Top McCain aide steps aside, rather than take on Obama

Last summer, Mark McKinnon, the former chief media adviser to George W. Bush, and now a top aide to John McCain’s presidential campaign, admitted that he liked Barack Obama so much, he didn’t want to work on the campaign running against Obama and he wouldn’t create negative ads against the Illinois senator if he became the Democratic nominee.

Of course, that was easy to say at the time. A year ago, McCain’s campaign was in deep trouble, and Obama still seemed like a relative long-shot. Given that we’re talking about a top-tier politico who was Bush’s top media guy, I assumed he’d come up with some excuse to change his mind.

I assumed wrong. Chris Cillizza reports today that McKinnon actually meant it.

Mark McKinnon, the lead media consultant for Sen. John McCain’s (Ariz.) presidential bid, is stepping down from that role — making good on a pledge he made last year not to work against Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) in the fall campaign.

McKinnon confirmed his decision to The Fix this afternoon. “I’ll be transitioning, shifting position from linebacker to head cheerleader,” said the always-colorful McKinnon. He added that he would continued to be a “friend and fan” to the campaign.

McKinnon, a former Democrat, played a central role in Gov. George W. Bush’s 2000 campaign and the Bush-Cheney reelection four years later. He was part of a large contingent of Bush operatives to make the transition to McCain in late 2006 and early 2007, but was one of only a handful who stuck with the Arizona senator after his campaign’s implosion last summer.

That same summer, McKinnon told Cox Newspapers that if Obama was the Democratic nominee, he would not play an active role in McCain’s effort to defeat the Illinois senator.

McKinnon is not just some low-level staffer — he’s been responsible for shaping McCain’s media strategy. He’s also a trusted member of McCain’s inner circle and Cillizza added that “many within the campaign acknowledged that losing him would be a heavy blow to the effort.”

And now he’s leaving the playing field to watch from the sidelines, because he just likes Obama that much.

To get a sense of his perspective, consider that McKinnon told NPR last year, “I would simply be uncomfortable being in a campaign that would be inevitably attacking Barack Obama. I think it would be uncomfortable for me, and I think it would be bad for the McCain campaign.”

I guess McCain deciding to stay positive and not attack Obama wasn’t an option.

I have to say, this is just not normal. I can’t think of a comparable example of a major candidate’s key advisor stepping down because he or she liked the other party’s candidate so much.

I suppose this leads to two questions:

1. Why would McCain hire a media advisor who was prepared to quit if Obama became the Democratic nominee?

2. Why would McKinnon go to work for McCain if he were prepared to quit if Obama became the Democratic nominee?

I suspect the answer to both is the same: they assumed Clinton would get the nod and this wouldn’t be an issue.

I guess kudos to McKinnon are in order. I never really thought he’d go through with this, giving up a high-profile, lucrative job for the Republican presidential nominee. The follow-through here is pretty impressive.

As an alternative answer to (1), also bear in mind that McCain was happy to keep whatever staffers weren’t deserting his apparently sinking ship last summer. He probably concluded (perhaps correctly) that keeping McKinnon on board in the short term was worth the risk of losing him in the general election in the (then unlikely) event that both McCain and Obama received their parties’ nominations.

  • And now shillary is whining that its all about sexism – enough of her lies, racist campaign, and sense of entitlement.

    Maybe being the wife of a president qualified her to buy a Senate seat in NY – it did not make her presidential material and it did not give her the right to destroy the democratic party.

    Her voting record in the Senate is one of enabling the chimp virtually all the way – it is time to move on and it has nothing to do with your sex. Its really all about the fact that the more people get to know you, the less they like you.

  • I know this is a cheap shot, but it’s pretty sad that a Bush media advisor was less comfortable attacking a Democrat than certain Democrats I used to like….

  • That is just an astounding story. Just astounding. This doesn’t happen. Nobody does this.

    Maybe Barack really is the second coming! I think I hear angels singing! (I’m KIDDING, KIDDING–pipe down, angry Clinton mobs!)

  • little bear,

    It is time to tone it down. There are a lot of Clinton supporters out there whom Obama will need to win the GE. Right now their emotions are raw–and wouldn’t yours be too if the situation were reversed? But truth be told, we will need every Democrat and Dem-leaning Indie we can get to win in November. Hillary Clinton is beat, but we don’t need to fan the flames of raw emothion right now.

  • he’s been responsible for shaping McCain’s media strategy.

    you mean the flip-flopping, ignorant, specious accusations, and the bungled geographical and biographical details, and the lobbyist-firings?

    THAT “media strategy?”

    and we’re glad to see him pull back, why, exactly?

  • Oh, little bear!
    At least save the foaming at the mouth Clinton hatred for, you know, Clinton blog posts?

  • “Right now their emotions are raw” & “Hillary Clinton is beat” – #5 independant thinker

    Whatever, I am with the bear. If she is beat someone forgot to mention it to her because just yesterday I heard her claiming how important Kentucky is and if she wins it, she will be that much closer.

    This board was littered with her supporters and with Rush retards and to be honest, it was virtually impossible to differentiate the two. I sent her money last fall and was ready to give her my support. Somewhere along the line, she gave up everything I thought she stood for and sold out in hopes of becoming president and now these fucks have the nerve to act like they aren’t going to support the D candidate. I am not Harry Reid, I would tell Lieberman to go fuck himself and I will tell anyone trying to leverage their vote to go fuck themselves.

    They might as well go support McCain because this last couple of months I personally can see no difference in a portion of HRC supporters then I saw in GWB supports in 2000 and 2004. They called me a sexist, a racist, and an idiot just because I did not conform to their candidate. I didn’t gravitate towards Obama, HRC shoved me over to his camp.

    So you can do what you want, but please don’t tell me who ass I should kiss. I don’t think Obama needs any of those clowns, I think in November Obama is going to hand the GOP a humiliation they are not soon to forget. I am calling Obama by a landside.

  • I’m still not sold. Anyone who worked for Bush in 2000 could plead for the benefit of the doubt. Anyone who worked for him again in 2004 only gets the benefit of skepticism. I have a feeling you’re right, he assumed it was going to be Clinton, but the conclusion to that assumption is that if it’s not Clinton, someone will have built up enough backing to beat Clinton and that candidate would likely steamroll John McCain in the fall.

    No, McKinnon checked his weathervane and decided he didn’t want to be on the losing team. Democrats, be wary the defectors.

  • Little bear, I would also like to see you turn it down a notch or two. It’s not that I disagree with you – I don’t! But after a while, the “shillary” and even the “chimp” namecalling gets tiresome.

    Please share your thoughts, but please spare us the invective.

    That said….

    The McKinnon story doesn’t add up. I would have assumed that any “media adviser” to George W. Bush was an unprincipled whore who would sell his services to whoever was hiring. After what Bush did to McCain in the 2000 campaign, it ought to be surprising that McCain would hire a Bush operative like McKinnon.

    Or maybe not, if an unprincipled whore is what you are looking for.

  • I’m not sure what to think about McKinnon. On the one hand, merely being a republican automatically makes him untrustworthy, in my book. Being a republican who used to be a democrat is even worse; it means he purposefully joined the party of George Bush and Dick Cheney.

    On the other hand, I can’t remember a high-ranking republican ever before actually keeping his word on something like this. Most of them either make excuses, lie by claiming no such promise was ever made, or just outright ignore the issue. And if he isn’t sincere about this, then I can’t imagine why he even did it at all. Why bother to bring up the issue when there’s a good chance that nobody would have even remembered it in the first place?

  • I think doubtful @#0 nailed it. He didn’t want to be on downslope side of an electoral avalanche. And, he gets to keep his promise and look above it all.

  • Hell, I don’t care what the guy’s true motives are. If McKinnon’s a rat running from a sinking ship, at the very least this is confirmation that some of McCain’s people know damn well the vessel’s going down to Obama.

    This makes McCain look like a total ass and sets up the next person attacking Obama from McCain’s campaign as base and vicious. If only this would get some decent coverage–it really is a cool story.

  • having read my share of Ludlum… I can pretty well guarantee this guy is an operative…
    was a Democrat, became a republican in 00′ and remained one thru 04’… that takes more than commitment…
    KGB ? …possibly.. but I doubt it… no, there’s only one organization capable of employing deceit and treachery on a level of this magnitude…
    he’s definitely KBR.
    ..

  • Rambling…

    (a) Leave Little Bear alone. He’s got a right. (So do those who criticize him for exercising it, I s’pose, but I get a little more vexed at those who use their free speech to bitch about the way other people use theirs.)

    (b) I’m with Dee and Doubtful. McKinnon clearly has a good eye for the weather. He switched from D to R just in time for the 2000 conservative party to start, and now that it looks like the cops are about to start knocking on Repub doors with search warrants all across America, he’s flushing his McCain badge and getting ready to parachute back into blue territory. (Pardon my mixed metaphors; some abhor them as sloppy thinking, but I prefer to believe I’m just colorful, dammit.) Were I in charge of such things, I’d detail a few grimly clever young Justice Department badges to take a good hard look at Monsieur McKinnon’s dealings over the last eight years.

    (c) It bothers me greatly that Senator Barack Obama is universally referred to as ‘Obama’ while Senator Hillary Clinton is always ‘Hillary’. I don’t much like Senator Clinton lately (although I used to be a fairly devoted admirer of hers back in the 90s), but this has always struck me as stupidly demeaning. If you’re going to call her ‘Hillary’, then he’s ‘Barack’, or, if he’s ‘Obama’, then she’s ‘Clinton’. Personally, I don’t think it’s that hard to either type a ‘Senator’ in front of either, or simply use initials.

    (d) I know everyone is saying it’s finally over, but I keep feeling like it’s not over. Suppose McCain offers Senator Clinton his VP slot… and she accepts? I’m trying to think of a good reason this can’t happen. Or convince myself that if it did, they wouldn’t win in a landslide.

  • Doc Nebula — Have you seen Senator Clinton’s campaign signs? They say …

    wait for it…

    HILLARY.

  • It bothers me greatly that Senator Barack Obama is universally referred to as ‘Obama’ while Senator Hillary Clinton is always ‘Hillary’.

    She’s called Hillary, Doc, because she’s married to a president named Clinton. She herself recognizes the potential for confusion and responded by naming her website and her campaign “Hillary08.” I always try to refer to the two primary candidates as “Clinton” and “Obama” unless:

    a) I’m talking about Bill Clinton in the same discussion (which happens a lot in discussions of this primary, as you’ll notice), in which case I will call both Clintons by their first or entire names, or…

    …much less frequently, b) the name “Clinton” has been repeated so many times in one sentence that good writing demands a little word variation (and I do the same for Obama in that case).

    There are many legitimate instances of people trying to demean Hillary Clinton in this primary season. I’m afraid this is emphatically not one of them, and to make your case, you’d really have to be talking about a woman who didn’t share the surname of a recent president.

    It’s too bad the people of Arkansas pressured her so heavily years after her marriage to take her husband’s name (something that wouldn’t be an issue today), and it’s too bad she folded on this demand, although I can understand the sense of political expedience accompanying that decision. If she’d kept Rodham, as she’d wanted to, there would be no confusion. As it is, we had a Clinton supporter here the other night complaining that people call her “HRC.” This person claimed the middle initial was somehow an insult, as though recognizing her family of origin’s name or giving a nod to the fact that she used to call herself “Hillary Rodham Clinton” was somehow demeaning. Sigh.

  • Farmgirl, Maria,

    Good points, and I do get that the ‘Hillary’ tag is (a) largely self bestowed by HRC, and (b) done because the name ‘Clinton’ has overwhelming connotations towards her hubby in political circles. Regardless — and this may just be because I live and die by words and phrases, I cannot like a song with lousy lyrics no matter how well orchestrated it may otherwise be — it rankles me when we call one of them by last name and the other by first. Perhaps it’s not demeaning… no, I imagine you’re right, it’s really not. But it bugs me.

  • Comments are closed.