pretty tough -- for doing so," he said. "And I stuck by it knowing it could hurt my chances for the presidency. I did it for one reason: I would rather lose an election than stay silent and watch my country lose a war."
On Iran, he suggested that Clinton is mostly confused. He asserted that she once ruled out unconditional negotiations with the Iranians but now is willing to talk without preconditions. McCain said he would pursue vigorous diplomacy with others to apply pressure on the Iranians. In reality, it is not clear there is as much difference here as McCain suggests, but he portrayed his potential rival as naive if she were to follow the course he said she favors.
On other issues, McCain drew a contrast between his long record of fighting government waste against what he said is Clinton's belief in big government. "She'll have Washington assume more of your responsibilities and raise your taxes to pay for it," he said. "She won't address seriously the fiscal crisis of Social Security and Medicare or if she does she'll let congressional Democrats convince her to raise your taxes."
McCain was more circumspect about his plans for the two big entitlement programs, promising only to fix them without raising taxes. That leaves the choices as either potentially painful in terms of reduced benefits or fanciful through gimmickry and sleight-of-hand. He said he would, if Congress balked, force an up-or-down vote on his proposals. Bush learned on Social Security how hard that can be.
McCain said he and Clinton would have a major argument over health care -- as would any of the Republican candidates. Clinton favors universal coverage that would include a mandate for all individuals to purchase insurance. McCain said he would make health care "more accessible by making it more affordable."
McCain called hers a big government plan, while Clinton has argued that she would keep the bulk of the current system of private insurance in place. She and other Democrats have argued that Republicans are not serious about insuring everyone and are not willing to put enough additional money into the system to achieve real success.
There were other areas of disagreement, from judicial appointments to reforming and expanding the military, which McCain cited in his speech at Franklin Pierce University. Boiled down to its essence, he said he offers one direction and she offers an alternative that he believes "is absolutely wrong for America and wrong for the world."
What McCain said about himself, however, may be the more important part of the speech, given that his campaign still faces serious obstacles en route to the nomination. Without speaking about his GOP rivals, McCain portrayed himself as the most equipped to deal with a hostile world and the conservative with the best chance of defeating Clinton.
"On matters of war and peace," he said, "I offer Americans my experience, my personal familiarity with the tragedy of war, deep involvement in all of the national security issues of the last two decades and steadfast conviction that America cannot afford to relinquish its leadership of the world and the world can't afford it either."
McCain's speech came hours before Rudy Giuliani was to launch a new television ad extolling his experience in crisis management as without parallel in the presidential race. The Arizona senator begged to differ. "No other candidate," he said, "has my experience or the judgment it informs."
McCain must spend the next eight weeks repeating that argument over and over again as he campaigns to win the New Hampshire primary. Should he succeed, he might yet have the opportunity to demonstrate whether it is possible to run both a courteous and vigorous general election campaign. As he showed on Sunday, the differences between the parties are huge and the stakes high. The choice, he said, "couldn't be a bigger one."
Reprint from http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/11/19/mccain_experience_no_one_else.html
Sunday night speeches rarely get much attention but the address John McCain delivered in New Hampshire last night deserves a closer look. It was his most cogent argument for why he should be the Republican nominee and a blueprint for how he would run against Hillary Clinton, if she were the Democratic candidate.
McCain couched his criticisms of the Democratic front-runner in civil tones, eschewing some of the hotter rhetoric coming forth from other Republican candidates and particularly from GOP partisans anxious to demonize her. "I intend this to be a respectful debate," McCain said. "She and I disagree over America's direction, and it is a serious disagreement. But I don't doubt her ability to lead this country where she thinks it should go."
That said, McCain proceeded to draw a series of bright and highly unflattering distinctions between the two of them -- in their worldview, in their approach to government's role in health care and the economy and especially on two of the most difficult issues likely to face the next president, Iraq and Iran.
McCain promised a respectful debate, but he was scornful of Clinton's position on Iraq. He implied that she had voted for the 2002 resolution authorizing the war because of polls and that she has abandoned that position because the war has become highly unpopular.
"I wouldn't surrender when we can still succeed, and accept the terrible consequences that would ensue, because I feared the polls more than history's judgment," he said, according to the prepared text of his remarks.
McCain recalled, critically, Clinton's comment to Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, during congressional testimony in September, when she said that his optimistic assessment of progress on the ground required "the willful suspension of disbelief."
Instead, McCain said, it is Clinton who has suspended belief in the face of positive reports about the effect of the troop surge policy in Iraq. He accused her of succumbing to "her rivals and the fringe of her party" in allowing her to be jerked "toward a position she knows is irresponsible."
McCain stacked up his record against hers -- highlighting his opposition to the policies of former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his advocacy for the surge policy proposed by President Bush and implemented this year by Petraeus. In contrast to Clinton, McCain suggested that he had taken the honorable but more difficult course.
"I took abuse from members of my own party -- some of it pretty tough -- for doing so," he said. "And I stuck by it knowing it could hurt my chances for the presidency. I did it for one reason: I would rather lose an election than stay silent and watch my country lose a war."
On Iran, he suggested that Clinton is mostly confused. He asserted that she once ruled out unconditional negotiations with the Iranians but now is willing to talk without preconditions. McCain said he would pursue vigorous diplomacy with others to apply pressure on the Iranians. In reality, it is not clear there is as much difference here as McCain suggests, but he portrayed his potential rival as naive if she were to follow the course he said she favors.
On other issues, McCain drew a contrast between his long record of fighting government waste against what he said is Clinton's belief in big government. "She'll have Washington assume more of your responsibilities and raise your taxes to pay for it," he said. "She won't address seriously the fiscal crisis of Social Security and Medicare or if she does she'll let congressional Democrats convince her to raise your taxes."
McCain was more circumspect about his plans for the two big entitlement programs, promising only to fix them without raising taxes. That leaves the choices as either potentially painful in terms of reduced benefits or fanciful through gimmickry and sleight-of-hand. He said he would, if Congress balked, force an up-or-down vote on his proposals. Bush learned on Social Security how hard that can be.
McCain said he and Clinton would have a major argument over health care -- as would any of the Republican candidates. Clinton favors universal coverage that would include a mandate for all individuals to purchase insurance. McCain said he would make health care "more accessible by making it more affordable."
McCain called hers a big government plan, while Clinton has argued that she would keep the bulk of the current system of private insurance in place. She and other Democrats have argued that Republicans are not serious about insuring everyone and are not willing to put enough additional money into the system to achieve real success.
There were other areas of disagreement, from judicial appointments to reforming and expanding the military, which McCain cited in his speech at Franklin Pierce University. Boiled down to its essence, he said he offers one direction and she offers an alternative that he believes "is absolutely wrong for America and wrong for the world."
What McCain said about himself, however, may be the more important part of the speech, given that his campaign still faces serious obstacles en route to the nomination. Without speaking about his GOP rivals, McCain portrayed himself as the most equipped to deal with a hostile world and the conservative with the best chance of defeating Clinton.
"On matters of war and peace," he said, "I offer Americans my experience, my personal familiarity with the tragedy of war, deep involvement in all of the national security issues of the last two decades and steadfast conviction that America cannot afford to relinquish its leadership of the world and the world can't afford it either."
McCain's speech came hours before Rudy Giuliani was to launch a new television ad extolling his experience in crisis management as without parallel in the presidential race. The Arizona senator begged to differ. "No other candidate," he said, "has my experience or the judgment it informs."
McCain must spend the next eight weeks repeating that argument over and over again as he campaigns to win the New Hampshire primary. Should he succeed, he might yet have the opportunity to demonstrate whether it is possible to run both a courteous and vigorous general election campaign. As he showed on Sunday, the differences between the parties are huge and the stakes high. The choice, he said, "couldn't be a bigger one."
Reprint from http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/11/19/mccain_experience_no_one_else.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)