The Candidates
Most foreign observers of American politics often fail to grasp the uniqueness of American politics in general and American conservatism in particular. Gerard Baker of the Times of London is an exception to this truism. In this column, Baker correctly postulates that McCain and Palin are offering a new type of conservatism, predicated in many ways on an old-school conservatism that first came to prominence in 1964.
And while it is still a conservatism that reveres and defends traditional Western mores, it does not lie awake at night worried that someone, somewhere is practicing buggery or, worse yet, having fun. Instead it is the conservatism to which many of us first became attracted — a “leave me alone” libertarian-lite conservatism rooted, deeply, in the ethos of the American West and limited, constitutional government.
Democrats think that Mr McCain, with the social conservative Mrs Palin, will launch an old-fashioned culture war at them, using her appealing manner to drive a populist assault on the familiar Republican issues of God, guns and gays.
Perhaps this Manichean interpretation will prove true. But I suspect that it misses the real appeal of the Republican team. The opportunity for McCain-Palin is not reaction, but reform - a reform rooted in a distant conservatism that could be due for a comeback
Hailing from Arizona and Alaska, the Republican ticket has a chance to rekindle a western conservatism different from the old Yankee paternalist sort or the Bible Belt version. They like their guns out there (some still kill their own food) and they are pro-life and deeply pro-America, of course. But at a time of grave challenges, the themes of economic freedom and opportunity, the resistance to the idea that government holds all the answers, could resonate with voters.
This is an election, as the Democrats have realised all along, about an America on the cusp of change. With the moose-hunting, establishment-taunting Mrs Palin at his side, Mr McCain might represent a bigger change than the one that his opponents are offering.
I encourage you to read the whole piece.
September 6th, 2008 at 8:17 am
From another Brit who gets it…
It seems the UK media is starting to realise it’s not going to be the Democrat landslide that they though it might be. What is amzing is the amount of attention Sarah Palin has got over here- surprise a first, then the criticism, then the (positive) response to her speech. She has been on the front pages of the serious papers most of the last week. Incredible for a VP candidate.
“while it is still a conservatism that reveres and defends traditional Western mores, it does not lie awake at night worried that someone, somewhere is practicing buggery or, worse yet, having fun. Instead it is the conservatism to which many of us first became attracted — a “leave me alone” libertarian-lite conservatism rooted, deeply, in the ethos of the American West and limited, constitutional government”
I hope so. The domestic stuff may not affect me, but a strong, coherent but tolerant conservatism has to be good for us all. I’m very much looking forward to visiting DC next week to see the campaign myself.
September 6th, 2008 at 8:26 am
This ‘change’ is consistent with the Romney speech. It is a change from liberalism to conservatism. We have come wayyyyyyyyy too far to the left, and need a ‘change’ back to where we came from. This came home to me more forcefully in a thread recently wherein someone posed the question, “What do you think is the appropriate roles of the federal government”? It really brought home the fact that it really should have a very limited appropriate roll in the whole scheme of things. Self defense, infrastructure, then you start to stutter…..as to whether it really belongs at the federal level. Maybe an assurance that people are saving for the future, but not forcing things like Social Security down peoples throats when it has such a dismal payback.
In any event take me back 50 years!
September 6th, 2008 at 8:35 am
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
This shows 49-46.
September 6th, 2008 at 8:47 am
Barack Obama: Magni cum Saudi?
What was a Saudi agent doing paying for Obama’s Harvard education? Hmmmmmmm…….from Investor’s Business Daily.
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=305508174916939
September 6th, 2008 at 8:47 am
Who cares about this poll. Obama didn’t get his bounce til the Monday after, I’m expecting the same thing from McCain. The day before our Convention, it’s fair to say Obama had a ‘decent’ size win in the polls on Wednesday before Palin’s speech with all the negative media attention. That will be dropped tomorrow.
September 6th, 2008 at 9:34 am
Rasmussen is a rolling poll, so it’s hard to assess what the polls were for each of the 3 nights…In fact, last night could have been great…it could have also been bad….we will know more tomorrow and we will know even more on Monday.
September 6th, 2008 at 9:43 am
Personally, I think, if McCain does not receive an adequate bounce from the Rasmussen poll, one really has to question the validity of the poll.
September 6th, 2008 at 9:44 am
Hahha Jersey, and many say it’s BIASED towards the GOP. Rasmussen on O’Reilly, and maybe the other guy was the Gallup guy, I forget, said don’t expect to see a bounce til Monday-Wednesday of next week.
September 6th, 2008 at 9:45 am
Now I do not want to start playing the games of the liberal blogs and speculate rumors as facts but does anyone know anything about the Berg lawsuit against Obama regarding citizenship and does anyone know of the validity of the claim?
September 6th, 2008 at 9:47 am
From Rasmussen’s poll:
“As McCain has begun to chip away as Obama’s convention bounce, most of his gains have come among women voters. Obama still leads 51% to 44% among women, but that seven-point edge is just half the fourteen point lead he enjoyed last Tuesday. McCain leads by three among men, little changed in recent days.”
It looks like Sarah is closing the gender gap!
September 6th, 2008 at 9:48 am
MV, I question the validity of all polls…they really don’t do much for me. I think they unfortunately have the ability to sway undecided voters to the winning side. BUT that’s just MY OPINION.
September 6th, 2008 at 9:50 am
When “leaners” aren’t forced to pick sides, Obama’s lead is down to 1, and as others have noted, Obama’s bounce didn’t show up until last Monday, which will also be the first date when all responses are post-convention.
September 6th, 2008 at 10:29 am
I think they TIED in Ras last night, maybe a very small Mac win with leaners. Probably, Mac won in the non-leaners by a couple of points. He held steady with non-leaners and lost a point with leaners because a good night for him rolled off.
I think a very good night for Barry comes off in tomorrow’s report, so if tonight’s polling is similar to last two nights, Mac should get a two point bump tomorrow in the leaners version.
September 6th, 2008 at 10:48 am
I figure this:
W: O+6
T: M+2
F: M+1
If McCain polls even or tied today, he could be tied or up slightly tomorrow. I have seen some estimates Wednesday could’ve been as high as +8 for Obama, and that will be gone tomorrow.
Let’s see where Gallup Stands.
September 6th, 2008 at 10:51 am
According to MSNBC, Gallup will be 0+2 today. Down from 9 this past week.
September 6th, 2008 at 11:05 am
To reurn to the subject: I was very impressed with the Gerard Baker item — perhaps because I hope he’s right.
A western-style conservatism would shift the emphasis slightly away from social conservatism. Not too much, because westerners tend to value family, but a bit, because they don’t like government enforcing such things. (These are generalizations, of course).
September 6th, 2008 at 11:06 am
Ok, this is out there, but I put the states in the columns I thought were most likely based on all the polls and trends we are seeing. Here is where I put each state:
Obama - New Mexico, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Iowa
McCain - Nevada, Missouri, Florida, Virginia, Ohio, and New Hampshire
If this occurs, believe it or not the electoral college would be tied! Guess who would decide who would be president if this occurred? First, Joe Lieberman (making the Senate vote 50/50). Second, Dick Cheney as all Senate vote ties go to the Vice President. Ok, that is a bit out there, but wow…
September 6th, 2008 at 11:11 am
what is with this site no longer posting polls promptly
September 6th, 2008 at 11:16 am
Gallup has not posted the poll on their site yet…
September 6th, 2008 at 11:18 am
Cp,
It is the House, not the Senate and it is decided by an unusual system where each state gets one vote for their entire delegation.
September 6th, 2008 at 11:24 am
DSkinner, you are right…VP is done by the Senate…okay, now got to quickly look to see who has the most states in the house….Given how big California and New York are, I would not be surprised if it is the Republicans…Imagine if you had a Dem and Repub in the white house
September 6th, 2008 at 11:44 am
How did we get on the polls here? Oh well, to return to the topic…
I particularly liked this part of the article:
Never mind all that. She didn’t have a passport! She was a former beauty queen! It was so axiomatic that she was a disaster that I was told by lots of savvy men - with deliciously unconscious sexism - that the real problem was what the choice said about Mr McCain and his judgment: cynical, irresponsible, clueless. It was as if Mrs Palin wasn’t really a human being at all, but an article of Mr McCain’s clothing that showed his poor taste, like wearing brown shoes with a charcoal suit.
That’s probably the best assessment of the Palin panic that I’ve seen yet. It would be funny how silly the criteria for being a “serious politician” is if it weren’t so tragic.
September 6th, 2008 at 11:53 am
21. If it went to the House Obama would win. The House delegations are 26-22 in favour of the Dems if I remember correctly.
But presumably Lieberman and Cheney could deliver the VP for the GOP. Would they have to pick Palin or couyld they choose McCain??
September 6th, 2008 at 11:57 am
Correction to 23.- the VP can’t cast a tie breaking vote in such circumstances, and 51 votes would be needed. So it would require a Senator to break ranks and vote for the other party to get a result…
September 6th, 2008 at 11:59 am
Gerard Baker is the columnist who wrote the mockingly clever “He ventured forth to bring light to the world” piece, in King James Bible style, about BO’s swing through the Middle East and Europe.
September 6th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
#22. “that the real problem was what the choice said about Mr McCain and his judgment: cynical, irresponsible, clueless.”
“Cynical, irresponsible, clueless.” Interesting. That pretty much describes all the Palin naysayers.
September 6th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
#21, Just did the math and it would be Obama 27-21 with two states that are split (Arizona and Kansas). However, it would set up a weird situation where there would be 2 states that have more Republicans in the House and would overturn their state’s pick of Obama (Delaware and Michigan). Further, there would be 9 states that would have more Democrats in the House that would overturn their state’s pick of McCain (Arkansas, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, North Carolina, Tennessee, Indiana, West Virgina, and Mississippi). I bet you many of those states could switch so as not to overturn their people’s vote. The gap is probably too much though to overcome the margin.
September 6th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
27. There would be some pressure to vote with the National popular vote too. Unlikely though.
Interestingly, if the tied Senate can’t decide on a VP before, the Speaker of the House becomes ‘acting’ VP until a decision is made. (would that be with the old or new make up of Congress though!?)
September 6th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
And Rep Salazar of Colorado is supporting McCain, so that would flip Colorado…wonder how many more of those there are….
September 6th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
I think if all goes well we’re gonna win Pennsylvania anyway, so hopefully it won’t get to that point.
September 14th, 2008 at 8:41 pm
[...] nomination bring back the folks who revolted over GWB’s immigration policies? Is Gary Matthew Miller correct in his assessment that McCain/Palin, at a gut level, represents a return to Western-style [...]