‘10,000 years’ McCain wins anti-war GOP vote.
On CBS’s Face The Nation last week, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) claimed Americans would not be “concerned” if the U.S. spends “10,000 years” in Iraq. Earlier in the week, he said it “would be fine with” him if the U.S. military stayed in Iraq for “a hundred years” or even a “million years.” Despite his push for an indefinite presence in Iraq, McCain somehow had a “wide advantage” yesterday with New Hampshire Republicans who “disapproved of the war“:
Exit polls found 64 percent of Tuesday’s Republican voters still support the conflict — and Romney, whose criticism of Bush’s management of the war has been muted, led McCain among those voters. But among the 34 percent who said they disapproved of the war, McCain had a wide advantage over the GOP field — even over Texas Rep. Ron Paul, the sole advocate of a U.S. withdrawal in the Republican field.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
56 Responses to “‘10,000 years’ McCain wins anti-war GOP vote.”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
I’m not even sure what this says about American voters.
January 9th, 2008 at 4:07 pmAs in previous elections, being informed has nothing to do with how one votes.
January 9th, 2008 at 4:08 pmI’m not even sure what this says about American voters.
Comment by Jeremy Henderson
I can tell you what it says about Republican voters. Duh-da-duh.
January 9th, 2008 at 4:09 pmNo one can claim that the goper voters are smart, for sure.
Maybe BugMan Delay was correct, the definition of a moderate Republican is someone that thinks ( too much )
January 9th, 2008 at 4:09 pmRepublican voters are not the brightest folk.
January 9th, 2008 at 4:10 pm…a moderate Republican…
Comment by Wayne
I thought they went extinct shortly after Newt Gingrich took over.
January 9th, 2008 at 4:12 pmHow many of the 64% who support the war are willing to enlist and fight themselves?
*crickets chirping.
January 9th, 2008 at 4:13 pmI thought they went extinct shortly after Newt Gingrich took over.
Comment by shoeless — January 9, 2008 @ 4:12 pm
I am still trying to find one that thinks……
January 9th, 2008 at 4:15 pmIt would be interesting to see if these people would still be so blindly supportive if they ever wrapped their minds around the fact that we invaded the wrong stinkin’ country to begin with:
http://www.asecondlookatthesaudis.com
If there is any rational basis to this lingering support for Pres. Bush and his invasion of Iraq, it must be something along the lines of, “At least he’s doing something.” After all, in the wake of September 11, this country was in near unanimous agreement that something needed to be done to counter that menace (presumably, militarily).
Indeed, Pres. Bush is doing something alright - namely, incessantly kissing the asses of those truly responsible for the attacks on September 11. And now it looks like McCain is getting ready to drop to his knees, too:
http://www.democrats.org/a/2007/04/mccain_retools.php
January 9th, 2008 at 4:16 pmI am still trying to find one that thinks……
Comment by Wayne — January 9, 2008 @ 4:15 pm
I should edit this
January 9th, 2008 at 4:17 pmI am still trying to find one that thinks…… Without cackling like a bad b movie mad scientist.
American voters are not of a class–we are all sorts of folks with all sorts of interests and motivations.
January 9th, 2008 at 4:17 pmcomment by Wayne @ 4:15 pm
Gooooood Luck on that(finding one that thinks, that is).
January 9th, 2008 at 4:18 pmAll this proves is that these voters think that McCain is the least of all evils they had to choose from. I mean get real the combined I.Q. of the whole field equals the brain power of a pissant.
January 9th, 2008 at 4:19 pmHAHAHAHAHAHA….more stupidity
proof once again that hysterical ignorance is the fabric of every fascist society
January 9th, 2008 at 4:23 pmIMO, they voted for McCain like I would vote for Hillary: HOLDING MY NOSE.
January 9th, 2008 at 4:28 pmNow that explains why we’re in this mess. Republicans just follow what ever their told no matter what is said. As they seat and pray to God, He must know their following Satan. This is right out of the bible when all the so called religious people yelled to kill Jesus only to later cry and say they were sorry. Now the first term of Bush one could say these people were fooled but after the second term even God would say their all fools and don’t deserve his blessings. Hell will get ready to have alot more residence as all will say their sorry they didn’t know but believed the Pastors.
January 9th, 2008 at 4:28 pmGiven that moderate Republicans have been defined as people who think “too much”, clearly McCain supporters are not all that moderate…
January 9th, 2008 at 4:29 pmMcCain better buy a house in Iraq now,because he’ll need it for the next lonely 10,000 years.
January 9th, 2008 at 4:30 pmLemmings.
January 9th, 2008 at 4:31 pmi’d bet it’s the veterans…
they know - or think they do - that another vet will be better able to get us out of this mess…
maybe ONLY if LIEberman is NOT part of a mcCAVE cabinet…
January 9th, 2008 at 4:33 pmbut i think that plan has already been made…
Are Repugs really that stupid, or does Diebold’s counting the votes have something to do with McCain’s showing?
January 9th, 2008 at 4:33 pmCan McCain express his 10,000 years of war into economic terms? Since we’re spending more than $2 billion a week on the Iraq war, how much does that add up to over 10,000 years? Something like $1, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, not counting for inflation? Maybe McCain should say $1 quadrillion dollars of war. Those are dollars, not quatloons.
January 9th, 2008 at 4:34 pm21 - Heh. McCain’s the only quatloon I know - !
January 9th, 2008 at 4:35 pmPass the Kool-Aid.
-GSD
January 9th, 2008 at 4:37 pmOnce you understand that Republicans make little, if any, sense, this report makes all the sense in the world.
There are Republicans that hate the war and want to to end…but there’s no way in Hell they’ll vote for anyone but a Republican (sorry Dems). A Republican who can win (sorry Ron Paul fans). None of the GOP frontrunners are willing to end the fiasco, so the “next best thing” is someone like McCain, you know, one a them “straight shooters” (sorry, threw up in my mouth a little) who will at least fight the wrong war the right way.
January 9th, 2008 at 4:39 pmAre Repugs really that stupid, or does Diebold’s counting the votes have something to do with McCain’s showing?
Comment by NoOneYouKnow
Nah, Diebold is voting for Bush’s candidate, Mittens
January 9th, 2008 at 4:42 pmkaty; most veterans(including myself) think that staying in Iraq for 10,000 years or bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran is the ultimate in stupidity. Only the veterans at the VFW, American Legion, and the Gathering of Eagles are THAT dumb.
January 9th, 2008 at 4:46 pmWell, maybe the anti-war GOPers voted for McCain BECAUSE their only other choice would’ve been Ron Paul, and, while New Hampshire is pretty much a “white as rice” state, they may have been more disturbed by some of the statements from Paul’s various newsletters with regards to gays and Blacks.
January 9th, 2008 at 4:48 pmI mean, as the other GOP candidates have all seemed to get behind Bush’s “endless” war, McCain HAS set up a “timeline”, even if it is 10,000 years. BushCo haven’t even been willing to limit the occupation to that length of time.
just heard on randi, and i do think i agree -
THE ticket to fear: mcCAVE / HUCKable…
oh ok… McCain / Huckabee…
~ ~ shiver ~ ~
January 9th, 2008 at 4:52 pmExit polls found 64 percent of Tuesday’s Republican voters still support the conflict — and Romney, whose criticism of Bush’s management of the war has been muted, led McCain among those voters. But among the 34 percent who said they disapproved of the war, McCain had a wide advantage over the GOP field — even over Texas Rep. Ron Paul, the sole advocate of a U.S. withdrawal in the Republican field.
So are they against the War…or Bush’s management of the War???
McCains position is the latter. He recognizes how Rumsfeld’s ideologically driven war strategy was a disaster…the military now realizes this also.
I’d like to know exactly how the exit poll question was phrased.
January 9th, 2008 at 4:52 pmAs I said on an earlier thread, I’ll never in a thousand years understand how the Republican mindset works. They seem truly schizophrenic to me.
January 9th, 2008 at 4:55 pmMcCain’s propostion that we should stay in Iraq on an open-ended basis, even if it takes 10,000 years contradicts his notion that the surge will work. The only purpose for the surge is to enable a diplomatic solution between Iraq’s warring Islamic factions in order to bring stability to Iraq. If Iraq becomes stable, it will not require 10,000 years of U.S. occupation. If it takes 10,000 years to pacify Iraq, then the surge clearly will not have worked.
January 9th, 2008 at 4:56 pmAre people listening to what these guys are saying , because if a dumb non-collage momo like me can figure it out , anybody else can . But there is a huge disconnect with reality and what people are wanting to hear .
First of all lets cut the crap , John McCain knows there is going to be a permanent OCCUPATION of Iraq . Obama knows it , Hillary clinton KNOWS it and the Council on foreign Relations she spoke to , KNOWS it .
Obama on 60 min. several months ago admitted - ” we need troops in Iraq , to protect OUR interests ”
Hillary told the CFR we need a presence in the region , to advance out causes , and mixed in some flowery ” advance democracy ” , at the same time saying U.S. should get first dibs at “contracts in IRAQ “.
And McCain we’ll his role is to continue the Bush Policy of U.S. military intimidation in the middle east , which includes increased bases , permanent occupation and controlling Iraq’s resources and remember the CFR, the Bush Crime Family always have bets on both sides . GOOGLE HILLARY CLINTON , CFR speech ..
The SYSTEM is RIGGED, the media is RIGGED because nobody is asking McCain or Clinton are we there for their oil, are you willing to sacrifice U.S. lives for ” our interests” and what exactly are ” OUR INTERESTS ” WHOs interests ?
JP MORGAN controls Iraq’s foreign loan process , the oil ministry in IRAQ has U.S. ” advisers” ( oil executives ), Banks can be 100 % foreign owned in Iraq, when it was limited to 30 % under Saddam . That’s why British, U.S. banks are buying up Iraqi banks .
Only until the media defines who’s interests are being advance and hence the sacrifice of U.S. blood , this misinformation campaign will continue .
January 9th, 2008 at 4:57 pmOnce the American people realize that the average American’s only roll is to financially support , U.S. intervention , occupations of foreign countries , and to wave the flag as instructed , this nonsense will stop . Until then the militarization of the U.S. will continue and grow and that is why Dennis Kucinich or Ron Paul can never reach that level of influence or power . THe CFR controls the process , it’s rigged .
So, I suggest that some/many of the 34 percent support McCain not because he is against the war, but because he has seem to endorsed more appropriate strategies enroute to a successful outcome.
Comment by CaptainMantastic
Yeppers, staying in Iraq for 10,000 years is a great strategy. I wonder why Bush didn’t think about it.
January 9th, 2008 at 5:00 pmIt makes sense to me. Staying in Iraq is different then fighting in Iraq, or surging in Iraq. I don’t agree that a presence there is required but I can understand how a Republican voter might. And of all the dudes they have to choose from I can see why they’d pick McCain. Better then Huck, Romney or Ghouliani. And while many may agree with Paul’s stance on the war that’s about where it ends for most. His other policy thoughts wouldn’t satisfy many. I’d like to see McCain get the nomination as he seems the most moderate of the freak show, or he sometimes does before he changes his mind. But on the other hand it might be better if Ghoul or Huck gets it as they would fall apart in the process.
January 9th, 2008 at 5:06 pm10,000 years.
That’s an awful lot of Friedman Units.
January 9th, 2008 at 5:07 pmDo you disagree that American’s are concerned about American casualties? Does it make sense to get Americans off the frontlines? Does it make sense for Iraqis to take over more and more of the responsibilities?
Comment by CaptainMantastic — January 9, 2008 @ 5:11 pm
It makes no sense for Americans to be there in the first place, at all. It makes all the sense in the world for Iraqis to be there in their own country, taking responsibility for their own security.
Why is this so difficult for you? In case you haven’t noticed, US troops in Korea and Germany are not being shot at and no one is diligently trying to blow them up. Because . . . they are not perceived as invaders. In Iraq, they are, and will be, regardless of whatever fantasy McCain has about parking them there for ten thousand years.
January 9th, 2008 at 5:15 pmTotal Votes cast yesterday…
For the record, two swing states had higher D than R voting, and in NH (where it’s more clear) the 2nd place D beat the 1st place R by around 16K votes (104K to 88K, with 112K to Hillary Clinton).
For all the angst about the winners and losers, the turnout for Democrats is a real story,
Clinton…112,238
January 9th, 2008 at 5:15 pmObama…104,757
McCain…88,447
Romney…75,202
Edwards…48,666
Huckabee…26,760
Giuliani…20,383
Paul…18,245
Richardson…13,245
How come the trolls on this website are so obsessed with men?
Captain MAN tastic
January 9th, 2008 at 5:35 pmMAN slagt
Southern Fried MAN (finger licking good)
How come the trolls on this website are so obsessed with men?
Captain MAN tastic
MAN slagt
Southern Fried MAN (finger licking good)
Comment by Starve-A-Bush_Feed-A-Beaver — January 9, 2008 @ 5:35 pm
It’s the wide stance that does it. and they’re afraid if they don’t announce it nobody will know.
January 9th, 2008 at 5:38 pmComment by Badger — January 9, 2008 @ 5:15 pm
Great insight.
January 9th, 2008 at 5:41 pmDo you disagree that American’s are concerned about American casualties? Does it make sense to get Americans off the frontlines? Does it make sense for Iraqis to take over more and more of the responsibilities?
I agree with all those things which is why getting US troops out of Iraq is the best policy.
January 9th, 2008 at 5:43 pmCaptain…I agree BUT..
Do you agree that Iraqi’s are concerned about Iraqi casualties??
Where exactly ARE the frontlines in Iraq???
Should the Iraqi’s take over the PERMANENT BASES that we are building over there???
For the record, I’m very glad that American Casualties are way down. I am FURIOUS that it took 5 years to realize how wrong Rumsfeld”s war strategy was. And the situation in Iraq could easily turn the “success of the surge” into the LULL of 2007.
January 9th, 2008 at 5:48 pmgummitch. which one of these McCain comments do you disagree with?
And BTW, although it may not make sense that are soldiers are in Iraq, they are there. So, which statement do you disagree with?
Comment by CaptainMantastic — January 9, 2008 @ 5:39 pm
Jesus, how many different ways do I need to write it for you?
If we leave American troops in Iraq they will be in harm’s way. The assumption that we can leave troops there because Americans won’t care is wrong because they will never be safe because the IRAQIS don’t want them there. It’s therefore a ridiculous, illogical assumption.
January 9th, 2008 at 5:59 pmDo you disagree that American’s are concerned about American casualties? Does it make sense to get Americans off the frontlines? Does it make sense for Iraqis to take over more and more of the responsibilities?
None of this is contradicted by a Total US Pullout. No Casualties. No frontlines. No one but Iraqi’s to be responsible.
January 9th, 2008 at 6:24 pmYeah, but McCain says, and his constituents agree, that it’s okay if the Iraqis are “fighting and dying with our support” for the next 10000 years - because we’re not against the war, we’re only against AMERICANS dying in it.
That’s mainstream Republican patriotism (imperialism) at its core. So, yeah, anti (Americans-dying-in-the) war Republicans would choose McCain.
January 9th, 2008 at 6:26 pmAt some point, someone should remind those Republican McCain supporters that 10,000 years is longer than the Earth has existed….
/sarcasm off
January 9th, 2008 at 6:27 pmIt makes little difference if people are voting more for Democrats than Republicans if the top three Democratic candidates refuse to commit to a full withdrawal of US troops from Iraq if they are elected.
January 9th, 2008 at 7:23 pmIf I were running against McCain, I’d air just two different ads.
January 9th, 2008 at 7:25 pmThe first one would be him singing “bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran” looped a few times.
The second one would be of that McCain supporter who asked him “How do we beat the b*tch”? and him laughing and responding “That’s a good question”. I’d loop that one a few times too, just like those annoying “Head-on” commercials.
Those two commercials would finish him off. Nobody would ever vote for him after they saw his bizarre behavior.
The only anti-war GOP candidate is Ron Paul.
January 9th, 2008 at 8:27 pmhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXOkVTJWnI4
If you’re a Republican who opposes Bush’s War in Iraq, and you look at your PITIFUL pack of candidates, you say, “OMG — guess I’ll vote for McCain.”
Newsflash to these GOP voters: Your man, Sen. McWar, says we should stay in Iraq 100 years — no make that 10,000 — no round it up to a million years. Don’t you feel stupid voting for him?
January 9th, 2008 at 10:23 pmThose two commercials would finish him off. Nobody would ever vote for him after they saw his bizarre behavior.
Comment by OxyCon — January 9, 2008 @ 7:25 pm
well, he would get the 24% who have turned off their brains and patriotism.
January 9th, 2008 at 11:57 pmA million years in Iraq? That would cost 100 quadrillion dollars, and that guy in New Orleans suing for that much wants all that money.
January 10th, 2008 at 9:50 amI’ve been thinking about the recent McCain endorsement by Sen. “holy joe” Lieberman. I wonder if there might have been a quid pro quo to this endorsement. Lieberman said that he gave the endorsement because Sen. McCain asked for it. I wonder if Lieberman asked for something in return, like maybe the Secretary of Defense position in a possible McCain administration. It would be deja vu all over again. That is McCain Lieberman as compared to Bush Rumsfeld.
billct
January 10th, 2008 at 2:19 pm“But among the 34 percent who said they disapproved of the war, McCain had a wide advantage over the GOP field — even over Texas Rep. Ron Paul, the sole advocate of a U.S. withdrawal in the Republican field.”
This happened because the 34% who disapproved of the war, were progressives and they voted for McCain so he will be the Republican candidate, because he will be easiest to defeat come this November
January 10th, 2008 at 2:26 pmPS - the WAR has been over for years. We’re now in an OCCUPATION, which McCain does not want to end…. ever.
January 10th, 2008 at 5:06 pm