Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

McCain Asks Supporters To Campaign On Blogs 889

Vote McCain in 2000! writes "McCain is not the stranger to technology some think him to be. McCain is now asking supporters to stump for him on blogs. Republican Web 2.0 consultant David All was effluent with praise for this outreach, calling it 'smart' and 'unique.' McCain's blogger outreach section has a handy list of political blogs which might be interested in hearing about McCain, such as the DailyKos, Crooks and Liars, and Think Progress. You can even report your posts to the campaign and 'receive points for your success,' though the page doesn't say what exactly the points are good for." Slashdot is not on their suggested blogs list. Can't imagine why.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

McCain Asks Supporters To Campaign On Blogs

Comments Filter:
  • by elrous0 ( 869638 ) * on Thursday June 12, 2008 @09:38AM (#23762975)
    Back in 2000, I liked and supported John McCain. He was a maverick not afraid to point out the stupidity of cutting taxes while not cutting spending. He was for small government, against nation-building, and pro-human rights. He told the bible-thumping religious right to go fuck themselves and rightly called George W. Bush an incompetent daddy's boy. It infuriated me when Bush and his disgusting cronies destroyed this good man with their scumbag tactics in my own home state (South Carolina).

    I don't know who this "John McCain" is today, but he's definitely not that man I supported in 2000. I never thought I would see a John McCain who backed Bush, supported unprovoked preemptive wars, wanted to cut taxes at a time when the country is $9 *TRILLION* in debt, and sucked up to the religious right. But above all else, I NEVER NEVER NEVER thought I would see a man who was a torture victim and POW stand up and support that very torture by HIS OWN COUNTRY.

    I was obviously naive to believe in him in 2000, to believe he was anything more than just another hyper-ambitious Washington scumbag who would sacrifice anything to win. I won't ever make that mistake again.

    I guess he wants to hear from supporters. But this FORMER supporter wanted to chime in too.

  • googlefight (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 12, 2008 @09:42AM (#23763047)
    He must have recently seen this:
  • by hansamurai ( 907719 ) <> on Thursday June 12, 2008 @09:43AM (#23763057) Homepage Journal
    Hear hear, I don't have a candidate this election, again. It seems to be becoming a trend.
  • by halivar ( 535827 ) <> on Thursday June 12, 2008 @09:55AM (#23763205)
    It depends on how many disaffected Hillary voters still lurk there. DKos has been none too kind to Hillary supporters, and the general tone there towards them is one of incredible condescension at best, and mouth-frothing vitriol at worst. Most Hillary supporters have left the site, but it's worth putting forth a modicum of effort to find them there, nonetheless.

    I think it's a smart move: get moderate Hillary supporters to believe that McCain wants their vote more than Obama does. You saw shades of this in the praise McCain heaped on Hillary in the weeks running up to her exit. It could also be enough to give him the election in November.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 12, 2008 @09:57AM (#23763231)

    I don't know who this "John McCain" is today, but he's definitely not that man I supported in 2000. ... I was obviously naive to believe in him in 2000 ...
    No, you were not naive. The simple explanation is this: the John McCain you knew died when his own party turned on him and sold him out in 2000. This is a man who staked his whole life on the Republican party, and was not willing to even entertain the notion of running as an independent because of that.

    He was betrayed by those he trusted most... and it killed him. What you see now is a shell.

    I'd like to believe that the John McCain of 2000 would have paid attention to a report predicting a terrorist attack on US soil, would have gone right to work upon hearing of the attack on the Towers, would have resolved the war in Afghanistan before starting another, would have set strict limits on the use of Guantanamo Bay, would have cracked down hard on abuses like Abu Ghraib, would not sacrifice the Space Shuttle, Space Station, Hubble, and the unmanned exploration of space, wasting billions of dollars, in order to distract the public from his mistakes, and would not simply have left all the decision making to others. Sadly, the McCain of today is not this man.
  • by |/rad|/oder ( 202635 ) on Thursday June 12, 2008 @10:00AM (#23763289)
    Encouraging people to use a medium doesn't indicate you "get" that medium. You need to immerse yourself in it and really grok it's ins and outs, as well as it's pitfalls and strengths.

    If he really got the web, he'd know better than to turn a bunch of anonymous trolls loose with permission to bandy about his name.

    People who "get" the web understand that communities need to be groomed by moderators.
  • by baldass_newbie ( 136609 ) on Thursday June 12, 2008 @10:01AM (#23763313) Homepage Journal
    Wow, this is EXACTLY what Obama's talking points are.
    How original.
  • ugh, dailykos...... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Shakrai ( 717556 ) * on Thursday June 12, 2008 @10:03AM (#23763341) Journal

    Every single negative stereotype you can think of about Democrats/liberals is exemplified by some of the comments on that site. Pulling out words like "racist" or "homophobe" in the middle of a conversation because someone has a principled disagreement with you. I asked once upon a time why that was any better than Republicans who pull out words like "cut and run" if you disagree with them -- needless to say that didn't win me many friends and I got about 30 replies explaining why it was "different" when Democrats do it as opposed to Republicans.

    I consider myself a staunch Democrat and a liberal/progressive in most areas and that site still seems to extreme even for me. Half of the people that contribute there seem more interested in punishing the Republicans for the last seven years then they do in moving forward. They all seem to be extremely pro-Obama yet none of them pay anymore than lip service to the part of his message about disagreeing without being disagreeable and ending the partisan rancor in Washington.

    I'm particularly concerned with the O'Reillyization of our political discourse. The manufactured anger. The one-sided reporting. Automatically assuming the absolute worst intentions of your opponents instead of assuming that they just have a principled disagreement with you. I flirted with Dailykos for about two weeks before my head started to hurt and I couldn't take it any longer. Ditto for Keith Olbermann. Tried watching him -- eventually came to the conclusion that he is little better than a left-wing version of Bill O'Reilly.

    I would love to see a site where people on the left, right and center could come together to discuss the issues in a calm and principled manner. Hell for that matter, I'd love to see some real journalism that didn't slant to one side or the other. Closest thing I can come up with is the Newshour on PBS.

  • by jbash ( 784046 ) on Thursday June 12, 2008 @10:04AM (#23763345)

    Yet, he wouldnt sign on to legislation limiting interrogation techniques to those found in the Army field manual.
    Limiting the interrogation techniques was McCain's own amendment to the 2006 Defense Authorization Act. It was amendment #1557. It's in the Congressional Record, a transcript of which you can read here: []
  • by Ogive17 ( 691899 ) on Thursday June 12, 2008 @10:06AM (#23763381)
    The 2000 John McCain would not get elected in 2008 if he didn't suck up to as many demographics as possible. Maybe once (if) he gets elected you'll see more of the 2000 McCain.

    I'm not sure about anyone else, but I ignore the rheteric until October, then I look for a summary of each cadidate over the previous 6 months. Obama's campaign is trying to call McCain "Bush Jr." while McCain is trying to label Obama as naive and vague.

    I don't think McCain is Bush Jr. and I don't think Obama is naive (althought I do think he's been pretty vague so far).. that is why I will ignore as much as I can until the final month.. that's when I'll start to pay attention. I'm just glad Billary lost the primary.
  • by Frosty Piss ( 770223 ) on Thursday June 12, 2008 @10:06AM (#23763383)

    The question is, how did this change occur? Did they put something in his tea?
    It is possible that he thinks this is the only way to get elected, and he wants to get elected. The other possibility is that he's eating the crow out of loyalty to his party (he's a military man, he believes in that sort of thing). And yet another possibility is both of these things are true.
  • Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jeiler ( 1106393 ) <> on Thursday June 12, 2008 @10:09AM (#23763423) Journal

    No, I have to admit it was trollish (not flamebait, though--I was actually hoping for a chuckle or two). Heck, I'll gladly accept the karma burn for it.

    The sad and sorry thing is that I am a registered Republican, and I will probably not be voting for McCain, I definitely will not be campaigning for him, and I certainly will not encourage others to support him. Back in 2000 McCain was a person whom I could respect--one who stood up for his principles. Today it looks like those principles have been prostituted on the altar of political expediency and "electability."

  • I think it's a smart move: get moderate Hillary supporters to believe that McCain wants their vote more than Obama does

    This election has come down to race, sex, and oil.

    Obama won the nomination because he won every state that had a large black population, and they overwhelmingly voted for him, and then, he split the white vote with Hillary. So now, McCain is reaching out to those white voters and po'd women that probably won't for Obama.

    The PO'd women is a huge factor. If McCain picked a woman as his VP - say, Kay Hutchinson, then, that would be a smart move on his part, as, every time Obama attacked McCain on his age, it would serve to remind Hillary supporters that if McCain dies, a woman becomes president.

    All McCain has to do now is flip flop a bit on drilling ANWR and off the coasts, and he can attack the Dems on supply. Let Obama defend not drilling for oil, or not supporting coal to liquids, when the price of gasoline hits $5/gal this November, and when diesel hits $6/gal. He'll make the AGW proponents happy, but no one else, and that's not enough to win an election.

    McCain wins easily, carrying 40+ states.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 12, 2008 @10:18AM (#23763567)
    I would never expect a guy his age to come up with something like this. I would expect him to delegate it to someone with an order along the lines of "Hey college guy, get me on the internet!" He doesn't need to know how it is done, just as long as someone on the staff knows.
  • by smilindog2000 ( 907665 ) <> on Thursday June 12, 2008 @10:23AM (#23763651) Homepage
    I've gotta agree on experience, but corruption? Are you referring to the Keating Five [], or something Obama's done? Crony earmarks? Can you name one? Dishonest politicking? Compared to who? Race baiting? I've not heard that one before. I'm going to guess you prefer Fox News to CNN or any less biased network. You may have been slightly brainwashed. BTW, Obama is a Christian, not a Muslim.

    I'm with GP. I've been a big fan of McCain for years, but not so much anymore. First, he'll appoint at least one more highly religious supreme court judge who can't separate their duty from their religion, and Roe v Wade will be overturned. Second, McCain graduated as the 6th worst student in has class at the Naval Academy. Under a Rhode Scholar president, our GDP grew faster than any time since the 60s. Under a C student president, it grew the slowest. Third, while I can forgive the Keating Five blunder, why does he remain so chummy with lobbyists? Sixth, his lack of judgment in supporting attacking Iraq is hard to forgive. Finally, to a certain extent, experience == age. He may have a bit too much experience.

    All that said, he's still a far better option than Bush Jr. I can at least respect McCain. Of the original field, he was my second pick, after Obama, and Hillary was my third. Overall I'm a rare happy political camper.
  • Sounds fishy to me (Score:3, Interesting)

    by hyades1 ( 1149581 ) <> on Thursday June 12, 2008 @10:28AM (#23763727)

    "McCain's blogger outreach section has a handy list of political blogs which might be interested in hearing about McCain, such as the DailyKos, Crooks and Liars, and Think Progress."

    I don't know Think Progress, but DailyKos and Crooks and Liars are prominent left-of-centre blogs. People who post there are probably quite familiar with Mr. McCain already, though that familiarity wouldn't be the kind his campaign might like.

    This sounds to me like it isn't really about campaigning for John McCain, though. It's about setting a bunch of true believers loose to swamp sites that offer opposing viewpoints with trolls. If what I've seen is any indication, these blogs can soon expect to be flooded with posts that feature all caps and lots of pure, unadulterated nonsense.

  • by tjstork ( 137384 ) <todd,bandrowsky&gmail,com> on Thursday June 12, 2008 @10:35AM (#23763831) Homepage Journal
    which makes him one of the most pro-human-rights republicans in the Senate. I wish he was just a bit stronger.

    I think we need to stop defining other parties in terms of our own definitions of what human rights are.

    I mean, what if, instead of arguing over Democratic visions of human rights - redistribution of wealth, freedom of the press, and rights for minorities, and combined that with the Republican view of rights for entreprenuers, rights to keep and bear and arms, dispose of ones land as one sees fit, and so forth?

    It seems to me that if we had a society where some folks could, gasp, put up with a manger and an xmas tree in a public square, and others could gasp, accept gay marriages, then, jeez, we might have a country where people respect each other more. Hell, we might even be all "growed up and stuff".
  • by elrous0 ( 869638 ) * on Thursday June 12, 2008 @10:59AM (#23764165)
    Is that the same Bob Barr who voted for the Patriot Act, voted for the Iraq War, and tried to get Wiccans banned from the Army? Yeah, real defender of freedom there.
  • by diamondmagic ( 877411 ) on Thursday June 12, 2008 @11:05AM (#23764267) Homepage
    The largest headline on the page is Gitmo Bay Detainees Win Round at High Court [].

    You know, I hear Obama has an entire company [] dedicated to him too.
    "Ticker: Obama lead on McCain growing in polls"
    I thought so.
  • Re:Har har (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Ungrounded Lightning ( 62228 ) on Thursday June 12, 2008 @11:07AM (#23764305) Journal
    How'd that whole "owning the Internet" thing work out for Ron Paul?

    Got him a whole BUNCH of campaign money for starters.

    The corporate media had to go to blatantly refusing to mention his existence to make up for that. He got started about four to six months too late to win the nomination on word-of-mouth alone in the face of media silence. (Doubling time for that is about 2 months.)

    But hang in there. While the presidential seat is a trophy, the real battles are for congressional seats, the parties' political directions, and the meme structrure of political debate. That's longer term than one presidential race. That's what he got into politics for and (after beating his head against the wall for decades) he's doing just fine on those fronts right now.
  • > BTW, Obama is a Christian, not a Muslim.

        Actually, that was an excellent piece of disinformation. In a recent survey, 16% of the respondants believed that Obama is Muslim. It was an excellent tactic for a completely dirty campaign. Look at who the majority of your constituency is (white Christians). Find their worst fears (Muslims, stereotyped into all being terrorists). Tag that on your opponent.

        Likewise, letting it be known that McCain is a well know pedophile, who flies to Thailand twice a year to molest prepubescent boys, would be dirty. Sure, it's an outright lie (or at least I hope so), but if 16% of the people who would respond to surveys believe it, that means a whole lot more people are whispering about it.

        Oh my, don't vote for him. Think about the children.

        Vote JWSmythe, write in candidate for the 2008 United States Presidential Election!

  • by PhoenixFlare ( 319467 ) on Thursday June 12, 2008 @11:33AM (#23764753) Journal
    ow I'm primarily watching the Newshour on PBS, BBC America as well as reading the various online news sites. It's pretty sad when the BBC can present a more balanced look at American politics than most mainstream American news networks.

    Whatever works for you - i'm not going to insult anyone's intelligence and try to say Keith isn't biased, I just think comparing him to O'Reilly is unfair to him, and frankly, overly generous to Bill.

    I just don't want to see us adopt the Republican method of Governing -- blackmailing our own members to vote the party line against their own constituents, demonizing the opposition and locking yourself into a bubble and ignoring all outside influence

    Neither do I, but the fact is, the Republicans (or at least the ones currently in power) are not just going to suddenly play nice and cooperate. And if you think some of them are jerks now, just wait and see how desperate they get if Obama wins and they lose even more seats in the House/Senate.

    While they don't need to be treated as badly as many of them have treated Democrats, there's a middle ground where Democrats still need to grow a farking spine and stick up for themselves....And if that requires getting angry enough to push back, then so be it.
  • by Pojut ( 1027544 ) on Thursday June 12, 2008 @11:35AM (#23764777) Homepage
    My fiance is a 3rd grade special ed teacher, and many of her friends are teachers in public schools as well.

    In addition to that, many of the problems in public schools also go back to what and HOW the teachers are allowed to teach. Did you know that in certain counties, if a teacher does not teach the curriculum as dictated by county law, they can be fired? It doesn't matter if the kids understand what is being taught or not...teachers can be FIRED if it isn't taught in a specific manner.

    Trust me, I used to think exactly that same way that you do. Now that I am able to see what my fiance has to deal with, I assure you that the problem is not incompetent teachers.

    After talking to close to 100 teachers over the past two years, I gotta say...a LOT of the problem lies in the tools they are provided, not their proficiency in using them.

    You can't be expected to build a skyscraper using wet paper bags and staples.
  • by mgblst ( 80109 ) on Thursday June 12, 2008 @11:37AM (#23764811) Homepage
    I thought Obama was the candidate who stopped taking money from lobbyists and PACs.

    John Edwards was the man if you really wanted change in Washington, he wanted to ban the lobbyists.

    I predict he will end up being VP.
  • by Shakrai ( 717556 ) * on Thursday June 12, 2008 @11:47AM (#23764995) Journal

    While they don't need to be treated as badly as many of them have treated Democrats, there's a middle ground where Democrats still need to grow a farking spine and stick up for themselves

    You'll brook no argument from me here. We do need to grow a spine.

    I just think we can be strong and respectful at the same time. Obama seems to be particularly good at this -- my favorite quote from his speech after clinching the nomination was "I honor John McCain for his accomplishments, even if he chooses to deny mine." That was the perfect attack line, IMHO. Obama stood him for himself and drew a contrast between him and McCain without resorting to loaded words like "cut and run".

  • Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Rei ( 128717 ) on Thursday June 12, 2008 @11:55AM (#23765087) Homepage
    It's amazing how much he's changed since then, isn't it? As a registered Democrat, I could actually respect the McCain of 2000. Now he's been voting against his own reform bills, supporting torture, supporting telco amnesty for spying on Americans, and pretty much everything else you could think of.

    By the way -- the summary article got something wrong:

    McCain is not the stranger to technology some think him to be

    No, the McCain *campaign* is not a stranger to technology. McCain most definitely is a stranger to technology []. When asked whether he was a Mac or PC person, he responded:

    "Neither, I'm an illiterate that has to rely on my wife for all of the assistance I can get."

    That's right. A president who, this day in age, doesn't know how to use a computer. Makes his policies on tech issues make a lot more sense, though. Back in 1999, running for the White House, this was remotely excusable. Today, it's just sad. A year ago, I set up a older woman who has brain damage with a Linux desktop and net access and she uses it just fine.
  • Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by FishWithAHammer ( 957772 ) on Thursday June 12, 2008 @12:09PM (#23765363)
    But at the moment, they're tolerating him. They'll vote for him regardless, at this point.

    What I envision is McCain popping the clutch and shifting the Republican Party in a direction they won't like--but doing it too late for them to even consider not voting for him.

    I could be wrong about the timing. He might wait until he's in the White House (I still think Obama's going to flame out) and do it there, when they can't do anything about it. But I'm 100% sure it'll happen.
  • by The Aethereal ( 1160051 ) on Thursday June 12, 2008 @12:13PM (#23765445)
    Exactly. I voted for Bush in '04 as what I felt to be the "lesser of two evils". Now I have to live with that. I should have voted Libertarian, which is what I plan to do this time (or write in Ron Paul).
  • Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Rei ( 128717 ) on Thursday June 12, 2008 @12:41PM (#23765959) Homepage
    What slam? That was 100% true. It took her a while to get used to things (scroll bars were a big challenge for her), but she does just fine now.

    Go on, explain to me how someone who doesn't know how to use a computer is expected to remotely understand the issues at hand. At least Senator Ted "Tubes" Stevens, the butt of many jokes on this site, uses a computer.
  • Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by pluther ( 647209 ) <pluther@us a . net> on Thursday June 12, 2008 @12:46PM (#23766055) Homepage
    I agree that he probably hasn't changed as much as I'd thought.

    In 2000, I registered Republican specifically so I could vote for him in the primary. Bush was just scary back then. (Turns out, I underestimated how scary).

    I was part of the effort to encourage him to run again in 2004. He declined to do so, and instead threw his full support behind Bush and started supporting all of his policies, including support of continued torture of suspected criminals, which he was very loudly against up until that point.

    He's no longer the man we knew in 2000. But, I'm willing to concede that that's most likely because we never really knew him, rather than because he's actually changed.
  • by grep_rocks ( 1182831 ) on Thursday June 12, 2008 @12:48PM (#23766109)
    I think there are quite a few paid Republican Trolls - especially on the Washington Post (I mean aside from the editorial staff) - there was quite a drumbeat of posts that looked very similiar of people claiming to be Clinton supporters who would never vote for Obama, and then any article about Bush gets some Bushbots in high gear. Isn't this kind of disturbing? - I was told once that at Italian Opera houses people would be paid to go to the opera and applaud (loudly) at the end - on the one hand it is sad republican have to pay people to say good things about them, but it is really kind of fascist in the way they try and manufacture consent and make it appear there is general support for really unpopular positions....
  • Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by uniquename72 ( 1169497 ) on Thursday June 12, 2008 @01:10PM (#23766547)
    No, McCain moved from being 'sort of' a conservative (or at least as close as one gets in the Senate and still remain electable) to a Bush yes-man and neo-con shill.

    I can list a dozen ways he's shifted toward the neocons (off the top of my head: nation-building, torture, abortion, tax cuts for the wealthy in wartime, warrantless wiretapping, campaign finance reform) -- can you list some ways he's shifted to the left?
  • Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by squiggleslash ( 241428 ) on Thursday June 12, 2008 @02:05PM (#23767513) Homepage Journal

    You guys need to get your story straight. It was, actually, a preference. McCain implied he felt that Iraq was just like Japan and Germany, countries that we've "occupied" (in his terms) for more than half a decade. The sheer ridiculousness of either implying either country is "occupied" (we have troops stationed in each, but not in an occupying sense), or that Iraq is anything like those two is what makes McCain's comments all the more ridiculous. Ironically, the right tends to complain we're misrepresenting him by pointing out he was making that comparison.

    "Dude, McCain said he wants to eat babies"

    "How dare the you on the left misrepresent McCain like that! All he said is that if the Chinese eat babies, then he'd like to eat one too, as he heard they're tasty and delicious."

  • Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by wattrlz ( 1162603 ) on Thursday June 12, 2008 @02:05PM (#23767521)

    Says a lot about his attitude, though, doesn't it? I hope, for all our sakes, that the quote in question was completely facetious. Otherwise people are supporting a candidate who doesn't consider it worthwhile to sit down and learn how to check his email.

  • Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 12, 2008 @03:21PM (#23768793)
    > "It's a sad state of affairs when your voting for the lesser of two evils"

    This sad state of affairs has everything to do with the people who think that third party candidates are worthless.
  • Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by sg3000 ( 87992 ) * <> on Thursday June 12, 2008 @03:58PM (#23769387)

    No, the McCain *campaign* is not a stranger to technology. McCain most definitely is a stranger to technology
    I agree -- a person who doesn't know how to use a computer and clearly is uninterested in using one is the wrong choice to lead 21st century America.

    I think it's an interesting contrast that Barack Obama [] knew that a bubble sort is a bad way to sort a million 32-bit integers. Although I think it's necessary, I'd hate to see a debate on technology between the two candidates.

    On second thought, maybe I'd love to see one. They could have Ted "Series of Tubes" Stevens moderate!
  • Re:Troll Army (Score:3, Interesting)

    by idiotnot ( 302133 ) <> on Friday June 13, 2008 @06:35AM (#23775945) Homepage Journal
    Actually not. I'm probably going to vote for Bob Barr, and no, I'm not a Ron Paul nut. Still, I find it interesting that you're accusing me of being a troll, when there's someone who goes and moderates everything you post just based on your past record.

    And judging from many of your comments, you are the shining example for trolls everywhere.

    Still, it's funny that the leftists have no problems with the antisemites within their ranks. That used to be something that was so rich, white northeastern Republican chic. Not anymore.

Statistics are no substitute for judgement. -- Henry Clay