Why do people keep asking about Sen. McCain as VP?

Please vote.

I'm not a huge fan of the idea, but I do think that our current system is so fundamentally flawed right now that we need a "unity ticket" of sorts to help fix things up and perhaps quell a little of the animosity between the two parties. That said, I think we can, will, and should win without McCain.

:eyes:

I like that one. Pretty good!

What's up with all the *lite choices. Should be harsher statements.

I would prefer him to run against Bush for the repug nominee but there is some delicious irony if he ran on Kerry's ticket. Bush and his cohorts have systematically destroy any sense of unity this country ever pretended to. We are as polarized as I can ever remember. It would be refreshing to see a coalition between these two comrades in arms to bring peace, prosperity and unity back as goals for America. It's a naive pipe dream but we still have the right to dream - asscrape hasn't taken that from us yet.

I wouldn't mind McCain as a VP candidate, for this reason: It would go a long way to showing the average person that the Bush thugs aren't even real conservatives, and it would be delicious to see a Democrat and a Republican team up to bring these monsters down. As a Republican, McCain isn't too bad, and he seems to be one of the few sane ones left.

Look, I'm a diehard liberal, but this election isn't even about liberals vs. conservatives. It's about taking out the greatest evil this country has ever faced. There's time later to move the country to the left. Right now, it's so far to the right that we need to begin a gradual process. Whatever it takes to get Bush out of office. Whatever it takes.

then some ditto head will come along and blow away Kerry so McCain would end up the first Republican to serve as a Democratic President

or even the best way for the two men to work on bringing some unity to this country. For example, they could form a sort of a coalition with Sen. McCain giving his support to President Kerry in the Senate, and helping to rally other Republicans to support many of Kerry's programs, helping to stop the blocking of Kerry's judicial nominees and other such things.

In fact, there are a whole lot of ways these two men could work together to help bring unity to this country if they both have the will to. I sincerely hope they will, but not through running on the same ticket.

candidate.

Because the Democratic Party is in such poor shape, is run by conservatives who pander only to the wealthiest (you know, those committed to the GOP )that they must look outside the party for hope and succor. Really ,really sad.

But, it does occur to me that insulting those who really are your allies seems a silly strategy to me. Bullying folks to follow the party line is no great plan for success......

He is a straight shooter who can DESTROY Bush.

He didn't seem to have much notable success in doing it in 2000...

But every poll showed that if McCain had been the Republican candidate in 2000, he would have blown Gore away in a landslide. The man may be the most popular politician alive in America today. I disagree with him on a lot of issues, but if he could get Kerry elected, and if Kerry could stay healthy for four or eight years, then why not? I don't think its going to happen, but it'd be great if it did.

to cheat this time around. After all, he's a fine upstanding Christian.:eyes:

a history of evil doesn't mean anything to people, because they are so DESPERATE for a hollow win.

and tolerance toward a large group of Democrats who post on this board. It is greatly appreciated.:)

seem incredibly naive and downright ignorant of how party politics work. Being an elected dem or repub is vastly different from registering as a D or R and even voting a straight party ticket for years. It's a lot more like joining a church and become a deacon or perhaps a fully ordained minister/priest/rabbi. You simply don't change religions (political parties) casually.

And the notion of McCain (or any other Republican) as the VP nominee and thus having a 'unity ticket' is one that utterly misses the point. If McCain were to become the VP nominee, he'd be completely drummed out of the Republican party, seen as a traitor.

Imagine Bush dumping Cheney and try to imagine Kucinich or Dean on the ticket.

It simply won't happen. Get over it. Concentrate on other things.

I don't give a fuck what the National Council on Public Polls says.

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck, I'll call it a duck.

Petty....incredibly petty... :eyes:

and the tenth is "Some combination of the above/other."


:eyes:

We've gone down the rabbit hole, I guess... :eyes:

I personally think McCain would be a horrible choice, and he wouldn't take it anyway. But no, it is not insulting to anyone to talk about it.

They'd even vote for Genocide John to beat Bush.

Uh...?

1974 Relocation Act
Boyden requested Congress to partition the Joint-Use area into separate Dineh and Hopi areas, so that the Hopi could obtain better access to the land traditionally inhabited by the Dineh. The 1974 Navajo-Hopi Settlement Act was pushed through Congress by a group representing the coal-fired power industry, which believed their industry would benefit by having the U.S. government finance the eviction of all the people living in an area larger than the state of Rhode Island. In their rush to promote national energy self-sufficiency, Congress never considered where the people would go or how relocation would affect their lives. Nor did they consider the wishes of the people they planned to relocate. John McCain authored this "relocation" bill.

1980 A Site for Relocation Purchased
The U.S. government purchases a uranium-contaminated site near Chambers, AZ as the "New Lands" for the evicted Dineh. This site qualified as a candidate for the Superfund cleanup after the worst RADIOACTIVE SPILL the world has ever known!

1996 The Final Solution
Congress passed the 1996 Navajo-Hopi Settlement Act, which required all Dineh remaining on the land in defiance of the 1974 law either to sign leases with the Hopi government ceding all of their property and civil rights, or to be forcibly evicted by the year 2000. Congress offered the Hopi government $25 million if it could get 95 families to sign these unfair leases, unleashing a campaign of coercion, fraud, and forgery. With their remedies in U.S. courts seemingly exhausted, the people turned to the UN for help, resulting in investigation in 1998 by a representative of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.

-snip-

This final solution - the Navajo-Hopi Settlement Act, was sponsored by Senator John McCain. Senator McCain comes from a very wealthy family, and has some very close personal and political ties to; the mining industry (coal, uranium, etc.), the power generating industry, and at the time he sponsored this genocidal bill - he was Chairman of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs! To state the facts in plain blunt english, he sold out the lives of these Indian people, relocating them to radioactive contaminated lands, so that his "friends" in the mining and power generating industries would profit. Genocide for profit.

http://www.aics.org/BM/bm.html

No its not nice, and I could tell you a bunch more reasons why you shouldn't like him, but to accuse him of "genocide" or of effecting a "final solution" is just childish and asinine.

Who cares about them, right? Just another dark-skinned people bitching about something. It's always genocide with the Indians, right? It's only a forced relocation. Uranium tailings are good for you. </Sarcasm>

Article II:  In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
<snip>
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
<snip>
Deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to destroy a group includes the deliberate deprivation of resources needed for the group’s physical survival, such as clean water, food, clothing, shelter or medical services. Deprivation of the means to sustain life can be imposed through confiscation of harvests, blockade of foodstuffs, detention in camps, forcible relocation or expulsion into deserts.
http://www.preventgenocide.org/genocide/officialtext.htm

I think relocation to the site of the worst radioactive spill in US history could count as genocide.

The Gallup Independent (July 19, 1988) article "Rio Raidoactive" states "Action must be taken now to solve the problem of radioactive contamination of the Rio Puerco. Chris Shuey, coordinator of the Southwest Research and Invormation Center in Albuquerque, NM said that the Rio Puerco has so much radioactivity in its sediment that drinking from it would pose a health risk at certain times. The surface water of the Puerco River has at times been between 10 and 100 times beyond the maximum allowable level for radioactivity, according to a report released in June by Robert Webb, a hydrologist for the U.S. Geological Survey."

The Church Rock uranium mining operation in 1979 was the site of the nation's largest radioactive spill.

Lisa Tso has this photograph on a bulletin board in her kitchen, documenting evidence of the spill.

"This is yellow cake, which is surface contamination from the uranium spill into the Rio Puerco. This is part of the New Lands to which we are being relocated."
http://www.videodocument.org/vbm/BefPea.htm

Yes, accuse me of being racist that'll be sure to make me sympathetic to your argument. What are you thinking?

I didn't endorse what Senator McCain did. In fact I said it was wrong. My point was that it is ridiculous on any level to say that removing people from their homes is "genocide." To compare it to the Holocaust, as you did, is as juvenile as you can possibly get. In fact the moment you do that, you alienate a huge segment of your audience from what appears to be a very legimiate set of grievances. And I'd say the same thing if you were talking about Anglos, blacks, Hispanics, Palestinians or Pushtu.

to the Holocaust was on the part of the source site (which I will admit may be poor wording on their part). Comparisons of Native American suffering to the Holocaust are a whole other issue.

My point was that it is ridiculous on any level to say that removing people from their homes is "genocide."

They were not just removed from their homes, they were moved to a radioactive spill site, a toxic location which would seem to fall under definition of genocide as in section c, Article II of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide.

my point wasn't to minimize the often systematic and always despicable extermination of Native Americans in the 18th and 19th centuries, which John McCain is not responsible for.

they were moved to a radioactive spill site, a toxic location which would seem to fall under definition of genocide

1. They weren't forced to live there.

2. There's no evidence they were moved there because anybody wanted to exterminate them.

At best you could argue that they were moved there with wilfull disregard for the health consequences of living in a toxic waste site. But that's not genocide, that's just not giving a damn.

Whether or not McCain was responsible for the extermination of the Indians from the 17th century up til now, he sure as hell knew what he was doing when he FORCED the Dine people to live on that contaminated land.

He knew damn well they did not have a lot of options as far as fighting it or other places to live. They had to sign leases....the other option resulted in Bennet Freeze- now there's a real sweet deal you ought to check out!

You want someone like this on a ticket with a DEM? You are way out of touch if you think people would vote for this deal. Fortunately it will never happen...still...either way, it makes McCain no less responsible for what he caused.

I've been past the village where there is nothing left but dead tree trunks and cement foundations where these people lived-until they and all the living things around them died from radiation poisoning.

I have heard the prayers for those who have suffered horribly from the worst cancers. I have heard stories how the giant corporations & US govt wriggle out of any paying any compensation.
This I can and do, lay at the feet of McCain & his cronies in the govt/mining/mineral business.

You've never lived around the rez, have you? Then you wouldn't have posted #2 "There's no evidence they were moved there because anybody wanted to exterminate them."
get real...like no one has been trying this ?? In your your post above- you even admitted it yourself......"my point wasn't to minimize the often systematic and always despicable extermination of Native Americans in the 18th and 19th centuries..." well here is plain evidence that it has continued right on into the present....thanks to a REPUBLICAN senator from AZ.

Peace
DR

... in the last month, or so.

Enough is enough with this foolish, pointless topic! Why not ask "Would Kerry win in a landslide if he could spin straw into gold"?

:eyes:

I think that some Dems indeed do lack the courage of their own convictions and believe that we can't win without a Repiggie on the ticket. (Never mind that a lot of people who would otherwise be willing to vote for Kerry would head straight for the Greens at such a sign of moral cowardice on the part of the Democratic Party.)

I think the rest are paid disrupters, and yes, I believe that there are paid disrupters on DU.

has gone QUITE to the right, and closes out traditional Dems.

Doesn't matter that many good thinkers have kept saying that trying to win by going to the right won't do it... people insist on thinking giving up traditional Dem values will "WIN".

Kanary

Just a thought.

It happens all the time here and in the general public. So many people had to have Gore because he was the only chance. People still jump up and down about Hillary, even with her baggage, because she's well-known. Mary Landrieu pulls off an end-of-the-cycle victory in a run-off, and suddenly she's a Vice-Presidential goddess.

Clark can dispel our collective self-hatred for being soft on defense, so he's the white knight of the moment.

The last thing we need to do is send a mixed-message like one with this goon on the ticket; simplicity of message is what wins elections, in case anyone hasn't noticed. We should run a strong moderate Dem who's not afraid of the "L" word and who will stand up and point out how the core values of the Democratic Party are ones that are in service to all of mankind, instead of cringing in terror at the onslaught of the hate machine.

To bring in McCain is to say: we hate ourselves, and our policies are crap. To have brought in Clark as a Presidential Candidate would have been to say that we couldn't find a real winner in our entire party, so we had to go outside. Why do so few see that doing things like this are tantamount to telling the world you're an idiot and you can't stand being in your own presence?

which is the sense I get from listening to their arguments

Clueless is the sense I get

"We need to get the votes of moderates by picking a hard core conservative" that I just can't seem to understand

:shrug:

Well, that's exactly what the Democratic wannabe-governor in Montana is doing...he's picked a Republican for a lieutenant-gov running mate. When I brought it up here all I got was "what a great idea" and "we really need to win the governorship." What exactly does it say to people when you are so fucking scared of standing up for the values the Democratic Party has represented that you think you need to have a Republican on your ticket to win? Will it attract moderates? Maybe but it will be a VERY cold day in hell before I vote for a ticket like that.

On edit: This was meant to be a general reply to the thread.

They're ABB whores. but they are chicken dems and they don't care how many Democratic gov's and sen's it would insult and they are clueless.

Can I say that?

:P

Padraig18's thinly veiled personal assault against me is merited, as are all the other shadow posts he's leveled at me.

I hereby confess to all that:

I truly had no idea that John McCain was a conservative Republican.

I had no idea that McCain had already endorsed Bush.

I was completely ignorant about McCain being Bush's AZ campaign chairman. Completely ignorant. Not even a clue.

I have never read a newspaper in my life (or even a book, for that matter).

I never listen to "the news".

I am a "'Chicken Little' Dem who think only a Repuke VP will help us win." (I really, really do believe this with all of my heart)

I am generally clueless.

*******
The thread of subject in this thread was intended for discussion as I wanted to get a feel for what people here at the DU thought, which was clearly stated in the originating post. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x491071. I had no idea that it would flush out such personal hostility against me, but it did.

For the record, I am the only person at the DU who posted that the Democrats would lose control of the Senate and even more seats in the House during the 2000 mid-term election. The ONLY one. My rationale for seeing that loss was based firmly in my belief that the Democratic Party had moved too far to the.......right. Imagine that!

But, on the other hand, it must have been my "inner freeper", huh?

Grinning ear to ear here.

I would have predicted the same thing about the House and Senate, though.

I didn't have the money to have access to a computer back then.
The only reason I have access now is because of my job.

It's probably too late to say this, but I was just engaging in a little humor. We all have inner freepers, just like we all have an inner child.

Most of the time, I don't pay enough attention to the inner social politics of this board to recognize who is being assaulted in these general questions.

I think like a lot of Dems, he's just tired of seeing a Republican bandied about when there are TONS of Democrats who would make EXCELLENT VPs. AFAIK, he has nothing against you at all.

I've just had it up to HERE with all the "McCain should be the VP on the Democratic ticket' threads. If John McCain were a Democrat, that'd be one thing, but the man is about as conservative a Repug as you can get without becoming a crypto-fascist, like Santorum or Lott or frist, etc....

He would never do it, and I know that, but I think the reason some Dems keep asking is bacause they believe he's one of a very few politicians who tell the people the truth. People of all parties would like that but never get it!

how wrong they are about there not being a 'dimes worth of difference' between the two parties! :eyes:

Can't add anything to that, KG.

I would expect it to be raised as a question here.

It has been the topic of discussion in the media several times recently. I'm more curious as to why you are so surprised that it is being raised as a legitimate topic of discussion here?

About a gazillion times.

Some of us don't read the DU a gazillion times a day or week. I've only seen it a couple times.

The blasted idea rears it ugly head too damned often.

No way in hell I would ever vote for John McCain -- even for dog catcher!

and I'm a tried and true Democrat.

But the question was why is McCain brought up as a VP candidate so much here, and that's what I answered. I can see why the question is raised, even if it causes impatience and ire with some people here.

Geeze. I thought it was a reasonable answer too. How did I get on your bad side so fast?

it is just in fun to speculate. :shrug: :-)

The idea is horrifying!

:puke:

would it be illogical to question if these people that are advocating for McCain also advocate and vote for republicans in House, Senate, and other elections?

There are definately some PROBLEMS with having a Republican running mate. Especially if he has the tie breaking vote in a close Senate.

It's a can of worms, for sure.

Courtesy of the Agonist

WASHINGTON - Sen. John McCain yesterday unleashed an attack on his own party, saying the GOP is ``astray'' on key issues and criticizing President Bush on the war in Iraq.

``I believe my party has gone astray,'' McCain said, criticizing GOP stands on environmental and minority issues.

``I think the Democratic Party is a fine party, and I have no problems with it, in their views and their philosophy,'' he said. ``But I also feel the Republican Party can be brought back to the principles I articulated before.''


( Umm, that's not flirting. That's called making a pass! ed. )

http://news.bostonherald.com/election2004/view.bg?articleid=1611

.

although Generally Clueless was fairly tempting as well.

It absolutely astounds me that on a progressive website, there would be so many people so enthusiastic about putting a right wing Republican on a Dem ticket.

I genuinely respect McCain, but that does not mean that I think he belongs on a Democratic Presidential ticket.

What really bothers me is how I and others like me got accused for months of being Republicans, but now it seems that everybody else is just tripping over themselves to advocate putting McCain on the ticket.

Now I get accused of being one of those purity obsessed people who doesn't want Kerry to win, as if his only chance at winning is by running with a conservative Republican.:grr:

It's more like a Faux News poll. :)

But got off of it. It would piss off more Dems and work against us with Repubs more than it would be worth. McCain wouldn't get Conservative votes, he'd be called a traitor by Fox News and the Bushites and the rest of the sheep would fall in line with that.

I like McCain even if I disagree with his Pro-Life stance, but he wouldn't help us as much as initially thought. Give it some real brain time, you'll realize it too.

Rp