Skip Nav
Tattoos
Read 'Em and Weep! 49 Tattoos Inspired by Famous Books
Disney
16 Spectacular Disney Princess Costumes You Can Buy For Halloween
Advice
Why I Will Never Apologize For Being an "Aggressive" Woman

John McCain on Meet the Press

McCain on Meet the Press Today: "I Believe I'm Going to Win"

An optimistic and fired up John McCain showed up to Meet the Press this morning where he dispelled the notion that he was hurting in the polls. McCain said, “We are doing fine. We have closed in the last week, and we’re going to continue this close in the next week.” Did you catch that? "The next week" he's referring to is the last week of the campaign. It's almost impossible to believe that there's still an ending to this.

Talk turned to his running mate and McCain stood firm on his Palin-position, “I don’t defend her. I praise her. She needs no defense." And as for that much ballyhooed shopping spree, McCain is very pragmatic about it. “She lives a frugal life, she and her family are not wealthy, she and her family were thrust into this."

Though a Newsweek poll released yesterday shows Obama with a 13-point lead nationally, McCain pressed on assuring voters, "We've closed in the last week. We'll continue to be very competitive in many of the battleground states." In all this morning, he sounded tough, rough, and ready, good-naturedly likening himself to Knute Rockne at half time. Is his optimism right on?

To see what he had to say,

.

Source

Join The Conversation
gitsie123 gitsie123 8 years
I was responding to the statement that "multi-billionares" don't waste money.
gitsie123 gitsie123 8 years
NO I didn't. I understand both points and maybe these "millionares" know something we don't and maybe McCain will win. Plus isn't illegal to bet on elections?
organicsugr organicsugr 8 years
"umm, not really. Millionares waste their money on stupid stuff all the time. Custom cars, private islands, exotic animals.... You hear about it all the time." I think you missed the point.
gitsie123 gitsie123 8 years
Really? You think they became "multi-billionaires" by *wasting* millions for absolutely no reason? That's the sillies logic ever. umm, not really. Millionares waste their money on stupid stuff all the time. Custom cars, private islands, exotic animals.... You hear about it all the time.
Jude-C Jude-C 8 years
Yeah, you know...keep dreaming, John.
juju4 juju4 8 years
I think McCain's comments just stirred all those Obama supporterss and volunteers to sprint to the finish line. After I heard these comments, I decided to donate my whole upcoming weekend to volunteering. I know I am not alone. Thanks John, for sealing the deal for us! :-)
sexylibrarian sexylibrarian 8 years
If you watched Meet the Press Molly you would have seen footage of McCain saying the exact same thing as Obabma!
Schaianne Schaianne 8 years
Polls mean diddlysquat - everywhere you look is another poll with different outcome.
mollyparnis mollyparnis 8 years
If BO wins get ready for a 70% tax rate http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck
hope2be hope2be 8 years
chatodenege, I wasn't asking for your opinion on my silly logic. What do you gain from trying to provoke me who doesn't even know you, ms. righteousness?
siguros siguros 8 years
keep dreaming great grandpa.
dreamsugar dreamsugar 8 years
[I thought Tom Brokaw did a really good job of discrediting McCain by showing footage of all his contradictions!!] Ohhhhhh -- post link :drool:
dreamsugar dreamsugar 8 years
[The chances of him winnning all of the battleground states and winning Penn...] Given that McCain's campaign has been erratic in the extreme -- I can't believe that McCain still has followers.
nyaradzom2001 nyaradzom2001 8 years
It must be nice to live in la la land Senor Mccain, talk about being deluded.
chatondeneige chatondeneige 8 years
[Eh? SOmeone actually bet a million for McCain to win? Well, maybe it's multi-billionaires and they don't mind spending that much.] Really? You think they became "multi-billionaires" by *wasting* millions for absolutely no reason? That's the sillies logic ever.
momma-tikita momma-tikita 8 years
i couldnt agree more wadewifey..I cant wait for this election to be over!!!! all the nastiness that comes out of people :mob: is crazy!!!
Frank-y-Ava Frank-y-Ava 8 years
The chances of him winnning all of the battleground states and winning Penn. is kinda of slim. But of course he shouldn't give up being a Hanoi prisoner and all. The polls could be wrong, bradley effect, etc. etc. I just want this to be over.
sexylibrarian sexylibrarian 8 years
I thought Tom Brokaw did a really good job of discrediting McCain by showing footage of all his contradictions!!
Jessiebanana Jessiebanana 8 years
margokhal I see your perspective about campaigning...I forget as I don't generally pay attention to commercials and advertising. Though I must say anyone with access to a tv would have a hard time being completely out of the loop. I guess what I'm saying is that larger cities have a larger sphere of influence because they have more people in it and I have to no problem with that. Thats completely dependent on the population. What I wish is that that influence would be more accurate, with one person, one vote. Right now I live in a state, OR, that only has 7 electoral college votes. My issue is that my west coast state will be blue. I already voted, but I could have sat it out and it would have made no difference in the election.
margokhal margokhal 8 years
I'm not exactly sure which part of the argument you were responding to, Jessie... I mean, I don't agree totally with their reasoning about the populous states determining the vote if there was no EC, but I can see why it would be a concern. The major cities would serve as large spheres of influence by their reasoning, even though each individual vote would count the same. I guess they'd say it was an unfair advantage to be able to campaign and affect so many people in a densely populated area rather than the few that may be affected in less populated areas. Candidates would spend all of their time in the major cities campaigning, leaving the smaller towns out of the loop in terms of attention. I don't agree with that reasoning, per se, but again, I can see why it would be problematic. I'd much rather have a modified EC where each candidate gets a percentage of the EC delegates based upon the split of the popular vote in the state, rather than the current all-or-nothing approach that's effective in 48 states.
Jessiebanana Jessiebanana 8 years
I think one person one vote gives my vote meaning. Why should I be punished or silenced for living in a heavily populated state? Anyways there may be plenty of people voting your way skb9850 in CA, NY, TX, and FL that can't be combined with yours because their vote was lost to the group majority vote of their state.
skb9850 skb9850 8 years
Living in the middle of the country, I don't want to see California, New York, Texas, and Florida deciding who the next president is going to be. I'm a citizen of this country too and I should have some say in who is elected even if I don't live in the most populous state. That is what the EC does, gives everyone's vote meaning.
Jessiebanana Jessiebanana 8 years
margokhal, but on that same note if I lived in a big city and were voting the other way my voice would not be heard because the majority would vote their way and decide where the electoral votes go for my state. Once losing at the state level, my voice is gone.
Jessiebanana Jessiebanana 8 years
Sorry I was trying to that in as least words as possible. In that sentence I wasn't referring to communism I was referring to capitalism (where personal interest should support community interest, profit coming from communities and not individuals), I should have switched gears (my bad :oops:). What I was saying is DESPITE the threat of punishment, individuals, often for the sake of greed, make dumb decisions (ie our current situation). And yes Organic the market does punish them. In the case of the bailout had it not been for government they would have been punished severely. Of course they would have taken our economy with them. In smaller cases when people at the top are punished they takes jobs with them. If I ran a small business and lost it, the impact of that would rest mostly on my shoulders...fine. When a business who is heavily entangled in the economy fails, its not that simple. I am concerned that people don't want to take into account that we are entwined and what impacts you impacts others, bottom-up and top-down.
margokhal margokhal 8 years
Jessie, I'm pretty sure it has something to do with where the populous lies and their spheres of influence. Let's take some of the more populated states: CA, TX, NY, FL. The majority of their residents are concentrated in major cities (LA, SF, Dallas, Houston, Austin, NYC, Miami). A candidate would have a better opportunity to influence a large swath of people from a major city - via media endorsements, setting up party offices, being able to conduct more events and rallies with possible large turnouts - than the few people that constitute smaller towns. Being visible might encourage people in the big cities to actually look at the issues, rather than just the candidate promoting themselves - but it doesn't mean that they *will*. If a candidate is more visible in a major city, it's likely that many of the people in the city will vote based on who's more visible or seems to be more popular. Hence, the more populous states (really, I guess it should be more populous cities) will have much more influence in determining the presidency. I guess that's why some of the less populated states have more EC votes - to balance out the large population of votes from other states and ensure that their votes count just as much as others [at least I *think* this would be the reasoning, I'm not sure exactly how it goes].
Why You Should Read Postapocalyptic Fiction
John McCain's Statement on Trump Comments About Khizr Khan
Usher and Blake Shelton Hand in Hand Performance Video
DACA Stories
From Our Partners
Latest Love
All the Latest From Ryan Reynolds