The Ironies of Voting for John McCain

Mischief in Michigan. Democrat for a Day. If it’s okay for “Democrats” like Markos Moulitsas and Barack Obama to play those of kind of screwy political games, it’s okay for you to too. There may be several reasons to vote for John McCain, but the most significant is that it’s the most effective way to use your leverage this year. In short, it forces the neoprogressives to replace the loss of your vote with two new Democratic votes. Since they are all about the numbers game and strategies revolving around that, we should be too. As I’ve said many times, the neoprogs must lose this year before their ideologies and campaign styles are given any more authority.

But this plan has another upside: If McCain wins, people like Markos Moulitsas will be laughing stocks–permanently. And wouldn’t it be ironic if Markos’ jacking with the primary in Michigan came back to bite him on the ass when McCain wins in November? It would demonstrate not only his political impotence, but also his intellectual impotence. And let’s face it, Kos’ tiny penis is rarely erect. That’s why he has to shoot of at the mouth so often, and so recklessly. Well, that and all that frustration from being gay and being married to a woman (I feel for her, poor girl). Don’t tell me your gaydar doesn’t go off every time you hear his voice or see him walk onto a TV set. I mean: Come. On.

Anyway, you’re frustrated, and you’re scared, as well you should be. Dangerous not-Democrats are afoot in our Party. They can drive us out, or we can drive them out. I plan to drive them out and stake out some independent ground while I’m at it. I mean, we should at least be as politically savvy as the so-called Evangelical Center, don’t you think? You saw what happened when neoconservatives took over the Republican Party–don’t let the Democratic Party mirror that experience. Let’s take this opportunity to beat them all at their own games. Because John McCain is no neoconservative–he’s old school, pre-neocon, and, in another ironic twist, he could just help you take back your Party this year.


12 comments on “The Ironies of Voting for John McCain

  1. annabellep says:

    Definitely check out all of those links, folks. You need to be in the know if you aren’t already. We’ve got a long fight ahead, be we CAN ultimately prevail. Maybe not the way we wanted to, with Hillary as our President, but we can sure pave the way for a 2012 run by defeating Barack Obama this November. You own your vote, of course, but if you want Hillary in 2012, the choice is clear: Defeat Obama, vote for McCain.

    I’m sorry I didn’t get around to telling you my ca-razy tale of what happened on the way home tonight, but I will get to it this weekend. It involves a documentary interview and getting my hands on an inside-the-DNC document that I think you will find very interesting.

  2. Simon Weigh says:

    As a U.K. resident with a great interest and concern regarding the U.S. elections I’ve visited this blog a number of times as I’ve found it an interesting counterpoint to the mainstream press.

    However I’m afraid that over time I’ve found the ‘anyone but Obama’ attitude becoming increasingly ridiculous. Even so, for this blog to resort to slurs regarding someones ‘tiny penis’ and sexuality seem to have taken the blog to an all time low.

    Whatever the rights and wrongs of the process Barack Obama has won the Domocratic nomination. For a group of so-called Democrats to then argue that there are several reasons to vote for John McCain seems absurd.

    Exactly which of McCains policies do you prefer to Obama’s? Health? Education? The environment? Foriegn policy? John McCain will put anti-abortion judges on the bench, will reduce the tax burden on the wealthiest members of US society (when the US already has some of the lowest tax rates in the world) and will be more lenient when big business comes calling asking to drill/dig/burn the few remaining environmentally clean areas of your country. Are you really ready to vote for that?

    If you honestly feel that McCain is the better candidate with the better policies then please vote for him. But if you’re voting for McCain because you’re disgruntled about the selection process within the Democratic party then please get over it.

    I speak as someone who was a Hilary Clinton supporter at the commencement of the selection process. But Hilary wasn’t robbed of the nomination. Deep down I suspect that Hilary knows that her team ran a complacent campaign and that they blew it – that she could (indeed should) have won the nomination. Nevertheless, Hilary didn’t win the nomination and in the last two days she’s shown the class to recognise this and to give Obama her support. You should do the same.

    This election isn’t about who should have been nominated and it isn’t about trying to right past wrongs. It’s about the leadership of the U.S. (and indirectly the leadership of the free world) for the next four years. It’s about the future of the planet and the urgent need to protect the environment. It’s about correcting the wrongs of the last 8 years. It’s about restoring the human rights that the U.S. claims to uphold and then ignores when they become inconvenient.

    And this isn’t about electing Hilary Clinton in 2012. The U.S. has just wasted the last 8 years in electing George W. Bush not once, but twice. If you think that you can afford to waste the next four in the vain hope that you’ll finally get Hilary in the White House then you are wrong.

    You may be prepared to wait four years, but the rest of the world cannot and this election is too important to wasted on petty vendettas.

  3. old dem says:

    Having your party hijacked by “post-partisans” who will do nothing to further the progressive cause and who will most certainly turn the Democratic Party further to the right is not a “petty” matter. The fact that the democratic process was mocked and destroyed by caucus fraud and intimidation is not a “petty” matter nor is the blatant misogyny and ageism that was a part of the Obama campaign.

    I am not prepared to support an individual who ran an abusive, dishonest campaign. The argument that the other guy is worse doesn’t work for me.

  4. annabellep says:


    My comments about Markos were meant to be funny. They are the remarks any fag hag like me would make amongst her friends. We joke about gaydar all the time, but I’m supposed to censor myself here, on my own blog, because you don’t get my sense of humor? Maybe it wasn’t funny, and that’s fine, but it was hardly an attack.

    And this is hardly about silly personal vendettas. This is about the fight for the very soul of the Democratic Party.

  5. annab

    The way you joke with your friends is a manifestation of self hatred and you should elevate your awareness. Unfortunately this often happens with oppressed people. Then, we say things out of our group and outsiders call us on it. You are about to become important. Your words matter. Elevate -do not degrade. Stop the name calling -fag, queer, dyke — you are men and women first – sexual preferences second.

    Closeted passing people should be outed but not with ridicule — with explanations about how they profit through their hypocrisy. I do it with so called feminists.

    You are hearing this from people who respect you. Pay attention before you hear it from people who only want to destroy you and your credibility.

  6. annabellep says:

    Fair enough, GC. I’ll consider what you’ve said. I don’t think “gaydar” is a manifestation of self hatred, personally, and I doubt that will change, but I will consider what you said about outing closeted people. I do struggle with that. On one hand I have some sympathy, but on the other hand, I have some resentment too, for what I perceive as the lack of courage, as well as the lack of taking an opportunity denied to gays and lesbians throughout the ages. It’s complicated, and that’s not exactly it, but like I said, I will give it some thought. Thanks for engaging.

  7. grlpatriot says:

    AB, you rock. I’m not offended. The penis reference was out of bounds, but I get a gay vibe from kos as well. I’m queer, so I don’t have a problem. But I do have a problem with kos being a complete and utter sh!thead and hypocrite. He gets no sympathy from me.

  8. annabellep says:

    Thanks grlpatriot. I appreciate that. I was starting to think the humor was just bad. I agree about the penis comment, but I can’t remove it now. It’s “out there,” if that makes sense.

  9. Valhalla says:

    Simon — you’re wrong. This is not about the next 4 years. It’s about the next 8, 12, and 20 years, and all the mulitples of 4 after that.

    It’s fine to sit across the ocean and pontificate on McCain’s evilness and Obama’s fabulousness, but sorry, I live here and have a much greater stake in the course my country takes.

    What you are saying is that it’s ok to support caucus intimidation and fraud, rampant and vitriolic misogyny, violation of due process principles, and caving to the destroyers of reasonable intellectual discourse, just for the sake of the next 4 years.

    Well, I don’t support those things, regardless what party they emanate from. The question you should be asking yourself is, what is the one issue, or group of issues, that are so important to me that I could not bring myself to vote for a politician who espouses the opposite? Then imagine people shouting at you constantly to sacrifice your principles to vote for that person.

    I don’t know what those issues are for you, but for me, democracy-small-d is one. That includes conducting oneself according to the principles of democracy, not cheating, not violating the rules of your own organization, and not putting your thumb on the scale. Fighting sexism is another. Keeping my party from abandoning the working class, women, minorities except for AAs, gays and lesbians, and the other many groups the DNC has disclaimed when it should be championing them, is another.

    Long before I saw any of the violations listed above, I felt (and now am certain) that Obama does not have what it takes to face the challenges of our economy or war(s) competently. Back in Jan. I felt that if elected he would be the next Jimmy Carter. We all know how that turned out — 12 years of Republican rule. I want McCain to be the next Jimmy Carter, not a Democrat.

    I’m unlikely to vote for McCain myself, but I can understand those who are considering it. McCain does not have the kind of driving ideological architecture that Bush Jr and Reagan had when they came to power. I think he can be suffered through so that in 4 years we can elect a real Democrat, whether Clinton or someone else. But if this Dean-Pelosi faction win, the faction trying to purge the party of anyone who isn’t an AA, a college kid, or a rich liberal wins, there won’t be any real Democrats left to repair the damage done by either McCain or Obama.

  10. Simon Weigh says:

    Can I begin my response by saying that it’s nice to have the chance to debate these points in an intelligent manner? I don’t agree with the opinions of many of the people who read this blog, but I respect yours and I appreciate that you respect mine.

    Now can I tell you why you’re wrong? 🙂

    I honestly believe that you are confusing the issue and the fight. I’m sorry, but you’ve already lost the battle that you want to fight – who is should lead the Democratic Party in the 2008 election. Now you want to make the fight who should lead in 2012.

    I hear what several people have said about the way that the selection process was conducted and understand that it was a viscious campaign – although I would have to say that I saw faults on both sides. Nevertheless, that conversation is over. You can pick it up again within the party over the next four years, but you need to be realistic.

    The conversation now concerns Obama vs McCain. I repeat my earlier statement – If you honestly feel that McCain is the better candidate with the better policies then please vote for him.

    But so far I’ve not seen anyone, on this blog or on similar, argue the case for McCain’s policies being better than Obama’s at any level.

    Valhalla wants to make sure that the working class, women and minority groups are not abandoned and I echo that sentiment. But you want to do that by voting for McCain? I just don’t see how that makes any sense at all.

    November’s election is a simple question – who do you think is the best man to lead America through the next four years? McCain or Obama?

    To make it any more than that simple question simply confuses the issue. A small number of Floida voters confused the issue in 2000 and voted for Ralph Nader. See where that got us!

  11. annabellep says:


    Your politeness and obvious intelligence make you delightful to converse with. Thanks for the mutual respect. And I apologize it took me so long to get back to you. I’ve been so busy…

    I think my post on voting options and more will do a pretty thorough job of explaining a shift in my political thinking as a result of a lot of things that have happened in the last few years. I think I’ve come to a rational POV in my choice to vote for John McCain. It’s not a choice out of anger, and it’s not a choice out of resentment. I think it’s a choice made out of strength, and which is entirely consistent with my point of view.

    Political reform has always been a hot-button issue for me, but I never expected to get the opportunity to reform the Republican Party. I think this election could bust everything open wide. I think that Obama has already transformed the Democratic Party, and that, if elected, McCain will transform the Reps. It’s not an issues-based strategy, it’s a process-based strategy.

    If you knew me, you’d know why that is the most intellectually consistent stance for me to take. I am a feminist and an English teacher after all. That’s also why I agree wholeheartedly with Val: it’s about all the future elections in my lifetime, and the lifetime of my daughter. We’re looking for more than to simply win this battle.

    Thanks for engaging.

  12. annabellep says:

    Oh, btw, I do see what misinformed Nader voters wrought in 2000. If they’d been informed, or if Obama was anything like Gore (he is not, btw), that argument might hold water. 2000 Nader defectors are part of what’s wrong with the Democratic Party, and they support Obama overwhelmingly. Precisely because they are misinformed, still, I might add.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s