If sending more troops does nothing, or makes things worse, will...

[Dawgs]

it be the end of John McCain; as Presidential candidate or otherwise?

[Cooley Hurd]

1. Probably not - Americans have extremely short memories...

[salin]

5. yes, but not *that* short - esp on an issue that is so much

on the mind of the public.

I think it not only ends McCain's chances, but also most other GOP hopefuls as well - as the whole party will be viewed as being obstinant per holding on to a disasterous policy. Right now the public is placing much of the blame on Bushco - other GOPers taking an active role supporting Bushco on Iraq (or any other new 'adventure') risk having that disillusionment (and disgust) spill on to them. At least for the very short term (think 18 months).

[Cooley Hurd]

8. ...I believe Guiliani and Romney are on record as favoring a troops surge...

The only prominent repugs I know against this is Hagel. This could set him up for 08...

[bdamomma]

11. unfortunately very short memories

:-(

[michaz]

2. You can be sure

it will be used by the Democratic candidates. That is one thing that will be pushed to the front and mentioned over and over to keep it fresh in the minds of the voters.

[applegrove]

3. Maybe it is all about leaving the mess for the Dem President to

clean up..like Nixon had to end Vietnam. Or perhaps they want the war on terra to be the issue in 2008. And if the USA was out of Iraq..and it calmed down..nobody would vote for McCain cause people would feel safe.

[Dawgs]

6. I agree, but my point is that...

McCain is the face for wanting to add additional troops in Iraq. He was the first to promote this idea, and has gladly been the one to push it.

I think it will make him look weak on national security, which is one of only a few things he has going for him.

[neoblues]

4. The sort who would support him...

are the kind who would forgive/ignore anything in order to continue their beliefs...

[lapfog_1]

7. This is why Edwards (very clever of him, btw) has named this the

McCain doctrine (instead of the Bush doctrine or something else). Hang it on the guy who wants to be the next CinC.
The chance that a "surge" of anything less than 400,000 troops (which we don't have and will never have) working at this point is exactly zero. The numbers we hear now are something like 10,000 or maybe 20,000... and that's just another 10,000 targets for the Sunnis AND the Shia to shoot at.

[radfringe]

9. may be the end of bush

I think it will increase the yelling for impeachment. It won't be ON the table - it will be THE TABLE.

I know many people are referring to the "viagra-ification" (i.e. troop increase) as the McCain Plan. However, McCain can still weasle out of it by pointing out that he (McCain) is not president and did not make decision, and /or the reason the viagra-ification failed was due to lack of planning on bush's part.

so to make sure this stays as a millstone around McCain's neck - I would suggest the viagra-ification be referred to as the BUSH-McCAIN plan.

[Dawgs]

10. I disagree.

It clearly shows that, if he was the President, he would have made the very same decision as Bush.

I do like the idea of "Bush-McCain plan". It ties McCain to Bush's failed Iraq policy. I also like Edward's 'McCain Doctrine'.

[radfringe]

12. McCain may make the same decision

but he can always say he would have made the decision AND HAD A PLAN.

this emphasizes the difference between him and bush - as bush has no plan

[madokie]

13. as long as he stays over on the dark side I don't care if he is a candidate or not

in fact I see him as an asset to us real Americans