That 83% ACU rating is from his first years in the senate. It is now in the low 60's and will only get lower if McCain is elected.

Here are the numbers as analyzed by an anti-McCain conservative:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/01/mccains_acu_ratings.html

2006 -- 65

2005 -- 80

2004 -- 72

2003 -- 80

2002 -- 72

2001 -- 68

2000 -- 81

1999 -- 77

1998 -- 68

1997 -- 80

1996 -- 95

1995 -- 91

1994 -- 96

1993 -- 83

1992 -- 85

1991 -- 86

1990 -- 87

They're up and down.

Hillary has an ACU of 9, while Obama has an ACU of 8.

I don't think these numbers explain what is going on.

The pure and simple truth about elections is all candidates are professional politicians. Such people run in a very small community where everyone knows their name. They pander to the electorate every 2, 4 or 6 years to keep them from having to get real jobs.

Meanwhile, the electorate does not have the financial resources to raise candidates who truly want to put this country back on the course of American Exceptionalism.

Eric, you raise an interesting question. I am very conflicted about this as I am sure many others are. First, the republican crossover voting in Texas is no more scandalous than the democrats and independents who started McCain on his way.

Second, we know from what we have been able to observe that no candidate not obsessed with desire to be POTUS stands a chance. Thompson's campaign demonstrated that the media would not accept less and they are a powerful screen of information to the public.

Is the negative stance of conservatives who don't believe McCain is true to our most fundamental founding principles any different than those who stood by Huckabee because of his religion?

I have long wondered, with some amazement, why minorities blindly support democrats while that party does not really represent their interests. It is my sincere hope that a rift in that party would cause many voters to examine this issue and result in a significant shift in voting patterns. A shared ticket would probably negate this potential effect.

> First, the republican crossover voting in > Texas is no more scandalous than the > democrats and independents who started > McCain on his way.

Really? How so?

Bob, I have much agreement, but what we conservatives say are foundational principles is more variable than we pretend. A few years ago property rights were at the forefront because of Kelo. McCain's solidity on that issue now counts for nothing, I guess.

I dislike the gamesmanship aspect of politics but understand that it's part of the process. I would not cross over as a Republican into a Democrat primary as it seems to me "not the straight bat." Even if I were to register as an independent to send a message to Republicans (which is exactly what I think minorities should do to Democrats), I would hesitate before voting in the Democrat primary.

The conventional wisdom is that it extends the infighting and works to Republican advantage. I see the point, but I find such manipulations too clever by half, and believe they backfire as often as they succeed.

Well, Jonathan, you tell me why its different.

McCain is fine on some issues but Freedom of Speech is not one of them.

I'm with you, Bob, in finding no scandal in crossover voting, even "organized" at the radio talk show level. People have a right to vote for whomever they wish, and such games are not only an indelible part of the system, but as there is no way to winnow crossover from conversion, they are also integral.

The larger issues of whether the McCain Derangement Syndrome runs as deep as BDS, whether it leads to Obamaphobia, and all the rest: No. The dislike of Obama is, as far as I can tell, solely resentment of the worship he gets in the MSM for trashing America and Republicans.

The anti-McCain sentiment will fade as libertarian and social conservative R's realize there's a lot more to like about him than there is to dislike. Economic and defense R's are already on board, for the most part, so especially to the extent that the categories overlap he's got a lot to stand on for Republicans.

Clearly, barring major scandal or health issues, the 2008 election will be about attracting the uninterested voter. It is for that reason that many Republicans worry about an Obama nomination, but I think enough people are turned off by his empty-suit rhetoric and pandering that it's a wash.

Seriously, I'd like to know what it is that makes the red-meaters so willing to overlook Travelgate, Whitewater, FBI filegate, Pardongate, Chinese money, Peter Paul, terrorist pardons, Norman Hsu, and more, more, more?

Keating 5, Gang of 14, McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy.

The Maverick is not our buddy. He just happens to share a lot of the same enemies we do.

Note that Ceaser's last words weren't, "you bastards", it was "Et tu, Brute?"

There is no such thing as MDS. There is McCain's record and the RINO agenda. One sees McCain's record and asks can this man be trusted to continue the war? Yes. Can he be trusted on other conservative issues? No. Would the RINO side of our party take our giving in as weakness? Yes. Would our cooperation portend the RINO side offering more conservative input in the future? No. If your only message is: "You are stubborn children, you must say uncle immediately"; you know where you can go, don't you?

" lot of conservatives prefer sleeping with the rattlesnake to voting for McCain. I am not at all sure this is driven by politics, or positions on issues."

McCain is just as much a rattlesnake as Obama or Hillary. The problem is that (despite years of evidence to the contrary), you are hoping that the 'maverick' aisle crosser will have a miracle change of heart & philosophy on the way to the general election and start biting the democrats instead of members of what is supposedly his party.

McCain has bit at me too many times in the past few years for me to believe that any "road to the White House conversion" is anything more than a political insider's lies.

What you so cutely called "McCain Derangement Syndrome" is more accurately described as "fool me once, shame on your; fool me for the hundreth time, shame on me."

If McCain tomorrow submitted a bill to immediately cancel McCain - Finegold; went to the border & built a section of the wall with his own money; and repudiated his leadership of the Gang of 14 and publicly and personally appologize to each of the judge nominees that he screwed over THEN I might be able to see my way to voting for him rather than writing in "other" come November.

The only good thing that can be said for the 3 remaining nominees is that at least one of those three liberals will be out of the senate.

I think winning the war is a very good idea.

Who ever votes for McCain will have his ear if not his agreement. Would we even get an ear under a D?

If Real Conservatives™ desert him and he still wins they will have no place at the table. Independents and RINOs will be in control. There will be Joe Lieberman lessons for both parties. Great!

If Harriet Miers had been a Dem appointee would the noise by Rs have been heard?

Think of McCain as a delaying tactic while we seek to educate Americans about the Constitution, economics, and geopolitics.