Kyle and her husband moved to Brookfield in 1986. She became active in local politics and started blogging in 2004. Her focus is primarily on local issues but often includes state and national topics, too. Kyle looks at things from the taxpayers' perspective in a creative, yet down to earth way, addressing them from a practical point of view.
Like many of you, I listened to the Super Tuesday coverage for most of Super Tuesday night. I also had my computer on and clicked on the US map watching the vote totals/percentages as they came in state by state. Of course I was most interested in what would happen on the Republican side in California. Finally, I gave up when they called it for McCain.
There's been much speculation about how conservatives (like me) will vote in November or if we will vote at all. First of all, this is not over...yet. Wisconsin and the other states holding primaries in February just became more important--that is the good news. The bad news is now we must listen to all those campaign ads!
I admit though, to vote or not to vote, is a tough question. I have voted in every primary, election and referendum since I was eligible to vote, and I will vote in November--just not sure for who. For some, however, much will depend on what happens at the Republican convention: who's the nominee, who's the running mate, and who is their opponent. I think it is far too early for people to state emphatically what they will do or not do in November.
One reason that keeps me from throwing my hands up into the air and saying, I quit, is the judicial nomination process for the Federal and Supreme Courts. This, in my opinion, is one of the most important functions of a president.
Five of our Supreme Court judges, I think, are over age 70. (Age range 71-88?) It has been mentioned that the potential for the next president to choose their replacements is very high.
The irony is that there is not much talk about 71 year old McCain's own personal potential for replacement during his next 4 years. (I wish him no ill will.) Instead, we are told we must vote for the oldest ever presidential nominee so we can ensure more conservative* judicial nominations for those 5 potential vacancies on the bench. (*More conservative than a Democrat President, that is.)
Another problem I have with the prospect of a McCain nomination is that he very seldom gets the majority of votes in the states he wins. Certainly Mike Huckabee's strong showing in the south was a surprise too. McCain did not even receive over 50% of the votes in his own state of Arizona.
Now many people think Huckabee is the spoiler for Romney, and I am inclined to agree. But if you look at the vote totals (click on any state and the percentages come up) in most cases, if you add Romney and Huckabee's totals-- representing the conservatives--they receive the majority of support.
Early on, there was some speculation if conservatives would go with a 3rd party candidate rather than vote for Romney. That seems to have subsided since groups like Focus on the Family and Bob Jones III of Bob Jones University (a very conservative Baptist college) are speaking favorably about Mitt Romney.
But the vote totals show that conservatives in the Republican party are not for McCain. He has not emerged as a real front runner in the sense of consistently gaining over 50% of the vote. It is almost as if he is the third party candidate within the party!
I really hate the idea of a third party. Ross Perot is the reason we got Bill Clinton. But with so many voters not standing with McCain, I just don't know.
Today GOPUSA Eagle email sent this out:
The Strange GOP Nominating Victory
Assuming John McCain gets the GOP nomination, it will show how whimsical history can be. It would be the first time in living memory that a Republican presidential nomination went to a candidate who was not merely opposed by a majority of the party but was actively despised by about half its rank-and-file voters across the country--and by many, if not most, of its congressional officeholders.
Slit a Vein or Vote for McCain?
by Chuck Muth
While the conservative knock against Mitt Romney is that he started out as a moderate and has since moved to the right, John McCain started out on the right but has since moved to the left. Which is worse?
I might add that Reagan started on the left and moved right. I always believed that how you end the race is much more important than how you start it.
Here are a few other Super Tuesday remarks that caught my attention:
From Hillary, "I see an America where prosperity is shared." (In the redistribution of wealth sense, not the American dream.) She then went on to list many other things she would take care of. I wondered, why work at all? She also thanked her mother. I truly can appreciate how special Hillary's campaign would be for her mom. She mentioned her mother was born before women had the right to vote and now her mother was watching her run for president.
From Obama, I noted that when he mentioned increasing alternative energy sources like solar, wind, and bio-diesel, I don't think he included ethanol.
Romney: I thought he gave a great speech and I liked his list of things we asked Washington to fix.
"You see... at a time like this...we recognize just how broken Washington is. We've looked to them to solve our problems, and they haven't.
"We asked them to solve Social Security. They haven't done that. We asked them to balance the budget. They haven't.
"We asked them as well to rein in excessive pork barrel spending. They haven't.
"We asked them to end illegal immigration. And they haven't...
Time will tell what happens in November. I did smile today when I heard Congressman Paul Ryan's name suggested as a possible running mate for McCain. Granted, Paul is a long, long shot, but he would be someone who would make this conservative a little more at ease come election day.