‘It’s time for some straight talk about John McCain’

I’m a little behind on this one, but with the Southern Republican Leadership Conference unofficially kicking off the 2008 presidential campaign over the weekend in Memphis, there’s been some renewed buzz about the GOP field and whether John McCain is the likely Republican nominee, as conventional wisdom suggests. Paul Krugman explained yesterday that it’s “time for some straight talk about John McCain.”

So here’s what you need to know about John McCain: He isn’t a straight talker. His flip-flopping on tax cuts, his call to send troops we don’t have to Iraq and his endorsement of the South Dakota anti-abortion legislation even while claiming that he would find a way around that legislation’s central provision show that he’s a politician as slippery and evasive as, well, George W. Bush.

He isn’t a moderate. Mr. McCain’s policy positions and Senate votes don’t just place him at the right end of America’s political spectrum; they place him in the right wing of the Republican Party.

And he isn’t a maverick, at least not when it counts. When the cameras are rolling, Mr. McCain can sometimes be seen striking a brave pose of opposition to the White House. But when it matters, when the Bush administration’s ability to do whatever it wants is at stake, Mr. McCain always toes the party line.

Not surprisingly, I agree with all of this. For that matter, the closer one looks at McCain’s record, the easier it is to believe he won’t be president, conventional wisdom notwithstanding.

The odd part of McCain is that he’s taken just enough positions against the conservative agenda to make him unappealing to GOP primary voters and just enough positions with Bush to make him unappealing to Dems.

For the right, the campaign ads almost write themselves. Republicans were united on Bush’s tax cuts, except McCain. Republicans were united on the “nuclear option” for Bush’s judicial nominees, except McCain. Republicans generally opposed campaign-finance reform, the patients bill of rights, limits on torture, and Ted Kennedy’s immigration bill. McCain broke party ranks on all of them. He even opposed a constitutional amendment on gay marriage.

In 2004, McCain said his Republican Party had “gone astray.” When there were rumors that John Kerry would consider him in the campaign to defeat Bush-Cheney, McCain told a national television audience, “Obviously, I would entertain it.” These are the kinds of things that will Republican activists will find it hard to overlook — and the kinds of things that a handy campaign consultant can turn into pretty hard-hitting ads before a presidential primary. Newsday’s Jim Pinkerton wrote today that GOP activists, “who actually pick the nominee, don’t seem to like him very much.” It shouldn’t be a mystery why.

On the other side of the aisle, McCain is an enthusiastic supporter of the war in Iraq and Bush’s handling of it; he supports privatization of Social Security; and he opposes abortion rights. In other words, on the issues Democrats and left-leaning independents care about most, McCain holds diametrically opposing views.

Pulling this together into a successful national strategy would be quite a needle-threading exercise. He’ll tell Republicans, “Yeah, I voted with the Dems on the issues you cared most about, but I’m electable so get in line.” He’ll tell the Dems, “Yeah, I’m at least as bad as Bush on the biggest issues of the day, but I broke ranks with the GOP base a few times so you can feel comfortable voting for me anyway.”

A lot can and will happen over the next year, but I don’t think he can pull it off.

McCain is an enthusiastic supporter of the war in Iraq and Bush’s handling of it; he supports privatization of Social Security; and he opposes abortion rights. In other words, on the issues Democrats and left-leaning independents care about most, McCain holds diametrically opposing views.

As soon as more people hear about this, McCain’s blue-state support will fade away. I’d even forgotten about the Social Security position.

  • Personally, I would just say that John McCain is no sort of moderate.

    Yes, he is against earmarks and pork-barrell spending. That, however, is not Moderate. Good Government, maybe, but not necessarily moderate.

    Yes, he is for campaign reform (or was, I don’t know if he would push it any further) and that upset single-issue conservative organizations like the NRA who like to spend freely during campaigns. But campaign reform is not moderate, just sensable.

    Yes, he is for increasing the troop strength in Iraq, even though Rumsfeld has seen to it that we don’t have those troops. More troops is what is required to achieve stability in that country. That’s not a moderate position, and it may not be possible. It is the only rationale one other than reducing our objectives.

    Privitizing Social Security is just stupid, but a very conservative position. I would not be surprised if he took a different track as President if elected.

    His opposition to abortion rights is no surprise to me.

    But then is position on torture should be no surprise to you.

    Either the majority of the Republican establishment is eventually (after the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire Primary) going to decide that McCain is their candidate and stop the swift-boating, or they will turn against him and rally around Brownback or someone else. If they do turn against him, it will prove that Republicans are opportunists and not conservatives.

  • The picture of John McCain snuggling up to Bush in a warm embrace during the 2004 election says about all you need to know about the “maverick” Republican senator.

  • I read today that Drudge hates McCain. At least some bigwigs like Gillespie are openly behind Allen, as is Rush.

    Much good speculation in a thread at digby’s blog as to the nature of McCain’s game. Run right as the man to continue the war on terror. But McCain probably didn’t think Bush would become so unpopular when he decided to ‘hug’ him.

    Read in US News that – surprise – Frist has some big donors with him. He may actually be a factor after all….it makes sense; the fundies don’t care about the insider types who believe he has no chance. Fundamentalists have no interest in McCain; why should they? They want their own President. They gave up Ashcroft in 2000, now it’s their turn.

  • One of Krugman’s most refreshing pieces. Absolutely dead on target. I really admire McCain’s military service but as a politician he’s everything Krugman, (and Mr. CB), says he is. No good.

    And for more straight talk courtesy of Russ Feingold to his fellow Dem’s: http://thinkprogress.org/2006/03/14/feingold-accuses/

    And Happy World Pi Day! (3.14)

  • The picture of John McCain snuggling up to Bush in a warm embrace during the 2004 election says about all you need to know about the “maverick” Republican senator.

    Comment by prm

    Yes prm, that is a disgusting photo and worth two words, Brokeback Wingnuts

  • Yes, yes, yes, and I too think McCain’s a scumbag. But the beltway media whores love the guy. Tweety and Timmy can barely keep their hardons hidden whenever he’s around. Don’t overlook their ability to sell this piece of shit to unsuspecting customers.

  • I agree with most of what you and Krugman say about McCain, but disagree strongly with your conclusions on his electability. The key, and unfortunate, point is that the MSM absolutely love McCain and the points you make will be difficult it not impossible to get through to the average (I.e., non political junkie) voter. And for this reason, enough of the wingnuts will get behind him (for example, his current dance with Haley Barbour) to probably give him the nomination. Of course, it is hard to predict two years before primary season, and God knows what can occur between now and then, but IMO, if the election was this year, McCain would likely get the nomination and would win in a cakewalk against any now visible Democratic challenger–including Hillary.

  • Marlowe makes some good points that I htink we need to elaborate on. CB brings up two separate issues:

    1. Can McCain win the GOP Primary?
    2. Can McCain win the general election?

    On the former, I agree that he’s got an uphill battle. But, fortunately for McCain, the GOP primary is far from an open contest. All he has to do is get anointed by the leadership the way Bush got anointed in 2000. And if the GOP is in as dire straits in 08 as it is now, their pragmatic instincts will kick in, and McCain will get the nod. Once that happens, the call will go out to the wingnut footsoldiers that McCain is not to be smeared, and he’ll sail through South Carolina unscathed.

    Remember, Bush was a pragmatic choice, too: given a popular president (Clinton) and a solid economy, the GOP nominated Bush because it was thought he could put a “compassionate” (read: moderate) face on a very conservative agenda.

    But it’s the latter question, about the generals, where Marlowe hits the nail on the head: The MSM will not tolerate attacks on McCain the way they allowed (and enabled) attacks on Kerry. That’s the tricky part. How do you re-define McCain in the public’s eye, when any legitimate attack on his policies will be treated by the media as a personal hit on his character?

  • In 2000, I re-registered as a Republican so I could vote for McCain in the California primary and have it actually count. I had no intention of voting for McCain in November, but I felt in a matchup between Gore & McCain the country would be reasonably well served regardless of who won. I had no illusion that McCain was anything but a staunch conservative. But I felt McCain was the kind of conservative who didn’t reflexively view non-conservatives as the Spawn of Satan.

    I stand by that reasoning even now. But I also think the John McCain of 2000 has ceased to exist. In 2008, I will view him with the same suspicion as the rest of the criminals who will vie for that nomination, and remain a frustrated Democrat.

  • Rege and Burro,

    I hate to disappoint you, but PI is neither 3.14 nor 3.14159….

    As the Bible clearly states (1 Kings 7:23 and 2 Chronicles 4:2)

    Then he made the molten sea; it was round,
    ten cubits from brim to brim [the diameter],
    and five cubits high,
    and a line of thirty cubits measured its circumference.

    30 divided by 10 is (Word a God now, ya heah?) 3.0 exactly.

  • “Mr. McCain always toes the party line.”

    should it be “tows the party line.” ??

    i have a thing about feet….

  • or they will turn against him and rally around Brownback or someone else.

    I’ve heard that Senator Allen (VA) is the heir apparent. Has that really changed?

  • Off topic…but since there’s not a relevant thread….

    I’m totally pissed at the wussy democratic Senate response to Feingold’s censure motion.

    And I have called my two Democratic Senators to inform them of my displeasure and asking for a congressional investigation.

    And I am writing Senator Feingold to give him support.

    This is a critical tipping point. Either the Dems stand up and demand a congressional investigation of the merits of censure, or they are a joke, appearing cautious, self serving and incapable of courage. Apparently we need to put our democratic Senators footsies to the fire, or they will play it safe and lose this opportunity to cast themselves as a party of initiative.

    Grrrrrrrr!

  • With respect to John McCain, the scales fell away from my eyes about the time others around me began to think of him as a heroic “third party” kind of guy, i.e., a true “centrist.” [Full disclosure: I think centrists are like unicorns, oft-discussed but never seen in nature.] Just as I was sadly concluding he was not what I would like him to be, he had become a household name. I preferred him to Bush in 2000 (hell would prefer him to Bush any day of the week), but I was well aware that his record did not square with the image.

    Since 2000, McCain has disappointed more often than not. I felt he was incredibly slow in reacting to the Abu Ghraib story. He had loads of personal credibility on the matter, and, IMO, should have been in the well of the Senate every day speaking out against mistreating prisoners – regardless of their designation. Not only is McCain not a centrist, I am no longer convinced he is as virtuous as the media paints him or my “centrist” pals wish him to be. But, they love McCain, and they like Lieberman. I think McCain would be tough in the general – if he gets that far. Same pals who love McCain think Hillary is too “shrill” to be President. Conventional wisdom dwells in the center. McCain’s (literal and figurative) embrace of Bush will not trouble voters in (self-described) “fiscal conservative / social liberal category,” of which there seem to be many here in Seattle. They did not even notice the former, and I predict they will be unconcerned by the latter as long as the story of John “Straight Talk” McCain remains fixed in their minds.

  • Well, rege, at some point, as we progress from
    3.14 to 3.15, we hit Pi exactly. In the wee hours, to
    be precise, so I’m sure no one noticed it. 🙂

    Pi is not just irrational, but transcendental, as
    well.

  • Personally, given what McCain has been through, I can’t see him getting bent out of shape over the so-called “torture” at Abu Ghraib… He’s BTDT, courtesy of Jane Fonda’s heroes, and I don’t think he’d consider even the horror of having to gaze upon that Englund (sp? I dunno…) chick’s doubtful goodies as torture.

    I see McCain as a Republican Clinton… Which way is the wind blowing, and what to the polls say, and if nobody cares about something at the present time, well, that just isn’t important… IMHO, the candidate needs to look to the far future, not his next 15 minutes.

    And what’s so bad about privatizing social security? So many of y’all don’t trust the government, so why do you want them managing your money? Wouldn’t you like some say in it? You pay into it your whole life, and then when you hit 65, the tap gets turned on… Then when you die at 65 and a half, under the present system, you can’t pass anything on… All that $$ you paid in, gone.

    Oh, wait a minute. How many of you pay into social security? Oops… Wrong crowd…

  • Wow, this is amazing.

    Everybody in the Blog hates John McCain.

    Except me. I don’t hate him, disrespect him or doubt his sincerity.

    I just don’t think of him as a moderate or centrist.

    If America decided in 2008 it wanted divided Government, we would do a lot worse then having McCain as President and the Democrats controlling Congress.

    Not my dream scenario, mind, but a lot more workable then now.

    As for McCain, his greatest sin, as far as I know, was holding up the airline industry for hundreds of thousands of dollars for campaign contributions by threatening them with a law protecting passenger rights. He held lots of committee hearings, but dropped the subject after the money flowed in.

    On the other hand, his indian affairs committee hearings helped bring Abramoff’s crimes to light. So he’s not all bad.

  • I hate to disappoint you, but PI is neither 3.14 nor 3.14159….

    30 divided by 10 is (Word a God now, ya heah?) 3.0 exactly.

    Comment by Ed Stephan

    That’s no fun. I figured with 3.14159…. we could just party without end. Lemon Meringue forever.

  • Oh, wait a minute. How many of you pay into social security? Oops… Wrong crowd…

    Comment by Bogieville

    Sorry to be dense, but what’s that supposed to mean?

  • If America decided in 2008 it wanted divided Government, we would do a lot worse then having McCain as President and the Democrats controlling Congress.

    Not much worse. According to this link from Americablog, http://voteview.com/sen109.htm, only Kyl and Sununu are more conservative than McCain.

    I’m not sure America could do worse than McCain, well, unless Satan himself is running.

    He’s as diametrically opposed to all I stand for as one can possibly be. He’s worse than Bush because he’s evil AND smart.

  • Rush Limbaugh told his brain dead audience that McCain is a “liberal” and they believe what the junkie tells them.
    Of course, he could go on the radio and say the exact opposite, and they will believe that.

  • There was a lot of talk before and after the 2004 elections about the electability, or un-electability, of Senators. Hopefully Republicans won’t be able to avoid this curse any better than Democrats.

  • America has been ill served since World War II by Presidents with Naval careers in their backgrounds. Kennedy, of PT-109 fame, left us the Viet Nam War after sponsering a coup d’etat that murdered the Diem leadership, leaving the Viet Nam War purely America’s political tar baby. Johnson had a thankfully brief ride as a Naval Aviator (observer status only) in the Southwest Pacific. MacArthur pinned a medal on his chest and sent him back to the Congress. Johnson’s Viet Nam War management revealed an obsession for detail unmatched since Hitler marched ghost armies from the Bunker against the Red Army Steam Roller. The Wretched Nixon ran a hamburger stand on some South Pacific Island for the Navy. He extracted the 500,000 Soldiers that the Democrat LEFT had marooned on the Asiatic Shore, but later blotted his copy-book when the Permanent Left Establishment decided it was time to discard him. Then Gerald Ford presided over the return of Congressional Government and the disgraceful exit of the Embassy Staff from the roof top in Viet Nam. Next we encounter America’s worst Ex-President EVER! Jimmie Carter installed the MISERY INDEX in the governance of these United States, after he learned Nucular Engineering at the Navy’s expense. George H. W. Bush was a hot-shot Naval Aviator, who believed the promises of the Democrat Congressional Leadership. They lied to him; he did not punish them for their arrant duplicity, then he agreed with the liars to raise taxes, and he was turfed out after only four years. Served him right. He also listened to the LEFT Tendency and did not finish the job in Iraq, causing his son to have to take up that burden. And if President George W. Bush does not finish the IRAQ job, then President Hillary Clinton will be forced to ship another Army over there, and give it another try. All told, the Navy has provided America with Presidents whose ineptitude in office is equaled only by the veneration lavished on them by the vulgar Marxist-Leninists who control the Democrat Party. What a bunch of stooges! So I suggest that the Republican Party bypass Senator McCain, and thank him for any services he may have rendered these United States.

  • That settles it. I knew when Ronald Reagan played “Casey Abbott” in “Hellcats of the Navy” that was the reason for his failed presidency.

  • “George H. W. Bush was a hot-shot Naval Aviator, who believed the promises of the Democrat Congressional Leadership.” – Claude

    What promises were those? That they would create laws like Democrats?

    “They lied to him; he did not punish them for their arrant duplicity, then he agreed with the liars to raise taxes, and he was turfed out after only four years.” – Claude

    It was Bush who promised the American people that he could withstand any force the Democratic controlled Congress brought to bear on him and not allow them to raise taxes. I did not believe him in 1988, which is why I voted for him. The day he signed the tax increase, he said he would take the heat for it, the next day he said Congress twisted his arm and it wasn’t his fault. Which is why I did not vote for him in 1992.

    “Served him right. He also listened to the LEFT Tendency and did not finish the job in Iraq, causing his son to have to take up that burden.” – Claude

    Also wrong. Bush listened to Colin Powell, his Chief of Staff, and other advisors of his administration. And he still defends not going in to Bagdad in 1990/91. I, evil lefty that I am, thought he was wrong then. So your premise is again wrong.

  • Bald assertions of error contradict the evidence on the ground and in the Public Record. If your presumptions fit only in the alternate vulgar Marxist-Leninist Universe that you have chosen to inhabit, then the purely Leninist-Stalinist concept of an Objective Truth, that is derived from the Marxist-Leninist Theory applied to a highly selective set of obscure facts, must override the evidence on the ground and the Public Record. The LEFT Tendency, enamoured with the alternate Marxist-Leninist Universe, which they found so appealing during their indoctrination in the spoiled nests of New Left Dreamers clogging the Humanities Departments of the Mass Universities, attempt to seize a power they are incompetent to administer over a people they are unfit to govern. The superstitious politics of incantation, dismissing by magic spells and incantations inconvenient manifestations of danger and those opportunities disguised as crises, because they do not fit the theory, must fail or America will fail and George Washington’s magnificent creation will be no more, expunged from history.

  • What evidence?

    It was Colin Powell that told George HW Bush to stop the invasion.

    How is that the fault of the left? I’m not presuming anything. I’m stating objective and documented facts.

  • You know Burro, I think it was his high school civics essay which he just copies and pastes whenever someone points out that he is wrong.

  • “I’ve heard that Senator Allen (VA) is the heir apparent. Has that really changed?” – Edo

    I saw James Webb on Hardball (yes, please forgive me) yesterday and he was quite impressive, especially as Chris was actually trying to trip him up (rather then feeding a repub softball questions). I think there is a good chance Allen won’t make it past 2006 😉

  • Selective citing of a datum is not evidence. It is an announcement of thralldom within the Notional Alternate Universe required by a vulgar Marxist-Leninism Epistemology. Evidence is what happened and an understanding of the historical context that enveloped the events, with particular attention to the belief systems of the decision makers and the prevailing correlation of forces. Events are events, even when they do not fit the Marxist-Leninist Theories. Assembling a jig-saw puzzle by chewing on the pieces to make them fit is the vulgar Marxist-Leninist belief system analog. The emotion of free-floating hatred is a pathetic support for the erroneous analyses submitted by the LEFT Tendency.

  • Claude, I’m still right. Colin Powell was the man who told George Bush to stop on the road to Baghdad. I wasn’t there, nor were there any communists in the room. It was all the Bush I administration.

  • Comments are closed.