A committed Democrat and a fanatical Republican mean different things to different people. The hardcore, racist, radical, subversive, anti-American, socialist, uber liberal Democrat and the socially moderate/economically liberal, patriotic Democrat are equally committed, but worlds apart on their beliefs. The same is true of a hardcore, racist, radical, white supremacist, militant Republican and the socially and economically conservative, moralist, tax paying, hard working, married with children, patriotic, often serving or have served in the military, conservative Republican. The former represent the lunatic fringe while the latter represent the base of the respective parties. Being a fanatical Republican does not mean that a person is less intelligent.

I agree with you that he is a rational, experienced, and patriotic centrist who has America’s best interests at heart. However I do not agree that he is too old. He’s around the same age Reagan was when he inaugurated for his first term. Reagan was 70 and McCain is 71. He may not have the oratory ability or razzle-dazzle of Obama, but then he never did. Making pretty (but empty) speeches has never been his forte. Obama is much better at lying to you while smiling.

If you combined what you consider to be the more enlightened social policies of the liberal Democrats with a toned down (weaker) version of conservative Republican foreign policy would you have a government that allowed any and every behavior just as long as nobody talked about what you were doing with a weak military, board patrol, and half assed responses to threats from the outside. You would have the Carter Administration, which was the worst 4 years of the past 50. This is exactly what Obama wants to do. Do we really want another Jimmy Carter?

Huckabee, Thompson, and Brownback are not lowbrow, but rather they are of average to above average intelligence. You may not agree with their positions, but this does not mean that they’re stupid. The more socially conservative Republicans are bothered by McCain’s somewhat moderate or even liberal positions on social issues, but in comparison to the uber liberal Obama it’s an easy choice. The more socially liberal Democrats are bothered for the same reason, but from the opposite side of the aisle. The key for him to win is to reveal that his core values are compatible enough with both sides to win. He must show the conservatives and Republicans that he has moral values and will uphold those values and he must show the liberals and Democrats that he is open to change when necessary. I believe that he has shown that ability for many years.

In case you’ve forgotten, it was liberal Democrats established the Confederacy. Those who still hold on to the idea of the Confederacy are members of the lunatic fringe and they wouldn’t vote for Obama anyway. As a moderate McCain has a much better chance of winning by sticking to his guns.

Reagan won for many reasons. He won in 1980 because of the disastrous Carter administration. Carter is a weak kneed and spineless pacifist who showed that he lacked the balls to stand up for the country when she needed him most. The Democratic Party was a shambles and the Republicans were able to come in and easily crush them. The moderates and many socially liberal, but economically conservative Democrats shifted to the right. In 1984 the Democratic Party was still a mess and they weakly offered up the uber liberal Walter Mondale and the uber liberal man-hating lesbian in Geraldine Ferraro. Such a weak ticket was destined to fail.

Bush II won for very different reasons. In 2000 we knew that he was a lame duck, but the Democrats offered up Al Gore. Gore is a new world order activist with absolutely no loyalty to the United States. Based on what he said he wanted to do in his speeches and his books he would have destroyed much of what makes this country great. As lame as Bush was, he was easily better than Gore. In 2004 we had the still lame Bush verses the treasonous John Kerry who met with the enemy in Paris without government sanction, not to mention all his other activities after his discharge from the military. Again, it was an easy choice to make. We didn’t vote for Bush, but rather against his weaker challengers.

Clinton was moderate enough to get elected and he won because he was able to do what Gore and Kerry could not, which is to connect with the moderates. What Obama says in his pretty speeches is the model for Democratic ideal, but under the smile, charm, and charisma is something very different that he and his staff go to great lengths to hide. We’ve become so sensitive to political correctness that it’s considered out of line to point out evil if it’s related to religion. If you do speak out then ignorant and naïve fools start throwing out the bigot label without any clear understanding of what the word actually means. If they do read or hear about his secrets then they either disbelieve them or they don’t consider them all that important.

I’m hoping that enough conservatives and Republicans, who traditionally are too busy working, paying taxes, getting married, having kids, and contributing to society to bother with surveys and polls, will come forward and quietly vote like they do every election. I’m hoping that enough Hillary supporters are put off by Obama’s complete lack of experience, understanding, comprehension, and long laundry list of friends do what many former Carter voters did in the 1980 election by voting against the tax and spend Mondale. I’m hoping that enough people see that Obama’s economic plan was taken right out of the Carter playbook and they either remember or talk to people who do about how bad it was. I’m hoping the people vote for the best candidate available, which is easily McCain.