McCain and the One Term Hoopla

I was talking to my husband this morning about all these calls for McCain to run only "one term". After all according to most recent polls his age is of concern to many voters. So I was thinking, if McCain made the one term promise for sure he would win the election. Of course, I had not had my morning coffee before I stated such a statement.

My husband, full of reason with or without coffee, just retorted "No, if he did that then they'll slam him saying what can he possibly do in four years?".

And he was right. Age or no age, McCain cannot promise a one term deal and he isn't.

Election 2008

Well the Democratic primaries are finally over; sadly the party didn't implode. However, I do celebrate the first Black candidate - whether you like or hate the guy he has accomplished history. Hooray for us; it remains to be seen if the US is ready to elect a Black president.

Pundits have been abuzz everywhere with VP talks on both sides. They've shown us the lists, and the pros and cons of each. We anxiously await these announcements to see if our candidates benefit or not.

A major issue still is Hill - what will she do? Will she be the VP? Will Obama ask her? My dem friends actually believe it would be counter productive for Obama to select her for the VP. Why? They believe Obama would lose the independents and "republicans" he has attracted as Hill's presence would undermine his "change" paradigm. She's not new; she's politically mature; she's part of the Clintons therefore there is no change.

There is some truth to that. However, after last night's speech in which she did not concede, people are wondering what her next steps are. I found the following comment intriguing:

Senator Clinton: Please tell us that you are not considering an independent candidacy during the general election. This would be a loser for the Democratic party. The party is poised to win super majority in both houses of Congress. You can help insure this or destroy it. Most importantly your independent candidacy would insure victory for John McCain; a loss for America

Robert Moleski (Sent Wednesday, June 04, 2008 9:39 AM)

Isn't that interesting? Let me be clear, I do not put this past her; but I don't think the party will allow this and if she even thinks about it she would be under great pressure to not do this. Wouldn't that be fun though? A four candidate ballot?

My own conspiracy theory on this goes a bit too far. Humor me. There is been some talk that McCain should promise to only run for one term. There has also been some talk that he should reach across party lines for a VP to garner some more votes (if Obama truly stood for change, he should be the one reaching across party lines for a VP). If to that you add the praises Hill has been singing to McCain and vice versa - would it be too farfetched to think of a McCain-Clinton ticket? What would that do to the electorate, the Democrats and Republicans?

If you have an overactive imagination like me, these elections stand to be a lot of fun as long as no formal decisions are made. Speculating can lead you to quite the history making tickets and ballots.

Republicans 1, Democrats 0

This elections are hard for me since no one candidate really excites me. Therefore, it is now where I start to watch them closely in order to help me decided which way I vote. Some of you might freak when you read this, but although my values lie with the Republicans their candidates don't always appeal to me. That being said....

McCain has just scored his first check mark in my pros column.

“it is not the duty of government to bail out and reward those who act irresponsibly, whether they are big banks or small borrowers.”

I couldn't agree more.

“Capital markets work best when there is both accountability and transparency,” he said. “In the case of our current crisis, both were lacking.”

Was McCain the subject of an alien abduction? It is refreshing to see someone rational on this issue.

“We must have greater transparency in the lending process so that every borrower knows exactly what he is agreeing to and where every lender is required to meet the highest standards of ethical behavior,”

In other words, let's push for more responsible lending in the future. I agree; many people fall prey of unethical lending practices and it is an industry that should be regulated so customers are not taken advantage of. However, this does not mean customers can borrow irresponsibly hoping the government will bail them out.

“Any assistance for borrowers should be focused solely on homeowners, not people who bought houses for speculative purposes, to rent or as second homes,” he said.

Touche (sorry don't know how to do the accents on the Mac). It goes without saying that I do not agree with the Democratic position on this issue.