Well, at least if it's McCain vs. Hillary.

Well, that makes sense. They're both **** ****** ***.

Aw, just kidding, Hillary.

She's probably trying for reverse psychology. But I'll send her a thank you if Hillary wins :-D

She's probably trying for reverse psychology.

Yeah, basic idea may be to make Democrats move away from Clinton, since if Coulter supports her, she must be pretty far right.

Yeah, it's
a) transparant,
b) batshit insane, and
c) possibly going to work.

i've been hearing this kind of thing from a lot of conservatives lately, and i don't think there is any reverse psychology at play here. the basic reasoning behind some of the more hardcore conservatives (particularly neocons) throwing their support behind sen. clinton is that they believe that the damage that a mccain presidency will do to the g.o.p. could be irreversible. on the other hand, a clinton presidency will unite them like never before.

in other words, if clinton gets elected, the g.o.p. status quo is maintained and the inevitable is delayed for a few years.

I thought Ann Coulter had gone away with the mid-term elections or something. It was nice not hearing about her for awhile. Guess she must have another book coming out soon, gotta get the PR out.

Just for the record, I myself would hold my nose and vote for McCain over Hillary. Don't tell my hubby, but I would vote for him over Romney, too.

Don't tell my hubby, but I would vote for him over Romney, too.

I hope the majority of Republicans feel the same way you do, bunnyfire.

the basic reasoning behind some of the more hardcore conservatives (particularly neocons) throwing their support behind sen. clinton is that they believe that the damage that a mccain presidency will do to the g.o.p. could be irreversible. on the other hand, a clinton presidency will unite them like never before.

I think it's a little of both. They want Democrats to think Hillary is too far to the right, and Republicans to think McCain is too far to the left.

I'm just really confused now.

Other than McCain-Feingold, which attempts to decouple personal wealth and political influence in the slightest possible fashion, and his stand that, having experienced torture himself, he's not too fond of it, why do so many republicans despise him?

Is it because, even with his political views, other that the above two, in lock step with republican orthodoxy, he's civil to those across the aisle?

I don't understand.

Pretty much, danf. He also backed that immigration bill last season that gave OMG AMNESTY or whatever, but that was well after the Republican party started to villify him. Overall, McCain doesn't seem to blindly follow the Party Whip.

But he is pretty forthcoming about his views, and, while I have a lot of personal respect for him (as far as I know him through the media), he would not get my vote over any of the democrats, due to a lot of his views.

But I can understand why people would vote for him. The whole straighttalk thing seems to be a "brand" for him, but he also seems to walk it.

I have watched this before. In the run-up to the 2000 election FreeRepublic went batshitinsane with intra-party squabbles and the anti-McCain faction took the upper hand, and basically ran off all the pro-McCainers. They were vicious and unprincipled in every way possible. They spread that black baby bullshit like it was butter. They hate him with a passion ... well, obviously in some cases exceeding that for the Clintons.

It is in fact his appeal to moderates and independents that they fear. They don't want a "big tent" party, they want a pure ideological party. Even though McCain has a pretty damn conservative voting record and stomps around backing the war and Bush.

Just today or yesterday RedState told its members to stop calling him "Juan McCain". (They also used the nickname "Jorge Arbusto" for some lame duck politician who doesn't matter.) It was upsetting the Hispanic conservatives.

I wish I could feel all this infighting dooms the GOP, but I've seen them turn on a dime before, so I'm not gonna get overconfident. (Especially after 2000 and 2004.)

Anyway, Coulter obviously hopes that Clinton will win (and doubts she will change anyone's mind on the left). This is just a slap at McCain, and linking him to Hillary seems to be in the zeitgeist:

Surprisingly Liberal spot

The smarter freepers (i.e., the two or three who wash their hands after defecating) think they should sit this one out & let the Dems win, then blame the winner for all the consequences of w's motherfucking galaxy of disasters, then stroll back in in '12 like nothing happened.

And while I'm at it, if a Dem wins, he or she need to prosecute as many of these fucking curs for their crimes as they possibly can. They got handled (relatively speaking) with kid gloves over Iran-Contra, and as a consequence, didn't learn a goddamned thing, save that they could get away with it (fucking Negroponte?)

Sooner or later, their party will be back in, and if examples are not made of them soon I believe they'll pick up right where we are hopefully about to leave off, and things will only get worse from there on out. If they're hell-bent on destroying the Constitution, one or two terms out of power will not deter them without felony convictions next to their names.