• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

How Close Are Mr McCain's Policies to Mr Bush's?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

RightIsWrong

Diamond Member
Apr 29, 2005
5,649
0
0
Originally posted by: ProfJohn

He is also a deficit hawk and would do a FAR better job than Obama at controlling spending.
How many of Bush's eight budget proposals did McCain vote against?
 

MikeyLSU

Platinum Member
Dec 21, 2005
2,747
0
71
Originally posted by: Xavier434
Originally posted by: MikeyLSU
Originally posted by: Siddhartha
Originally posted by: Druidx
Originally posted by: jpeyton
You mean John McBush? Almost identical. He voted with Bush 95% of the time last year in the Senate.
I didn't realize Bush voted in the senate.

Strange how this is brought up but failed to mention Obama voted in line with fellow Senate Democrats 97 percent of the time in 2007 and 96 percent of the time in 2006.
What's important here is Obama is the one claiming to be a maverick and running on the platform of "Change"
Where's the big change?
Is he going to increase 3% so he will be 100% mindless party line supporter?

Also worth mentioning the fact, how many Democrats got elected to congress on the platform they would stand up to Bush, then failed to do exactly that when it wasn't politically expedite?
The reason I asked the question is because the Democrats have connected Mr McCain to Mr Bush at every opportunity they can get.

That is because they have nothing else to say. The same far right people that call Obama muslim, are the same as the far left that call McCain a Bush clone.
McCain is not a clone. He is not Bush, but he is close enough to the point where I doubt that the majority of Americans will see and feel much of a difference in their lives if he is elected which is exactly why a lot of people do not want him to be Pres. They don't care if he is exactly like Bush or not. The people just want their lives to feel different. They want them to feel better. At the very least, they want them to feel like they used to feel before Bush. Many of these Americans are not quite certain if Obama can deliver on that, but most do believe that he has a much better shot of giving them something closer to what they want (not exactly what they want). I know I feel that way and I agree with a great many of his view points even though I do not agree with all of them.
if you agree with Obama then there would be no point in saying McCain is just like Bush, makes much more sense to actually point out what you don't like about the guy.

Me, I disagree with about 99% of what Obama says. Unfortunatly, i don't agree with McCain too much either, but I do a bunch more than Obama. Both want way too much spending, but McCain wants a little less. And some of the biggest things are the windfall oil tax and universal healthcare by Obama that I disagree with.
 

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
11,905
1,244
126
It's really hard to determine what McCain's positions are because they change from day to day. Or, more likely, they change depending on which lobbyist "adviser" has his ear that day. For example, look at his position on Bush's tax cuts for the rich-he once adamently opposed them, now he wants to extend this proven loser of an idea. Or look at his rejection then embrace of religious extremist political operatives (ie, televangelists), his flip flops on cleaning up campaign financing, etc.

One thing is for certain-it is fraudulent for him to claim to be a maverick anymore.
 

Xavier434

Lifer
Oct 14, 2002
10,377
1
0
Originally posted by: MikeyLSU
if you agree with Obama then there would be no point in saying McCain is just like Bush, makes much more sense to actually point out what you don't like about the guy.

Me, I disagree with about 99% of what Obama says. Unfortunatly, i don't agree with McCain too much either, but I do a bunch more than Obama. Both want way too much spending, but McCain wants a little less. And some of the biggest things are the windfall oil tax and universal healthcare by Obama that I disagree with.
I agree which is why I don't lean on the whole McCain = Bush crutch like a lot of people do. That doesn't mean that the reasons why I do not like McCain are not similar to the reasons why I do not like Bush though.

Without going into specific details because that would take forever to justify them all here, I will just say that what Obama wishes to spend most of the money on is much more in line with how I believe it should be spent based on my own set of priorities and values regarding what I believe is best for this country rather than what is best for myself. In addition, Obama has shown many signs that he tends to think and problem solve more like me and I like that.

I am not a reinvent the wheel kind of guy. I don't want to wipe the floor clean in Washington and reduce spending by leaps and bounds just for the sake of reducing spending with some kind of hope that the result will be less taxes. I just want to increase efficiency using what we have in place and gradually changing things as we go with exception of a select number of services and policies.
 

Deeko

Lifer
Jun 16, 2000
30,215
11
81
Originally posted by: Druidx
Originally posted by: Deeko
It's always hilarious when people bring this up. Obama is running on a platform of change from the current administration. Use some common sense there sport.
Oh Please, Obama biggest bogus claim to fame is that he's supposedly not the typical politician. Yet, he votes more party line than anyone.
So you're going to claim his big platform of "Change" is the fact he's Dem not a Pub.
Is that suppose to be news to anyone?
By your rational sport, every single Dem presidential candidate should/could have ran on the platform of "Change"
I'm just pointing out the obvious.
A Pub is most likely going to vote like a Pub
Just the same as a Dem is going to vote like a Dem.
The only real difference is I see the Dems trying to turn that fact into some kind of
litmus test.
Talk about political hawks.
Most people learned in 1st grade that sentences flow together in a paragraph. Anyway, are you blind? Seeing as about 435% of the country hates George Bush, wouldn't you think that when you've got one candidate with very similar views to said Bush, that it might be a good idea for his opponent to tout the fact that he's different? That he's a "change" from the president everyone hates?

You'll get it some day, I have faith.
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,251
4
0
Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Originally posted by: ProfJohn

He is also a deficit hawk and would do a FAR better job than Obama at controlling spending.
How many of Bush's eight budget proposals did McCain vote against?
Ummmm you might want to rethink that line of thinking.
2006 budget votes
10 votes
Obama voted Yea on EVERYONE of them (of the ones that had a roll call vote)
McCain actually voted no on one of them.
2007 budget votes
Only 3 votes that counted, Obama and McCain both voted Yea on each of them.

Those are actually the only two years Obama has been able to vote on budgets and his votes were essentially the same as McCain.
 

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
141
116
Originally posted by: Druidx
I didn't realize Bush voted in the senate.
It was a publicized study; I even created a thread about it when it was released. ANY time the White House had a stance on a Senate bill vote and McCain voted on that bill, they were in agreement 95% of the time in 2007, 100% of the time in 2008, and averaged 90% of the time over the last 7 years.

Strange how this is brought up but failed to mention Obama voted in line with fellow Senate Democrats 97 percent of the time in 2007 and 96 percent of the time in 2006.
What's important here is Obama is the one claiming to be a maverick and running on the platform of "Change"
Where's the big change?
Is he going to increase 3% so he will be 100% mindless party line supporter?
The Democrats didn't dig us into the hole we're in over the last 7 years, so this is a non-issue.

Also worth mentioning the fact, how many Democrats got elected to congress on the platform they would stand up to Bush, then failed to do exactly that when it wasn't politically expediate?
How exactly didn't they stand up to Bush? Were you cheering for an impeachment or something? They didn't have the filibuster/veto-proof majority they needed; they will have it after this November.
 

RightIsWrong

Diamond Member
Apr 29, 2005
5,649
0
0
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Originally posted by: ProfJohn

He is also a deficit hawk and would do a FAR better job than Obama at controlling spending.
How many of Bush's eight budget proposals did McCain vote against?
Ummmm you might want to rethink that line of thinking.
2006 budget votes
10 votes
Obama voted Yea on EVERYONE of them (of the ones that had a roll call vote)
McCain actually voted no on one of them.
2007 budget votes
Only 3 votes that counted, Obama and McCain both voted Yea on each of them.

Those are actually the only two years Obama has been able to vote on budgets and his votes were essentially the same as McCain.
What about the other six of McCain's opportunities to prove that he is the social and ideological maverick?

I never made the claim that Barack doesn't like to spend money. You however, made the inaccurate claim that McCain does not and just proved that he does.
 

Druidx

Platinum Member
Jul 16, 2002
2,971
0
76
Originally posted by: jpeyton
How exactly didn't they stand up to Bush? Were you cheering for an impeachment or something? They didn't have the filibuster/veto-proof majority they needed; they will have it after this November.
I wish the congress would have had the balls to make a stand over wiretapping.
The Dems failed on that point except for their convenient 5 second sound bites.
Talked big then failed to do anything.
 

Druidx

Platinum Member
Jul 16, 2002
2,971
0
76
Originally posted by: Deeko
Originally posted by: Druidx
Originally posted by: Deeko
It's always hilarious when people bring this up. Obama is running on a platform of change from the current administration. Use some common sense there sport.
Oh Please, Obama biggest bogus claim to fame is that he's supposedly not the typical politician. Yet, he votes more party line than anyone.
So you're going to claim his big platform of "Change" is the fact he's Dem not a Pub.
Is that suppose to be news to anyone?
By your rational sport, every single Dem presidential candidate should/could have ran on the platform of "Change"
I'm just pointing out the obvious.
A Pub is most likely going to vote like a Pub
Just the same as a Dem is going to vote like a Dem.
The only real difference is I see the Dems trying to turn that fact into some kind of
litmus test.
Talk about political hawks.
Most people learned in 1st grade that sentences flow together in a paragraph. Anyway, are you blind? Seeing as about 435% of the country hates George Bush, wouldn't you think that when you've got one candidate with very similar views to said Bush, that it might be a good idea for his opponent to tout the fact that he's different? That he's a "change" from the president everyone hates?
So does that mean you agree with my earlier summary that Obama's platform of "change"
amounts to little more than "I'm not Bush". Someone who by the way isn't running this year. BTW, that whole "I'm not bush" message didn't work very well for them last time.
So again, if that's what Obama's "Change" is in reference to.
Doesn't that mean all the Dem presidential candidates should/could have ran on the same vote for me because I'm for "Change" platform?
I guess that whole "Change you can believe in" is just Obama's way of letting everyone know he's not a Republician.

Thanks for clearing that up for me.
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,979
0
0
Originally posted by: Druidx
Originally posted by: jpeyton
How exactly didn't they stand up to Bush? Were you cheering for an impeachment or something? They didn't have the filibuster/veto-proof majority they needed; they will have it after this November.
I wish the congress would have had the balls to make a stand over wiretapping.
The Dems failed on that point except for their convenient 5 second sound bites.
Talked big then failed to do anything.
I feel the same way but after all that's happened they probably figured it would end with another executive privilege charade.
 

winnar111

Banned
Mar 10, 2008
2,847
0
0
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: winnar111
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: Siddhartha
So the fact that Mr McCain has voted with Mr Bush 90 to 95% of the time is a fiction made up by the "far left"?
IMO the bigger deal is the 180 McCain has done on many of his previous stances in order to fall in line with the party.
Kind of like Obama, FISA, and gun control, eh?
IMO he did the right thing regarding the FISA deal. Why should the government get a pass and the telcos not?

No candidate is going to get elected running on a pro-gun control stance. Guns aren't ever going to go away so it's a non-issue.
So when Obama changes his mind, its a right thing or a non issue, and when McCain does the same thing, its a big deal.

Well, ok.

Besides, the Bush McCain Kennedy immigration policy was a load of horsesh!t. A lot of people think that was the right thing too.
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,251
4
0
Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Originally posted by: ProfJohn

He is also a deficit hawk and would do a FAR better job than Obama at controlling spending.
How many of Bush's eight budget proposals did McCain vote against?
Ummmm you might want to rethink that line of thinking.
2006 budget votes
10 votes
Obama voted Yea on EVERYONE of them (of the ones that had a roll call vote)
McCain actually voted no on one of them.
2007 budget votes
Only 3 votes that counted, Obama and McCain both voted Yea on each of them.

Those are actually the only two years Obama has been able to vote on budgets and his votes were essentially the same as McCain.
What about the other six of McCain's opportunities to prove that he is the social and ideological maverick?

I never made the claim that Barack doesn't like to spend money. You however, made the inaccurate claim that McCain does not and just proved that he does.
The problem is that votes on the final budget are not a good measure of controlling spending. There is a LONG LONG process and by time we get to that final vote they have worked out so many agreements and compromising that nearly everyone votes yes on the final budget.

A better measure would be McCain's opposition to earmarks. Or his opposition to the Bush tax cuts because he thought it would blow a hole in the budget. (yes he changed his mind afterwards, but that is another topic) McCain has a history of being a budget hawk, Obama does not.
 

Deeko

Lifer
Jun 16, 2000
30,215
11
81
Originally posted by: Druidx
Originally posted by: Deeko
Originally posted by: Druidx
Originally posted by: Deeko
It's always hilarious when people bring this up. Obama is running on a platform of change from the current administration. Use some common sense there sport.
Oh Please, Obama biggest bogus claim to fame is that he's supposedly not the typical politician. Yet, he votes more party line than anyone.
So you're going to claim his big platform of "Change" is the fact he's Dem not a Pub.
Is that suppose to be news to anyone?
By your rational sport, every single Dem presidential candidate should/could have ran on the platform of "Change"
I'm just pointing out the obvious.
A Pub is most likely going to vote like a Pub
Just the same as a Dem is going to vote like a Dem.
The only real difference is I see the Dems trying to turn that fact into some kind of
litmus test.
Talk about political hawks.
Most people learned in 1st grade that sentences flow together in a paragraph. Anyway, are you blind? Seeing as about 435% of the country hates George Bush, wouldn't you think that when you've got one candidate with very similar views to said Bush, that it might be a good idea for his opponent to tout the fact that he's different? That he's a "change" from the president everyone hates?
So does that mean you agree with my earlier summary that Obama's platform of "change"
amounts to little more than "I'm not Bush". Someone who by the way isn't running this year. BTW, that whole "I'm not bush" message didn't work very well for them last time.
So again, if that's what Obama's "Change" is in reference to.
Doesn't that mean all the Dem presidential candidates should/could have ran on the same vote for me because I'm for "Change" platform?
I guess that whole "Change you can believe in" is just Obama's way of letting everyone know he's not a Republician.

Thanks for clearing that up for me.
I don't see why that's a problem. Bush's approval rating is record low. There are tons of reports that show McCain is being very similar to Bush (how valid those claims are, I'm not commenting about now). Therefore, a strategy of "you hate bush, he's like bush, I'm not" seems pretty valid.

Also, that strategy didn't work for Kerry because Kerry did a very poor job with his campaign. It wasn't the overall 'bush sucks' idea that failed, it was Kerry's implementation.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
72,654
23,806
136
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Originally posted by: ProfJohn

He is also a deficit hawk and would do a FAR better job than Obama at controlling spending.
How many of Bush's eight budget proposals did McCain vote against?
Ummmm you might want to rethink that line of thinking.
2006 budget votes
10 votes
Obama voted Yea on EVERYONE of them (of the ones that had a roll call vote)
McCain actually voted no on one of them.
2007 budget votes
Only 3 votes that counted, Obama and McCain both voted Yea on each of them.

Those are actually the only two years Obama has been able to vote on budgets and his votes were essentially the same as McCain.
What about the other six of McCain's opportunities to prove that he is the social and ideological maverick?

I never made the claim that Barack doesn't like to spend money. You however, made the inaccurate claim that McCain does not and just proved that he does.
The problem is that votes on the final budget are not a good measure of controlling spending. There is a LONG LONG process and by time we get to that final vote they have worked out so many agreements and compromising that nearly everyone votes yes on the final budget.

A better measure would be McCain's opposition to earmarks. Or his opposition to the Bush tax cuts because he thought it would blow a hole in the budget. (yes he changed his mind afterwards, but that is another topic) McCain has a history of being a budget hawk, Obama does not.
McCain's opposition to earmarks is not a particularly good estimation either. Factcheck.org did an analysis on how much you would save by eliminating them and the savings were extremely small... and that his promise to save all sorts of money that way was a total fantasy. In most cases earmarks are simply directing agencies to spend money they have already been allocated.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
67,360
4,075
126
McCain is a Republican who will try to appeal to his base, a bunch of religious wacko's. One needs no more information than that to vote for Obama, but there mountains of other reasons.
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,979
0
0
Originally posted by: winnar111
Originally posted by: Robor
IMO he did the right thing regarding the FISA deal. Why should the government get a pass and the telcos not?

No candidate is going to get elected running on a pro-gun control stance. Guns aren't ever going to go away so it's a non-issue.
So when Obama changes his mind, its a right thing or a non issue, and when McCain does the same thing, its a big deal.

Well, ok.

Besides, the Bush McCain Kennedy immigration policy was a load of horsesh!t. A lot of people think that was the right thing too.
Why did McCain promise to make this election about issues then immediately go on the offensive with dirty attack ads? Why did McCain suddenly support GWB's tax cuts he so strongly opposed in the past? Why did McCain suddenly garner the support of the 'agents of intolerance' he formerly distanced himself from? Why did McCain support abortion in certain cases and then suddenly oppose it? I could go on and on. McCain was running as a 'maverick' of sorts but this election has stripped him of that title.
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,979
0
0
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
McCain is a Republican who will try to appeal to his base, a bunch of religious wacko's. One needs no more information than that to vote for Obama, but there mountains of other reasons.
Both candidates are going to appeal to their base and stretch if not bend over backwards to attract those in the middle. That's a given. That said, McCain's base is the same that elected the worst administration in modern history and that's all the reason any undecided voter should need.
 

RightIsWrong

Diamond Member
Apr 29, 2005
5,649
0
0
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Originally posted by: ProfJohn

He is also a deficit hawk and would do a FAR better job than Obama at controlling spending.
How many of Bush's eight budget proposals did McCain vote against?
Ummmm you might want to rethink that line of thinking.
2006 budget votes
10 votes
Obama voted Yea on EVERYONE of them (of the ones that had a roll call vote)
McCain actually voted no on one of them.
2007 budget votes
Only 3 votes that counted, Obama and McCain both voted Yea on each of them.

Those are actually the only two years Obama has been able to vote on budgets and his votes were essentially the same as McCain.
What about the other six of McCain's opportunities to prove that he is the social and ideological maverick?

I never made the claim that Barack doesn't like to spend money. You however, made the inaccurate claim that McCain does not and just proved that he does.
The problem is that votes on the final budget are not a good measure of controlling spending. There is a LONG LONG process and by time we get to that final vote they have worked out so many agreements and compromising that nearly everyone votes yes on the final budget.

A better measure would be McCain's opposition to earmarks. Or his opposition to the Bush tax cuts because he thought it would blow a hole in the budget. (yes he changed his mind afterwards, but that is another topic) McCain has a history of being a budget hawk, Obama does not.
Then why are you making the case that Obama would be deficit dove based on votes on the final budgets that you are saying aren't a good indicator of whether or not a person (McCain) would be a deficit hawk?
 

Druidx

Platinum Member
Jul 16, 2002
2,971
0
76
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
McCain is a Republican who will try to appeal to his base, a bunch of religious wacko's. One needs no more information than that to vote for Obama, but there mountains of other reasons.
This election cycle when you mention religious wacko's, I automatically think of Obama and his spiritual guide for over 20 years.

 

ASK THE COMMUNITY