Why did McCain vote yes on the bailout?

[allvol123]

Am I the only that sees him voting no on this thing as a way to separate himself from Obama, to make a clear and loud statement.

 

[TacomaJPP]

McCain is a liberal in conservative's clothes.

Checkout who funds both of their campaigns:

Barack Obama:
Barack Obama: Campaign Finance/Money - Top Donors - Senator 2008 | OpenSecrets

John McCain:
John McCain: Campaign Finance/Money - Top Donors - Senator 2008 | OpenSecrets

They are both owned by big banking corporations. Remember, follow the money. All politicians are owned, PERIOD. A big corporation pays to get a politician in office so that politician can turn around and help push legislation to benefit the corporation that got them in there in the first place.

All politicians suck....

 

[allvol123]

I am just speaking in regards to political posturing. Seems to me a vote no is a win for him. If it passes, no one will know whether it works in the next 30 days or not. The consensus is most people are against it, voting no would have gotten him some votes.

 

[TacomaJPP]

I am just speaking in regards to political posturing. Seems to me a vote no is a win for him. If it passes, no one will know whether it works in the next 30 days or not. The consensus is most people are against it, voting no would have gotten him some votes.

I think even though over 80% of Americans are against the bailout, through debates etc., the democrats would use a "no" vote in to scaring voters that the economy would fail and then there McCain would be looking like the guy who is trying to kill the American economy. It's all about the scare tactics.

 

[allvol123]

I think even though over 80% of Americans are against the bailout, through debates etc., the democrats would use a "no" vote in to scaring voters that the economy would fail and then there McCain would be looking like the guy who is trying to kill the American economy. It's all about the scare tactics.

The bill was going to pass anyway, regardless of his vote. His vote was irrelevant in the passage of the bill.

 

[joevol320]

why did the stock market go down even more when the senate passed the bill last night? this bill isn't going to fix the problem, is freddie and fannie going to continue to give out risky loans.

 

[jcwvolfan]

McCain is a liberal in conservative's clothes.

Checkout who funds both of their campaigns:

Barack Obama:
Barack Obama: Campaign Finance/Money - Top Donors - Senator 2008 | OpenSecrets

John McCain:
John McCain: Campaign Finance/Money - Top Donors - Senator 2008 | OpenSecrets

They are both owned by big banking corporations. Remember, follow the money. All politicians are owned, PERIOD. A big corporation pays to get a politician in office so that politician can turn around and help push legislation to benefit the corporation that got them in there in the first place.

All politicians suck....

The best idea I have heard to combat this is to make all political donations anonymous. That way no one would be beholden to a contributor. I can’t remember who I heard bring this up but I remember it was someone I usually don’t agree with.

 

[KingNick865]

I think even though over 80% of Americans are against the bailout, through debates etc., the democrats would use a "no" vote in to scaring voters that the economy would fail and then there McCain would be looking like the guy who is trying to kill the American economy. It's all about the scare tactics.

Sort of like Bush did in 2004 to the American public.

 

[BigPapaVol]

The best idea I have heard to combat this is to make all political donations anonymous. That way no one would be beholden to a contributor. I can’t remember who I heard bring this up but I remember it was someone I usually don’t agree with.

contributions would drop like a stone, which is probably a good thing.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[TacomaJPP]

Sort of like Bush did in 2004 to the American public.

What are you referring to?

 

[TacomaJPP]

The best idea I have heard to combat this is to make all political donations anonymous. That way no one would be beholden to a contributor. I can’t remember who I heard bring this up but I remember it was someone I usually don’t agree with.

Wow. Good thought. Here are my three biggest things that are stopping real progress in D.C.

1) Lobbyists - shoot them all

2) Campaign contributions

3) Lack of term limits on reps and congressmen which equates to career politicians.

 

[KingNick865]

What are you referring to?

The "terrorists are gonna get you" campaign that Bush ran in 2004

Wow. Good thought. Here are my three biggest things that are stopping real progress in D.C.

1) Lobbyists - shoot them all
Agreed
2) Campaign contributions
Agreed
3) Lack of term limits on reps and congressmen which equates to career politicians.
Agreed

 

[T-TownVol]

The bill was going to pass anyway, regardless of his vote. His vote was irrelevant in the passage of the bill.

Correct, and if he would have voted no, BHO would have crucified him with it and insured the Messiah of the White House.

 

[allvol123]

Correct, and if he would have voted no, BHO would have crucified him with it and insured the Messiah of the White House.

That makes it all the better. But I think him voting no on this would have been a majot boost. A 450 page spending bill, this flies right in the face of his nonsense about straightening out DC. I really believe he missed an opportunity here.

 

[T-TownVol]

Trust me, I wish he would have voted no also, but it would have been political game over.

 

[allvol123]

Trust me, I wish he would have voted no also, but it would have been political game over.

I completely disagree. Wrong or not, the masses were against this thing. He votes no and Biden and Obama vote yes, clear line in the sand. This thing was framed as the Wall Street bailout, he looks like he is standing up for the little guy if he votes no, against government spending. Whether this bill works or not, it will not be known in the next 30 days.

 

[WA_Vol]

The govt is most likely going to make money on these assets, and if they don't vote yes, the U.S. economy was going to tank IMO.

 

[WA_Vol]

Am I the only that sees him voting no on this thing as a way to separate himself from Obama, to make a clear and loud statement.

Yes

 

[allvol123]

The govt is most likely going to make money on these assets, and if they don't vote yes, the U.S. economy was going to tank IMO.

I won't dispute either of those points. My argument for him voting no was not arguing whether yes or no was the correct vote. It was about the way a no vote would have been received by undecided voters. I've heard for two weeks how congressional members were getting calls into their offices going 9 to 1, 4 to 1, etc. against the bill.

 

[OWB]

...

 

[hohenfelsvol]

...