GOP base less than pleased with pro-choice talk
A few months ago, Chris Matthews asked John McCain if he would consider a pro-choice running mate, such as former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge. “I don’t know if [his position on the issue] would stop him, but it would be difficult
,” McCain said. This week, McCain reversed course a bit, saying he might consider a pro-choice running mate, just so long as he or she doesn’t also support gay rights.
The Republican base is paying close attention, and it’s not especially pleased with McCain’s latest remarks.
Top social conservative leaders in key battleground states are urging John McCain not to pick a running mate who supports abortion rights, warning of dire consequences from a Republican base already unenthused about their nominee.
McCain’s comments Wednesday to the Weekly Standard’s Stephen Hayes that former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge’s pro-abortion rights views wouldn’t necessarily rule him out quickly found their way into the in-boxes of Christian conservatives. For those who have been anxiously awaiting McCain’s pick as a signal of his ideological intentions, there was deep concern that their worst fears about the Arizona senator may be realized.
“It absolutely floored me,” said Phil Burress, head of the Ohio-based Citizens for Community Values. “It would doom him in Ohio.”
In an email Burren wrote to leading evangelical activists and McCain aides tasked with Christian conservative outreach, he added that a pro-choice running mate “will end his bid for the presidency and spell defeat for other Republican candidates.”
McCain almost certainly shouldn’t have said anything at all. He was unlikely to pick a pro-choice running mate anyway, but probably wanted to score some points by appearing open-minded on the subject.
But now, when he picks a running mate who opposes abortion rights, McCain will look like he caved to pressure from the religious right, especially after they claim “victory” for having “forced McCain’s hand.”
In the meantime, the GOP base is worried about the possibility. James Muffett, head of Michigan’s Citizens for Traditional Values, joined McCain for a meeting on Wednesday night.
To select a running mate who supports abortion rights would be “wrong-headed, short-sighted, fracture the Republican Party and not allow us to capitalize on the Democratic Party’s fracture right now,” Muffett argued.
“If he does that, it makes our job 100 times harder. It would dampen enthusiasm at a time when evangelicals are looking for ways to gin up enthusiasm.”
McCain, Muffett said, got that message in their meeting.
“Some people in the movement say it would be the kiss of death. He heard that in the room last night.”
My hunch is this is much ado about nothing. McCain is even further to the right than Bush on reproductive rights, and the likelihood of him picking a pro-choice veep, and risking the ire of the conservative movement, is very remote.
But given McCain’s willingness to bring it up, expect the religious right to talk about little else until the official announcement is made.
jhm
says:Just in time for the big evangorama Saturday.
Maria
says:But now, when he picks a running mate who opposes abortion rights, McCain will look like he caved to pressure from the religious right, especially after they claim “victory” for having “forced McCain’s hand.”
Dems need to push this message hard. McCain cannot please both the religious right and moderates. It’s our job to get in there and continually remind the moderates of how much of a slave to fundamentalists McCain really is.
JC
says:I wonder how James Muffett, head of Michigan’s Citizens for Traditional Values, feels about John McCain’s adultery? Isn’t adultery in conflict with, oh I don’t know… say, Traditional Values?
There’s nothing more sadly ironic than a politically minded Thumper.
IludiumPhosdex
says:No wonder the Religiopolitical Right is on tenterhooks about whether they can continue pledging their political fealty to John McCain, as Right Wing Watch explaineth:
Elsewhere, state-based right-wing leaders, many of whom have had personal meetings with McCain, are likewise making their displeasure known:
Predictably, Gary Bauer – one of McCain’s earliest right-wing supporters who seems to only show up when the candidate does something to anger Bauer’s right-wing allies – appeared on the scene to assure them that there was nothing to worry about:
Gary Bauer, founder of the Campaign for Working Families, said he isn’t worried.
“I’m confident that at the end of the day, the running mate will be pro-life,” he told Family News in Focus.
McCain has a solid pro-life voting record on abortion issues and has promised to appoint “strict constructionists” to the Supreme Court.
And talk about deception: What exactly does the “Campaign for Working Families” have to do with the defence of Traditional Values, let alone working-class “white trash” they claim to be defending the honour of?
Shade Tail
says:Keep in mind, the right-wing fanatics have been feeling a bit blue this election cycle. They were all fire and brimstone in their declarations to never support McCain, and now they’ve meekly fallen in behind them. Carpetbagger has written about that a couple times recently.
Perhaps this was a Rovian attempt to throw them a bone by making them feel more important and influential. McCain floats the possibility, let’s them work themselves up about it, and then retreats. He gives up nothing that he cared to keep anyway, but he gains more support from the extremist Christians who now think he’s under their thumb.
Then he gets elected (in theory) and, once in office, goes along with the usual Republican tactic of utterly ignoring the religious extremists who were naive enough to think he’d watch their interests.
Chad
says:That would be the worst thing that McCain would do. The very reason why the conservatives won’t vote for Obama is the abortion issue. McCain doesn’t need a pro-choicer on his ticket, because pro-choice groups aren’t going to vote for him anyway.
This talk of picking Lieberman is crazy and I think it might be a fabricated story to rile up the right. Good job planting that rumor DNC.
Shade Tail
says:#5: “…and now they’ve meekly fallen in behind **HIM**.”
Feh, typos.
thorin-1
says:The flirting with a ‘pro-choice’ running mate is just a ploy to bolster McCain’s ‘maverick’ image with the MSM. And to reinforce the the perception among many ‘swing’ voters that McCain himself is ‘pro-choice’. I’ve had at least 9 people I know say one of the reasons they are leaning towards McCain is because ‘unlike the rest of the Republican party he’s pro-choice’. I’m not kidding (Dems really need to do a better job of pointing out McCain’s deep seated social conservatism).
McCain believes (with some justification) that in the end the evangelicals will come home in November and vote Republican. So he can afford to pretend to be ‘moderate’ and a ‘maverick’ and the press with eat it up and talk about how much courage he has for even considering a ‘pro-choice’ running mate.
iambilly
says:Isn’t it odd that the press regularly parrots the right wing, claiming that the Democratic Party has a litmus test for all candidates and all judges? While the mere suggestion that a Republican candidate might possibly consider a pro-choice candidate sends the Republican base into conniptions?
Michael Carpet
says:“Muffett.” Huh. Wouldn’t you know …
Capt Kirk
says:Must be tough on an old fart like McCain, trying to satisfy every hate group known to man. He’s gotta be super white for the klan, super war mongering for the muslim haters, super aggressive for the neocons, and super hetero for the homophobes.
What confuses me is the evangelicals, they support McCain, who apparently has no religious affiliation, over Obama, a Christian. Don’t look for McCain’s pastor to be controversial, the guy doesn’t go to church.
NonyNony
says:Heh. I wondered how large the explosion would be. If he picks a pro-choice guy for VP he can say goodbye to about 1/4 of his ground forces here in Ohio. They might still vote for him, but they won’t be running the ground game he’s going to need to win it. (And we have a Dem in the Sec. of State position this time around, so no monkeyshines with the vote tallies will be tolerated.)
The VP choice for McCain is incredibly important among his base – much more so than it is for Obama. Because his base is very worried that McCain will not survive his entire term. As far as they know, he could go in his first 90 days in office. So his choice of VP could very well be the next President.
As such, they want someone orthodox. Unfortunately, “orthodox conservative” means different things to different factions. And, as I’ve said before, if there were a single candidate who could have pleased all of the different factions McCain would not be the nominee right now. So McCain’s kind of stuck.
In some ways, I think that McCain’s choice of VP will tell us which faction is in ascendance over the GOP. Will it be the moneymen? The religious conservatives? It certainly won’t be the libertarians. I’m banking on the moneymen still being in power – they almost always are – and I’m thinking that it’ll be one of their guys making that VP acceptance speech at the convention in a few weeks.
As for why McCain said that – he was shooting from the hip. He doesn’t really care about abortion issues except inasmuch as he needs to get elected as a Republican candidate. He’s losing his discipline lately and so his own opinions are coming out instead of the opinions he needs to stick to if he wants to keep the GOP base happy. Does anyone else think he looks tired all the time lately?
Roket
says:“McCain almost certainly shouldn’t have said anything at all.”
Add “ever” to the end of that sentence and, by George, I think you’ve got it.
SaintZak
says:“just so long as he or she doesn’t also support gay rights”
Is he returning the money get from Manhunt.net?
This may be coming down to who is the more important vote, right wing Christians or independants. I’m sure they’re disecting the numbers to measure the possible losses or gains. That the possibility of a pro-choice running mate would even be entertained may show a real weakening in the christian right’s power.
You know, if he picked Florida’s own Gov. Christ, McCain might have to personally call Paris Hilton and appologize. I mean, they’de need to hire a real knock out for Christ to parade around with. He’d definitely have to leave the boyfriend at home.
The Answer is Orange
says:I wonder if they’ll be so eager to claim “failure” for forcing McCane’s hand when he gets buried on election day.
Lance
says:Ridge is a red herring. McC*nt is going to pick Romney and tell the Evangelicals that ‘Gosh, I could have gone with Ridge, why aren’t you happy’.
The only way Romney will look good to the Theocratic Wingnut Chorus is in comparison with someone like Ridge.
McCain/Romney 2008
A Polygamist…
…and a Mormon
joey
says:They give lip service but do nothing to help the pro-life group. In fact the republicans make sure that abortions increase by denying sex education or the availability of birth control. Nor do they want to give money to family planning for abortion alternatives, job training and health care for pregnant women or adoption…but they claim they will reverse Roe v Wade. a law over 70% of the country agrees with, which they know won’t happen but will keep single issue voters deeply in their pocket convinced theirs is the only way.
The media frames pro choice as “abortion rights” and until they are corrected by the dem party will continue to frame pro-choice s an abortion movement when it is merely the right to choose not an advocation for abortions. “Safe legal and rare” combined with increased funding and counseling for abortion alternatives is doing more to decrease the number of abortions than anything the republicans have done in the past 12yrs..
These so called “Christian” emails are so viral in their attacks on dems that they should be matched with this new dem platform asking the question “what have republicans done to decrease abortions”…Nothing…they want the number high so you will continue voting for them.
btw…Rove did meet with the Georgian president in July and weeks later Georgia invades Russian territory which McCain claims is a big boost to his campaign. Congress needs to investigate and the dems need to get this out to the voting public.
McCAIN WOULD RATHER START A WAR THAN LOOSE AN ELECTION.
Maria
says:I wonder if they’ll be so eager to claim “failure” for forcing McCane’s hand when he gets buried on election day.
They will if they want long-term viability. The more reality-based among them seem to grasp that the next president will be a Democrat; telling McCain and the GOP “you lost because we didn’t come out for you” is the only way they can maintain relevance in the next go-round.
Milt Muncy
says:What is it that one can not understand about McBush…… he will do anything to get elected. John Mccain… the human spatula!
Will Hunting
says:My own position on the issue is to leave it to the states, and let people vote with their feet. You want to live in a pro-choice state, go ahead. Anti-abortion? Move there. I also wish that McCain was a true “maverick” who would pick a pro-choicer just to expose all the single-issue voters who seem to have hijacked the R party. Tell them to “Give to Ceasar what is Ceasar’s, and to God what is God’s”. Vote on the real issues, get rid of the moral things that are wrong by changing individuals. It’s impossible to force people to do the right thing.
ET
says:Is it just me our would anyone else here just loooove to watch what would happen if a pro-choice candidate was the VP choice?
Seriously I just might OD on toxic levels of schadenfreude.
bcinaz
says:Good. I hope he goes pro-choice and the ‘family values’ crowd gets into a big snit and sits out this election.
Maybe they’ll revolt at the convention and nominate Huckabee.
McBush has been such a poor candidate, I’m half expecting the Rs to nominate somebody else at their convention.
Bill
says:From the article at cnn.com referring to the lack of support among social conservatives:
“He hasn’t done anything to offend; he’s just ignored them and they don’t like to be ignored,” said Phyllis Schlafly, founder of the Eagle Forum, who added she will vote for McCain.
Isn’t it amazing, the squeaky wheel won’t line up behind him because he’s snubbed them.
libra
says:Isn’t it amazing, the squeaky wheel won’t line up behind him because he’s snubbed them. — Bill, @23
It’s only fair, that the fRight should also have their PUMAs and their No Quarter-Brainers. At that, those freaks are less crazy than ours; at least they’re not planning on voting for the opposition, only making some mewling trouble for their own.
Jack
says:Social conservatives should stop threatening to sit this one out if John McCain choses a pro choice VP. By not voting they ensure an Obama presidency and two seats on the Supreme Court to liberals. It will set back the conservatives two generations. One issue voting is childish as much as it is selfish.
uesd2bdemocrat
says:The social conservatives are a strong voting block. In the end they will pull the lever for the Mccain ticket by an overwhelming majority. They may not entirely like what McCain stands for, but when they look at the other choice they realize they have to vote in solid numbers. They know that will be the only way they can limit their losses this election cycle. They will never stand idly by and watch a black racist, socialist communist take over this country. Anyone who believes otherwise is drinking to much of the koolaid.
Megalomania
says:This pro-choice stuff is a perfect political hysteria. Fear mongering at its best and Republicans do it best. Here again the free market is the breeding ground for terror, misinformation by money influence. So, for me searching around the net because in my opinion the Mainstream Media, in its professional analysis has deliberately been side stepping and convoluting the real need in our social structure.
Our media is possessed with bottom line mania, influenced by big Middle East money rather than good will, worse these forces use America’s at will principals to manipulate the electorate. My argument is that Bush and Company not only lost control of America but submits to Arab influence beyond treaty, moreover, aligns by personal gains through comforts in agreements.
For me this argument is more obvious as I reflect on some of the basics in America’s political greed, ineptness, and free speech treachery coupled with the influence of the Middle East cultures in America’s commercial, social, and political process.
So I look for making a choice in anything but here in these comments I find there those who argue and don’t want to have a choice. They are Republican’s, seem to do the right thing but know and think nothing of stressing out society. To choose a person who does not want choice as a Vice President for me is far from being a real Conservative. The perfect cynical ingredient receipt for mass hysteria.
So here thinking through this a little more I found a web sit with some interesting points. Likely many more however there is something that jumps out here.
http://www.cirtl.org/choice.htm
I offer a short definition from it.
“”The fact is that the term pro-life is almost unequivocal in its clarity and those who take this name must stand in the bright light of its definition for the entire world to see. The line that the pro-life label draws in the sand is clear and there is no place to hide.
On the other hand pro-choice is a great umbrella that almost anyone can get under. Pro-choice allows fellowship among many disparate groups. The true believers, who promote abortion through active support and performance or collusion; the cowards who think abortion is wrong but are unwilling impose restraint on the evil of others; those who could care less because theirs is a world with no right or wrong: all these can stand together under the broad pro-choice canopy. And the slickness of its wide surface, (that propaganda masterpiece!), protects all those in its shelter from the bright sun of scrutiny, from the rain of tears and the cold sleet of death that they have all in concert brought upon this world.””
What jumps out at me is
“The cowards who think abortion is wrong but are unwilling impose restraint on the evil of others; those who could care less because theirs is a world with no right or wrong”
I don’ think these people as cowards, perhaps too focused. But I do agree on the issue of restraints. Here, this is where it takes leadership. Its foolish to think about this pro life stuff at same time our sexual culture is wide open with stuff like Viagra, sex, and other drugs in theater.
Who really controls America’s Pharmaceuticals is another question that begs honest answers?
Sometimes that’s why I think Bin Laden, Bush Company and friends want McCain. America we won’t get more of the same, we get a harder dose and a larger more bitter pill till we all turn screwy. The perfect formula for infidels.