Gil, you never did tell us if you would have supported McCain if Hillary had won the nomination.

Gil, you never did tell us if you would have supported McCain if Hillary had won the nomination.

I have little doubt that Hillary and Obama would govern in virtually the same manner. And so people say to me: Well, you’ve said you’d vote for McCain over Hillary if she wins it, but why? If you think you’d like the way Obama would govern and here you’re admitting that Hillary would probably govern in almost the exact same way, why would you vote for McCain instead?

The answer to that is twofold. First, as I’ve said before I think the conservative movement has hurt this country tremendously, and I think the conservative movement needs to be buried, finally, once and for all. Hillary pumps additional life into it - there’s just no getting around it. And even if a Hillary presidency is able to heal some of the wounds the movement has inflicted upon the country these past seven years at least, by invigorating the movement she makes it possible that the movement will win the next time around; and undo all that she might have been able to accomplish.

There are two ways to drive a stake through the heart of the movement - electing Obama (more on that in a second), or electing John McCain.

Because as noted - John McCain represents a continuation of where we’re at, right this second; a worsening of it, in fact. McCain’s admitted he has no clue when it comes to economics; we know he wants to attack Iran and would stay in Iraq for 100 years. So to elect a McCain in 2008 means the economy is likely to be just as bad or worse for at least the beginning of his presidency - but probably longer; it’s to ensure that the casualty counts from the Mideast as well as the bill for our little adventure will continue to creep upwards.

Four years of a McCain presidency and the Republican Party is destroyed. The conservative movement has no choice but to climb on his bandwagon now, but once things started to go wrong, which they would, the infighting would make what’s happening between Hillary-Obama now look like a picnic. And after eight years of Bush, the broader public is likely to become convinced that Republican rule has been a complete disaster - and reject the party for a generation.

Obama drives a stake through the heart of the movement in another way - first, by denying it its symbolic white whale. But second, because Obama has crossover appeal; a number of honest conservatives have expressed interest in his candidacy

Even if she were to press for a change to the Michigan decision, Clinton would still lack the delegates necessary to secure the nomination — a point made by Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, a Clinton supporter."I don't think we're going to fight this at the convention," Rendell said on CBS's "Face the Nation" Sunday. "Because even were we to win it, unless it's going to change enough delegates for Senator Clinton to get the nomination, then it would be a fight that would have no purpose."

Also in the above segment of msnbc, it was commented that McCain will have a better opportunity to defeat Obama than he would Clinton.

He did say he would cast a vote to McCain but I couldn't find when he said it first. This is from a blog he wrote on April 14.

Based on what?

the independent vote.....

Interesting point.

What percentage of voters are independent in a typical election?