First, he’s too old. I’m not an agist, but I’d rather not have someone as President who probably won’t live through his term. The Presidency aged Clinton, is still aging Bush, and when you exit the gates at 71 or 72, there’s just not that much room to age.

Second, he’s basically a war-hero democrat. He’s not solidly conservative on economic or social issues. He has a very limited understanding of free markets, and has shown that his views on illegal immigration are one-sided; his views on free speech misguided; and his willingness to raise taxes frightening.

I’ve said this regarding Obama, as well: Charm is not enough of a reason to vote for a President. McCain’s charm isn’t even that charming. He’s an honorable guy, but that alone is not enough of a reason to vote him into the oval office!

When it comes to Victim status, the first black president trumps the first woman president.

Jon Baker, yes, McCain’s connection with “Mexico First” Juan Hernandez is going to keep me from voting for him—as well as his other deficienies, such as the fact he really doesn’t support the free market. And, yes, where I live, too, you see the Mexican flag flying all over, we’re overrun with Hispanic gangs (whose members, no matter how many crimes they commit, and their lack of citizenship, never get deported) and racist groups such as La Raza and Mecha have entirely too much influence in the political sphere. This is a real problem, not just ranting about Mexicans per se.

We’re electing a president, not a pastor. And foreign policy is the president’s sphere. Congress is supposed to handle the domestic stuff, and, with issues like Roe v. Wade, the courts have taken those out of our hands for the moment. Giuliani is the soundest Republican candidate on foreign policy, in my opinion. We’re not going to get a perfect candidate, this election, or any other election; I think Giuliani would be best for the country at this point.

McCain could have disassociated himself from Democrat calls for troop raises, because McCain darn well knew the Democrats would only pour more troops into the meat grinder in order to acquire political support, like Johnson did. The Democrats were not interested in winning, but McCain allowed his statements and comments about Bush’s military policy in Iraq to be used to further the cause of “more troops”, even if it had the stamp of Democrat approval, purely because it was politically convenient for the Democrats, if not McCain.

That and McCain’s retarded belief that you can work with Democrats or anyone else and “legislate” anti-corruption laws that will positively affect politicians. What ends up happening is that politicians corrupt the anti-corruption laws, and make the anti-corruption laws a front for more corruption. Which has happened, but McCain has bigger things to worry about I suppose.

Because McCain has been in the grid for awhile, he has to work with Democrats. But we’re at war, and you don’t work with your enemies, period. When they want to surrender or turn to your side, then you can work with them, but not until. The Democrats are not a Loyal Opposition, but McCain, like Bush, doesn’t seem to believe that.

Such beliefs as mine are incompatible with politics, especially Senatorial politics. They have to work with people like Kennedy, regardless of how loathsome or traitorous they are.

Bush got into this much trouble because he kept listening to the wrong people. McCain shows the same tendencies.

Then once in office all the -gates started.

After the 2nd term election i had grown accustomed to him and did notice that the country didn’t fall apart, so I was beginning to not be so against him but then Matt Drudge posted his story and the allegations of fundraising violations started to pop up..

These peopel need to be kept from office forever they are corrupt criminals to the core.

That is not hatred.. That is emotion-less fact.