McCain is just not the man he was in 2000

[rogerashton]

Which of us is? But in the leadup to 2000, McCain was a very shrewd and able POLITICIAN.

He overcame the Keating 5 challenge by becoming an activist for campaign finance reform. Very smart.

Being Goldwater's successor in the Senate from Arizona, he adopted Goldwater's free-market economic position, and inherited Goldwater's reputation as a maverick. As the Repub party moved away from free-market ideas toward theocracy, the Goldwater/McCain free-market position seemed all the more unorthodox -- and kept McCain in touch with a national following within and outside he party. At the same time he never pushed it as far as Ron Paul. He knew when to trim his sails.

All the same, he lost in 2000 -- so now, all that is gone.

The McCain of 2008 is a puppet of the Bush-Cheyney political machine -- not the McCain of 2000 at all.

[H2O Man]

1. True.

These changes remind me of what a number of republicans have said in recent years about Dick Cheney: they no longer recognize him.

[DainBramaged]

2. Nor is he the man he was in 436 AD

[GoesTo11]

3. Eight years ago McCain wasn't the man he was in 2000

It was a fabrication then.

[WinkyDink]

4. Frankly, I reject ANY praise of McCain, erstwhile or current.

[rogerashton]

5. praise?

I don't think I praised him. But what the hell.

I do think it's a good talking point, though. After all, not everybody is in step with DU -- and it would be a good idea to persuade everybody we can, win big.