GOP Nominee
Former Candidates
Well, well, well.
It looks like your old pal DaveG has once again been vindicated.
A week ago, I wrote this about Johnny Mac and Iraq:
A part of me wonders what would happen if McCain would do a full one-eighty on the war. He could hold a press conference and with righteous indignation attack the incompetence of the Bush Administration concerning the war and the refusal of a free Iraq to put aside ancient squabbles to come together in peace. He could also attack Iran and the other nations of the region for rooting for the failure of the Iraq project, leading to a myriad of deaths both American and Iraqi. Finally, he could call on the rest of the world to band together to help prevent a humanitarian crisis as the U.S. exits Mesopotamia over the course of his first year in office.
As usual, within mere days, my prediction turns out to be eerily prescient.
The following are conditions I intend to achieve. And toward that end, I will focus all the powers of the office; every skill and strength I possess; and seize every opportunity to work with members of Congress who put the national interest ahead of partisanship, and any country in the world that shares our hopes for a more peaceful and prosperous world.
By January 2013, America has welcomed home most of the servicemen and women who have sacrificed terribly so that America might be secure in her freedom. The Iraq War has been won. Iraq is a functioning democracy, although still suffering from the lingering effects of decades of tyranny and centuries of sectarian tension. Violence still occurs, but it is spasmodic and much reduced. Civil war has been prevented; militias disbanded; the Iraqi Security Force is professional and competent; al Qaeda in Iraq has been defeated; and the Government of Iraq is capable of imposing its authority in every province of Iraq and defending the integrity of its borders. The United States maintains a military presence there, but a much smaller one, and it does not play a direct combat role.
This was a brilliant move by John McCain. That’s because McCain has effectively grabbed the center on this issue, leaving the Right with nowhere to go and leaving Barack Obama with only the Left.
Certain elements of the Republican base will pout, to be sure. But I have little concern for the base, and even less concern for online activists, all of whom lack the numbers to be a meaningful force in politics given the mad dash from the GOP tent that has taken place over the past few years. There are fewer self-identified Republicans today than there have been in a generation. And Americans now prefer Democrats on every single issue area. In order to rebuild the party, and, more importantly in the short term, to win this election, John McCain has to invite large numbers of new voters into the GOP tent. Considering that Barack Obama and his leftist hordes are in the process of wrenching the Democratic Party away from the Clinton/Lieberman centrists that ran the party just eight years ago, it’s pretty clear just which voters are in the market for a new party. John McCain’s job is to convince the DLC Democrats and Independents to vote for him this year and to start voting Republican long-term. In order to do so, McCain must grab the sensible center that Gore/Lieberman occupied in 2000.
On the subject of Iraq, the most recent Q-Poll tells us where the center can be found. When asked what should be done about the American military presence in Iraq, 22 percent of Americans take the Obama position of withdrawing as soon as possible. Meanwhile, 28 percent take the GOP base position of staying as long as necessary to accomplish the original objectives laid out by President Bush. Fully 48 percent of Americans think that the U.S. should set a timetable for a presumably gradual withdrawal. This is the center position. And this is the position that John McCain has now taken.
By grabbing the center on Iraq, John McCain exposes Barack Obama as the candidate of the McGovernite Left, who want the troops out of Iraq now because, to these folks, even mass genocide is less immoral than the use of the American military. With this gesture, McCain becomes Nixon to Obama’s McGovern. Vietnam wasn’t Nixon’s war, but Nixon took ownership of the war and promised Americans that he would end it in a sensible way. Even though the war was still ongoing after his first term in office, 49 states voted to send Nixon back to the White House because they trusted his pragmatic, non-ideological judgment on the war rather than McGovern’s clear distaste for a strong America and for American military prowess.
I am becoming more and more excited about John McCain every day. Many on the Right simply want McCain to Bob Dole himself into irrelevance so that he can lose this election, allowing the Old Right to nominate the candidate it really wants in 2012 and lose again. But McCain’s not going to do that, is he? Instead, he’s going to build a vibrant new party, a center-right party that fuses the remaining elements of the present GOP with the abandoned American center. We’re seeing McCain pursue this strategy more and more with each passing day. McCain’s proposal for a $5,000 refundable tax credit to allow individuals and families to buy health insurance is part of this strategy. So is his focus on the environment and green conservatism. And so is his outreach to the Log Cabin Republicans. In so doing, John McCain is saying to the centrists who voted for Gore/Lieberman in 2000 and who supported a Clinton restoration this year that while Barack Obama may not speak for the broad American center, John McCain does. In so doing, McCain is constructing a brave new party that will make him President-Elect and that will usher in a glorious Red Dawn in the years to come.
May 15th, 2008 at 10:29 pm
DaveG, John McCain did not do a 180 on the war. I said your advice was absurd, and I also defended McCain’s predictive intentions today.
May 15th, 2008 at 10:33 pm
No, he didn’t do a 180.
But he did find a way to make his position consistent with that of the majority of Americans.
What McCain did was far preferable to what I proposed. But the point is that both McCain and I realized that a change was needed.
May 15th, 2008 at 10:45 pm
I think he did do a 180 aka flip-flop and the idea that this makes McCain Nixon is laughable.
But the political move of the day goes to Obama (two in a row after the Edwards endorsement). The best thing a presidential candidate can have happen is for the sitting president to attack him because it elevates the candidate, which happened today. The second best thing for that candidate is for his opponent to defend the unpopular sitting president, which also happened today. And it certainly does not hurt a fractured party for the entire party leadership to come out blasting the sitting president. Make no mistake, this was a fight Obama wanted. All dems want Bush to be an issue in the campaign and now he is.
May 15th, 2008 at 10:54 pm
PabloZed,
I actually don’t think it was anything like a flip-flop. He’s simply predicting what will happen after a successful McCain administration; but he allowed himself to be seen as A.) Supporting a timeline, and B.) Implicitly accepting the notion that withdrawal is paramount.
May 15th, 2008 at 10:56 pm
PabloZed,
Perhpas Obama can tell himself that as he goes to bed next week having suffered another 30+ defeat at the hands of someone who has no shot to win and was dismissed months ago.
As for today, this was a brilliant move of aikido by Bush. It was akin to how he pwned Kerry in 2004 on Iraq. He got Kerry to admit he would have gone to war in Iraq just as Bush had and exposed him as a defeatist and a flip flopper.
By putting out Obama’s policy of meeting with Ahmadinejad and Khameini in Iran, and Obama responding, the next step is for McCain to ask Obama if he still stands by his stated policy of meeting them, along with others like Chavez, Castro, Assad, Kim without preconditions in his first year.
Obama’s in trouble. If he says yes, he validates the criticism and every one will know he’s willing to meet with terrorist leaders and dictators.
If he says no, he’s a flip flopper and in less than a year has gone back on one his central foreign policies. Either way, he’s in trouble.
Just an update, also, the CQ politics VP tournament finished its next round. Huckabee beat Sanford and Pawlenty beat Hutchison and they’ll face off in the final four. In the other bracket, Portman edged out Crist and Palin beat Jindal and they’ll be the other half of the final four.
I say the final ends up being Palin vs Huckabee.
May 15th, 2008 at 11:01 pm
“Just an update, also, the CQ politics VP tournament finished its next round. Huckabee beat Sanford and Pawlenty beat Hutchison and they’ll face off in the final four. In the other bracket, Portman edged out Crist and Palin beat Jindal and they’ll be the other half of the final four.
I say the final ends up being Palin vs Huckabee.”
That’s what I’m expecting too. Something bizarre is going on with folks supporting Huckabee, but I find it hard to imagine that Pawlenty will beat him, after Sanford just lost by 17 points. Not unless people from the conservative wing of the party actually start voting.
May 15th, 2008 at 11:06 pm
Any day that someone writes “a brilliant move by Bush” is a bad day for the GOP. Bush’s disapproval is at 71% which is higher than Nixon’s during watergate. Wrong track is in mid 80’s. It would have taken millions in advertising to tie McCain to Bush and Bush did it for free.
May 15th, 2008 at 11:28 pm
DaveG, both you and the extreme right of the Republican party have something in common. You greatly underestimate how conservative McCain is. I hate to break it to you, but your dream of John McCain making the Republican party the squishy, pre-Reagan, moderate party that you dream about is not going to come true. My prediction is John McCain will win. He will be more conservative than Bush. He will veto spending bills that Bush would not have. He will appoint conservative judges. Then whether he serves one term or two, someone equally conservative will follow him as our nominee. I think it’s also insulting to say that McCain has a lot in common with the Clintons and with the Gore/Lieberman ticket. McCain, unlike DaveG, does not believe in pandering to win elections. Also, you didn’t have to say that you have little concern for the base. You’ve made that very clear already.
May 15th, 2008 at 11:31 pm
…your dream of John McCain making the Republican party the squishy, pre-Reagan, moderate party that you dream about…
My party is post-Reagan, not pre-Reagan.
David Cameron, not Nelson Rockefeller.
May 15th, 2008 at 11:39 pm
Well if you’re just going to be the Republican version of Dick Morris or Bill Clinton, count me out. They were “New Democrats” for triangulation. Now you want the Republicans to do the same. I am not a “new” or “neo-” anything. I am a Republican.
May 15th, 2008 at 11:47 pm
Pablo Zed,
Have you checked the disapproval rating of the Democratic Congress? It’s in the mid 80s, way higher than Bush.
Matthew Miller,
As for folks supoprting Huckabeee beating Sanford close to 60-40 may not mean much. We don’t know how many people voted. The raw vote could be something like Huck 90, Sanford 60 or some small sample like that. Also, online polls are highly irrelevant to the views of the wider elctorate.
If you looked at similar polls last year on various sites, John McCain was getting less than 3% for the GOP nomination and Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson were cleaning house. We all know what happened.
For me the bigger news is that Palin, who has a much lower profile is doing so well. I think she’ll beat Portman as he barely squeaked past Crist.
Not that Congressional Quarterly’s website means anything, but if she were to win it would be a nice boost for her.
I don’t know who McCain will pick, but I don’t think the generic bland white guy in the Pawlenty/Romney/Portman mold is going to help this year. I don’t think it would necessarily hurt, although Romney’s mormonism could be an issue in the South(All those white folks who haven’t taken a shine to Obama in all these states lately, they don’t exactly like mormons all that much, either).
I think McCain needs a pick that will help him, that will make waves, that will cause people to get excited or take notice, be well received in the media, etc…
I also don’t get all this love for Pawlenty. He won reelection by 1% with 46.7% in a 4 way race. It’s not like he was some overwhelmingly popular guy. And he’d be counted on not only to deliver a state that hasn’t gone GOP since 1972 but other states nearby that haven’t gone GOP since 1988? That’s a tall order.
May 15th, 2008 at 11:58 pm
And he’d be counted on not only to deliver a state that hasn’t gone GOP since 1972 but other states nearby that haven’t gone GOP since 1988? That’s a tall order.
Not quite. That would be McCain’s job. However, he is there to help, though how much, I don’t know.
May 16th, 2008 at 12:00 am
Why are we celebrating a candidate “doing a 180″? Seems like blinkered stupidity to me…
May 16th, 2008 at 12:02 am
And people who point out that Congress has lower approval ratings than Bush miss the point. Congressional gridlock is still blamed on the GOP, not the Dems. That’s why the ovters are delivering more Dems to congress (witness MS-01 and the other two recent elections). Once there is a Dem president that will change and the cycle will resume…
May 16th, 2008 at 12:07 am
Why do people always look to the “next best thing” rather than focus on who is the best of those who have proven themselves?
Politics is all about setting lofty expectations (in the first few years) and then faiing to meet them (e.g. Bush 43 & 41, Spitzer, etc) or meet them (e.g. Reagan).
For some reason, people are obsessed with those who are yet to prove themselves. Crist, Jindal, Palin, Corker - all these people are being given the job on potential, not proven experience. This would be stupid even if the GOP weren’t going up against Obama
May 16th, 2008 at 12:09 am
McCain isn’t doing a 180 at all. He never said he’d keep all troops there indefinitely. He said he’d keep them there until victory was achieved, He said yesterday he thinks he can win by the end of his 1st term. When that happens, troops can be withdrawn. If it doesn’t, they wouldn’t be.
It’s not that difficult to understand.
How is congressional gridlock being blamed on the GOP when the dems contro both houses? I do think McCain and the GOP need to do a better job of holding the dems to account. What’s happened to gas prices since the dems took the congress? to unemployment? to gdp? In most areas, things have detrioriated under their leadership. Hopefully, the GOP can point this out. I’m not confident they will.
It would be interesting if someone did a poll of Obama vs Bush in a 2008 election and then compared those results to Obama vs McCain.
In any event, Obama is going to lose by 30+ this week in KY. I thought Hillary could repeat her 40+ win of WV, but KY has more than double the black population and Edwards is on the ballot so she’ll win by closer to 30 than 40. She’ll lead in the popular vote and take this to the convention.
If McCain plays his cards right, the dems will so fractured by Labor Day, he should win fairly easily.
May 16th, 2008 at 12:12 am
“How is congressional gridlock being blamed on the GOP when the dems contro both houses?”
Jim you miss the point. They don’t control both houses when they are unable to overcome a Bush veto. That will change if Obama wins the White House, with Dems being unable to blame anyone but themselves…
May 16th, 2008 at 12:17 am
CQ update, it does look like a Palin vs Huckabee final.
Pretty crazy to give a 2 year Alaska governor a finals spot, but then I looked at the draw. She’s had to beat Rick Perry (oh yes, the country is in the mood for another GOP governor from Texas), Sam Brownback (who stole the hearts of conservatives from Iowa to Kansas), Bobby Jindal (one of the only candidates with less experience than her), and then went up against Portman. Hardly a difficult path!
Contrast that with Huckabee, who’s had to defeat Lindsay Graham, Condi Rice, Mark Sanford, and Pawlenty… The seeding wasn’t very good was it?
May 16th, 2008 at 12:22 am
well, we’ll see. It’s certainly not all roses for the GOP.
But…looking at the past they’re in ok shape. Ford was down by 30 and closed to lose by 2, a 28 pt swing. Reagan was down 10 in the spring of 1984 and won by 20, a 30 pt swing. Bush was down by close to 20 and won by close to 10, 25 pt swing or so. Bush was even behind Kerry in the spring and summer of 2004 and won.
The GOP tends to close well. Obama, as we’ve seen, closes poorly. In fact, he’s pretty much the nominee by sheer fate and luck. If, after Super Tuesday, instead of having all caucus states and states with avg black turnout of over 40% vote, we had OH, PA and WV, Hillary would be the nominee. Obama pretty much won because of the calendar and which states happened to fall on which dates.
Even Dole was behind Clinton by 20+ in 1996 and ended losing by 8 or so, a more than 10 pt swing.
He had basically no money between the time he won the nomination and the convention. McCain has upwards of $30 million, and is tied or within the MOE in most polls.
If he even just gets the Dole 10 pt swing, and that was against an incumbent dem pres in peacetime and a good economy with an awful candidate, he wins.
If he can pull the Bush/Ford 20+ swing, he wins easily.
That said, with the white vote shrinking it is going to be tougher and tougher for the GOP to win the WH. We better hope McCain does because if he doesn’t, it could be a while.
May 16th, 2008 at 12:33 am
Abandon major components of the party coalition at your own risk Dave. Nixon sucked up former southern Democrats, leading to GOP Presidencies for 28 of the next 34 years.
May 16th, 2008 at 1:07 am
DaveG, a lot of comments are giving you a hard time, but I’m all with you on this being a brilliant move by McCain. A center-right campaign is the only way he’ll win. The thing to remember is that the conservative coalition is not composed of purely race42008-posting Republicans, like #10. Yes; he is the GOP’s triangulating Bill Clinton. You’re in or out. Which is it?
May 16th, 2008 at 1:14 am
An interesting piece on O’Reilly tonight about dem women who are against Obama. There was also a pieceon CNN about dem women who are against him a few days ago.
A decent amount said they would not vote or would vote for McCain. I don’t think anyone asked how they would feel if McCain had a woman as his VP after the way the dems kicked theirs to the curb.
But I’ve seen a # of pro-Hillary blogs and many of the posters seemed receptive to McCain having a woman VP and that that would make it much more likely they’d vote for him. They also despise Obama. The names they threw out were Christie Whitman and Condi Rice.
I know it’s somewhat anecdotal and more polling should be done, but there was already that poll that showed McCain-Rice winning NY over Obama. I still think the arguments for a woman VP, especially electorally and in light of the vulnerability Obama is creating for himself on this(and his sweetie comment didn’t help).
May 16th, 2008 at 1:19 am
Is John McCain talking about time tables now? Are you listening sampo?
May 16th, 2008 at 6:06 am
Those two women o’Reilly dug up looked like they were from a homeless shelter looking for a sandwhich. I understand why women are upset seeing their candidate lose, but its just emotion and posturing that compels them to threaten with their votes.
May 16th, 2008 at 6:28 am
Wow, I think McCain has really stepped in it. The media has already declared that McCain has flip-flopped on a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq and now comes evidence that McCain is on record in favor of negotiating with Hamas.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/15/AR2008051503306.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
There is even video of the interview. This puts McCain in a very bad light because its rank hypocrisy. If he did not have a reserve of goodwill with the press this would destroy his campaign.
May 16th, 2008 at 7:12 am
Not good for old J/Mac.
This election will be at most 55 v 45 to the winner. More likley 52 v 48.
Ant talk of either of them winning by more than 10, especially J/Mac, is crazy talk.
May 16th, 2008 at 7:32 am
Ronald Reagan and the Bushes did not have to “triangulate” to win. You guys just want McCain to be moderate because your own conservative credentials are kind of spotty themself.
May 16th, 2008 at 7:33 am
If the Republicans get too moderate, I will skip over the Presidential race. There is one Republican I would not have voted for in the general election. I always said I would be okay with the other four contenders, and one of the four got it. There are some candidates who are conservative enough; others are not; McCain is right in the middle.
May 16th, 2008 at 7:36 am
If the Republicans start acting like triangulating Bill Clinton, I am out for sure.
May 16th, 2008 at 8:07 am
Clarence,
Didn’t you read his post? “But I have little concern for the base, and even less concern for online activists…”. He doesn’t much care if you leave; he’s banking everything on the elusive center. There’s no thought of pursuing a strategy that might rope in the center AND the base. The base simply doesn’t matter. The Republican party is being hijacked at all levels by moderates, and now they’re prepared to add a liberal like Lieberman to our already moderate nominee, in order to increase the moderation. And the delusional right is suggesting folks like Romney, Ensign, Thune, etc. I’m telling you folks, either we suggest a direction and VP that McCain might actually consider, or we end up with an unrecognizably liberal party. In this election, if it’s a choice between base conservatism and moderation/liberalism, moderation/liberalism will triumph, and evicerate our party. If it’s a choice between strategic conservatism and moderation/liberalism we can prevail.
May 16th, 2008 at 8:21 am
Matthew, they are greatly underestimating McCain’s moderation. McCain will not pick Lieberman. They are HOPING McCain will be really moderate because their own conservative credentials are lacking. While McCain might not be as conservative as you or I would like, he won’t be as moderate as they’d like either. He basically calls each issue as he sees them. He most certainly will NOT be like Bill Clinton and “triangulate” to win. McCain wouldn’t even think of having a Dick Morris type working for him. He is a man of principle. People like the one who wrote this post give McCain a bad name. I sometimes wonder if DaveG is a secret Democrat who just posts on here to try to turn conservatives against their own party. I’m just kidding about that, but you get my point I’m sure. Furthermore, the war is not a right-left issue anyway. Conservatives like Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul strongly oppose, and liberals like Lieberman support it.
May 16th, 2008 at 9:46 am
I thought McCain was a man of principle until the last few weeks. I gave him a pass for flip-flopping on the tax cuts, but to flip-flop on Iraq shows a character defect. And now to know he previously called for negotiations with Hamas suggests he is really just another say anything politician.
May 16th, 2008 at 10:14 am
Well Pablo, it sounds like DaveG is hoping he flip-flops even more.
May 16th, 2008 at 10:17 am
It’s also interesting how people like this “have little concern for the base” but want to please those poor, neglected moderates. They like to glorify people who don’t believe in anything and belittle those who do, saying, “They have nowhere to go anyway.” They want to do to us what Clinton did to liberals in the 90s.
May 16th, 2008 at 10:36 am
Clarence,
I’d be fine if John McCain did to conservatives what Clinton did to liberals; give them 90% of what they want, while making occasional feints to the center. DaveG is suggesting something more extreme, probably because McCain couldn’t pull off successful triangulation. Triangulation is largely rhetorical and fairly complicated. John McCain isn’t skilled enough to manage it. DaveG wants him to actually govern from the center.
May 16th, 2008 at 10:47 am
I think PabloZed is trying to impersonate Matthew Yglesias.
Folks, trying to appeal to the center makes sense, because you cannot win the presidency without it. Even Dubya, with all his appeals to the arch-conservative base, has just as frequently governed from the center after failing to change people’s minds. This gave us Medicaid Part D and No Child Left Behind. Right now were paying massive subsidies and applying administrative fiat to convert foods to fuels. But none of this gets any play because it is simply assumed that Bush is the root cause of any bad news anywhere in the known universe. The negative bias is overwhelming and unmistakable.
Personally, I don’t think McCain is trying to pander to the center or triangulating, either. I believe that he is expressing what he thinks is wrong with how the federal government functions and proposing various fixes. I can’t say I agree with all of them. And I wonder how many of his assumptions that the competing interests in Washington will come together in a spirit of harmony for the good of all can withstand reality.
May 16th, 2008 at 10:55 am
I can barely impersonate myself much less anyone else.
I think McCain is being pushed, pulled and torn in several competing directions. He still needs to consolidate conservatives and try to energize them so he talks tough on the war and stresses tax cuts. But he needs independents and so he comes out for a timetable in Iraq and for cap and trade. And he needs to appeal to women and the working class so he is proposing help with healthcare and mortgage assistance. That is quite a juggle because appealing too much to one group upsets another. All the while he needs to avoid falling into the Bush trap.
May 16th, 2008 at 11:02 am
I have a novel idea. How about just running on what you believe in (whether centrist or conservative) and never mind all this endless positioning?
May 16th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
Oh yes, McCain moving the party to the left is deffinately something to throw a parade about.
Lets see, under McCain, we are giving up immigration, the hard line on judges, any federal action on marriage, campaign finance reform, etc.
Is that really something to be happy about? What next, abortion? low taxes?
How far to the left do you want us to go?
May 16th, 2008 at 4:30 pm
Re: Clarence Claus’ slight:
Hah, of course I have spotty conservative credentials. I’m a moderate libertarian that votes against left-wing economic policy. Funny thing is, my fellow moderates and I are the ones that McCain cares about, not yourself.
If the GOP picked anyone other than McCain, they’d be left for dead in the fall. When he picks Lieberman to run with, have fun voting for Bob Barr.
May 16th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
“When he picks Lieberman to run with, have fun voting for Bob Barr.”
If McCain pick Lieberman, many will. First of all, the GOP convention would go balistic. And if McCain picks Joe, he deserves to lose.
May 17th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
This on line polling things is sooooooooooo stupid. Just a few weeks ago, Huckabee finished dead last of 36 candidates in another poll. And in our own poll, he was below the middle of the pack.