Is McCain more of the same?

[GorillaPaws]

It has been claimed by the Obama campaign that McCain is "more of the same," implying that McCain's policies are merely an extension of the same policies that Bush has had for the past 8 years. The McCain campaign has labeled him as a maverick reformer who is going to bring about change. Clearly one of them is wrong.

I started this thread in the hopes that Republicans could put forth clear examples of McCain's policies (i.e. we shouldn't be talking about Obama) that show how he "isn't more of the same." Something to the effect of:

Issue "A"
Bush's policy is "X" and McCain's is "Y";
"Y" is clearly different from "X" because of "Z".

Most of what I've been hearing from the Republican party seems to reinforce the idea that McCain really isn't that different from the Bush White house, but I think it's only fair to give the Republicans a chance to make their case. I'm hoping a structured format like this will provide an opportunity to focus on the actual issues instead of unproductive political mudslinging.

EDIT: I forgot to mention that the intent isn't to debate the merits of the policy, but only whether it's the same or different from Bush.

[seenew]

Good luck with this, haha. I'm looking forward to the responses.

[Aea]

Good luck with this, haha. I'm looking forward to the responses.


There's practically no difference in important policies. He'll stand up against minor issues but he'll side with the party and continue bush-style politics on the issues that really matter.

Then again maybe he won't, when Bush was elected he was viewed as a center right president who would be cautious with foreign affairs. Just look how that one turned out to be.

The "Difference" is there just to get the undecided voters to lean his way, you know those who base their votes on blatantly outdated stereotypes.

[Badandy]

Immigration reform?

[yg17]

Immigration reform?


You mean the same immigration reform he said he would vote against (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtHOkSWCr6Q)?

[Cleverboy]

Immigration reform?
Interestingly, McCain is so fearful of his party's bad reaction, that he calls the topic "border security" on his campaign website. Simply having it as "immigration" apparently enraged his base. His immigration reform can't be pitched without adding "security" to the mix. Reading the McCain website, its hard to see where his immigration plans split from the administration, even though I'd vaguely heard they did. It'd be nice to hear from someone who thinks he's still "a maverick".
http://civicalert.org/2008/02/08/is-mccain-that-different-from-bush/
As McCain has disagreed on a small number of issues of the conservative mainstream, some in the far right have sought to call him a moderate or a maverick, even a liberal. Some of these issues include campaign finance, immigration, and stem cells. However, while reaching out to conservatives in the primary season, he has stated that he will revisit his stand on immigration. However, these issue stances are the rare exceptions, not the rule. So it seems that instead of bringing to the Presidency a moderate or maverick mentality, it will be only a continuation of many of George Bush’s worst policies.The GOP is so fearful of what they'd criticized McCain for, he's done everything to obscure any real difference. I mean, listen to McCain himself. The man's own words. I think the only thing that can be said is... hey, maybe because he personally hates Bush, that means he'll do something unique in his Presidency on non-policy related matters.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uThoBMfcFRc

~ CB

[Desertrat]

The press, SFAIK, is responsible for the "maverick" label. There are numerous issues where McCain's postion has differed from Bush's in degree, if not substance--but often in substance. McCain/Feingold, for one.

As far as immigration, nobody has come up with anything sensible. And, political viability on that issue is well-nigh impossible. We know that the 1986 Simpson/Mazzoli law created more problems than it solved, so nobody really wants to touch it in any meaningful way. Both parties will only phrase things in a manner to please their constituents, as long as they don't really have to take action. So, I doubt McCain will really do much.

Fiscal? Dunno, but Bush certainly hasn't been a fiscal conservative. And, not really a conservative, given No Child Left Behind and Free Pills for Olde Pharts.

Taxes? Depends on his budget ideas and priorities.

Overall monetary policy? Absent bringing in a Volcker type to try to turn things around at the Fed, whoever wins this race will have to preside over an economic shambles. Even so, we're not between a rock and a hard place; we're between a diamond and carborundum.

Dunno what he can do about personal rights and privacy. The Democratic Congress seems reasonably content with Homeland Security and the TSA, etc. I don't see any relief, there.

As far as energy, the big problem with the Bushies has been that they're inarticulate. Their basic ideas are correct, but they just can't explain anything in a clear, understandable manner. And, the press doesn't help, any.

I dunno. I don't pay as much attention to what's said on the campaign trail as I do to track records in life and in public office--and vote for what seems to be the least harmful to the country as a whole. This time around, it looks like McCain. As usual, it doesn't mean I like the choice.

Nuthin' new. I've been voting for the lesser of two weevils since 1956...

'Rat

[GorillaPaws]

There are numerous issues where McCain's postion has differed from Bush's in degree, if not substance...

I think that's a valid criticism of how I was hoping to structure this thread. I think it would be reasonable for people to bring up instances where McCain's policies differed from Bush's in degree alone as evidence that his policies are different (they might have to work a bit harder to convince others though).

Thanks for contributing; you make some good points.

[Dont Hurt Me]

McCain backed Bushco's policys what 95% of the time? Where the heck is the change in that? These guys are Corporate Prostitutes, Heck Im sure McCain is even backing Bush's Torture and his removing Habeas Corpus?? McCain is more Bush. Heck there was a time a year ago that Bush couldnt even sit down without asking brownNoser McCain to move. These guys are tearing down the Constitution and trying to replace it with multinational Corporations with no individual liberty, freedom or rights.

[GorillaPaws]

McCain backed Bushco's policys what 95% of the time? Where the heck is the change in that? These guys are Corporate Prostitutes, Heck Im sure McCain is even backing Bush's Torture and his removing Habeas Corpus?? McCain is more Bush. Heck there was a time a year ago that Bush couldnt even sit down without asking brownNoser McCain to move. These guys are tearing down the Constitution and trying to replace it with multinational Corporations with no individual liberty, freedom or rights.

To be fair, that > 90% charge is misleading since many of the votes weren't really policy issues. I'd like to hear more posts like Deserat's to be honest.

[Cleverboy]

To be fair, that > 90% charge is misleading since many of the votes weren't really policy issues. I'd like to hear more posts like Deserat's to be honest.
It's McCain's words. Its not a "charge", it was a selling point. Ask him, he'll tell you straight.

~ CB

[SMM]

McCain did not have the support of numerous factions in the republican party, most of the corporate special interest groups, and most of the religious right. It was clear early on, he could not get the party's nomination, without making vast changes to his opinions and policies.

So, be began ransoming his soul, for one last chance at the big chair. McCain no longer is in charge of anything. He must agree to do anything he is told. The republican power machine will be calling the shots, just like they have with Bush. Poor Georgie has not made his own decisions, ever since he ran for governor. He is a front man for the Texas power machine. They created him, polished him up, schooled him in what to say (and when to say it). I have long believed that Cheney is the 'babysitter', to make sure he does not say something stupid (a daunting task). Cheney gets his orders from the power machine, and makes sure George can make the delivery.

These are the same people who now have McCain by the balls. He will not make a policy decision, which is not approved in advance. He is now just a front man.

[iShater]

Nuthin' new. I've been voting for the lesser of two weevils since 1956...

'Rat

Interesting you say that. I know a lot of people who are voting the same way.

[atszyman]

Interesting you say that. I know a lot of people who are voting the same way.

I think a lot of the U.S. has been voting for the "least bad" candidate for years. Unfortunately we can never seem to agree on who the "least bad" candidate is.

[nanofrog]

I think a lot of the U.S. has been voting for the "least bad" candidate for years. Unfortunately we can never seem to agree on who the "least bad" candidate is.
Perhaps... Or maybe they're all so bad, it doesn't make any difference anyway. Screwed no matter who gets it. :p