January 30, 2008
The McCain surge
John McCain’s recovery is astonishing in so many ways it is hard to know where to begin. He was written off by everybody just months ago, a staff meltdown on his hands and no money to buy his way back up the polls. Money is everything in American politics, right? Romney had it all and McCain was flat broke. He was no textbook conservative, and the Republicans were obviously going to insist on that. He had little or no appeal to the evangelicals, either, yet another disqualifier. And get ready for this: he formed an alliance with Ted Kennedy - Ted Kennedy! - and sponsored an amnesty for illegal immigrants. That measure provoked a national outcry and was killed stone dead in Congress. And this man was running for the Republican nomination? Who was he kidding?
Well, he is not quite there yet. Giuliani is gone but Mitt Romney and his checkbook are not giving up. Super-Tuesday is the real test. Nonetheless, winning Florida makes McCain the front-runner, and whatever happens now, that is remarkable in its own right.
How on earth to account for it? It was crucial of course that none of the Republican contenders struck the party as an ideal choice. McCain had his drawbacks, all right - but so did all the others. Fred Thompson was the best the party could come up with for the textbook-conservative heir-to-Reagan slot, and he turned out to be a terrible campaigner who barely even seemed to want the job. I am still puzzled, I have to say, by the stunning failure of the Giuliani campaign. (Maybe one of the clichés of US horse-race politics was correct, after all: momentum acquired in the early primaries, which Giuliani downgraded in his planning, really counts.) At any rate, McCain appeared to command respect in way that Giuliani does not. And nobody could accuse him of being inauthentic, a charge that Romney cannot get away from.
So for all the things they dislike about McCain, Republicans seem to like his character. And above all, of course, they like his electability. They may be a divided party, but they are united on the need to stop the Democrats - and above all, of course, Hillary Clinton - from gaining the White House. McCain could give Hillary a run for her money, and that seems good enough for the conservatives, evangelicals and immigration hard-liners who would find so much to dislike in President McCain. That is something for Democrats to ponder as they weigh the choice between Hillary and Obama.
An Obama - McCain contest would bring a note of decency into a US presidential campaign, something I have rarely seen since I was old enough to cast my first vote (for John F. Kennedy in 1960). However, it s precisely for this reason that I think a Clinton - Romney contest is still more likely.
As Mr. Crook mentions, Romney’s checkbook is not about to go away. Nor is the fury of the Republican establishment at McCain for his campaign finance reform (which may eventually be struck down by the same Bush right wing judicial appointees that McCain has promised to replicate in making his own appointments).
Nor is the even greater fury of the anti-immigrant lobby against Mccain about to go away, even though McCain has, in fact, already caved in to the same people whom he had earlier, rightly, referred to as modern “Know Nothings” ( 19th century anti-Irish bigots) on a crucial point in the immigration debate. This is that McCain, contrary to his earlier stance, is now postponing any thought of “amnesty” or reform, until the Mexican border is “secure”, i.e. never.
Posted by: algasema | January 31st, 2008 at 8:15 am | Report this commentOne further thought about “decency” in American presidential campaigns. Even John F. Kennedy, whom I mentioned in my above comment, and whom I consider (as do many others) to be the greatest US president in modern times - at least since Franklin Delano Roosevelt - was elected with the help of a fraudulent issue in the the 1960 campaign. This issue was the alleged “missile gap” in favor of the Soviet Union over the United States, which Kennedy blamed on the incumbent Republican administration of President Dwight Eisenhower.
After Kennedy was elected, it turned out that the “missile gap” was as genuine as Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction were to be 40 years later.
Posted by: algasema | January 31st, 2008 at 9:13 am | Report this commentAs a Republican who participates in frequent discussions with other Repubs, I would like to challenge your thesis. Winning 36% of the vote is hardly a mandate by any measure. The primaries that McCain has won are those in which independents have been able to vote, as opposed to just rank-and-file GOP. Most of us in the rank-and-file detest John McCain and his fraudelent brand of conservatism. There is a feeling that the conservative movement within the GOP would be dead if John McCain were the GOP nominee, and many of us would feel compelled to sit out an insulting McCain-Clinton disaster. As Mr.Obama does not repel many of us in the way that McCain-Clinton does, many of us could take a chance on the Illinois senator. In either case, Mr. McCain is a sure loser and his “electability” myth would implode on the spot. As to the so-called “character’ issue…I fail to see how surviving a Vietnamese prison situation, as admirable and courageous as surviving it was, 36 years ago, translates into the presidency. (FYI:I am a 60 year-old decorated Viet vet, son of an 82-year-old mother who believes McCain is too old for Presedential rigors.)
Posted by: jay byrd | January 31st, 2008 at 6:29 pm | Report this commentIf Clive Crook and poster algasema really believe in the possibility of a Romney win, then they are naive. Romney cannot win due to his Mormonism. I am not saying that this should be so, just reminding us that this contest take’s place in the real world, not the world of ideals.
Having said that, I must add that McCain is any case the most deserving candidate in decades.
Posted by: RCS | January 31st, 2008 at 6:39 pm | Report this commentYou don’t know what you are talking about. The vast majority of Americans are against his amnesty for illegal alien squatters in our country. They alos know that he has not ‘changed his mind” on amnesty. He is just flip-flopping temporarily to get votes. Just the accusation that he is making of his rival. The tag team of he and Huckabee was planned. Look into who is paying Huckabee. If he wasn’t in the race Mitt would be stomping the unelectable McCain. McCain has no chance as the candidate for Republicans. I know you Euroweenies want him so the borders will remain open. He’d lose a general election after the liberal media who has propped him up for the GOP primaries turns on him for what he really is…a
Posted by: Gary | January 31st, 2008 at 11:40 pm | Report this commentblue dog Democrat beholden to globalization organizations.
According to Jail Bird: “The primaries that McCain has won are those in which independents have been able to vote, as opposed to just rank-and-file GOP. ” Wrong. Florida is a closed primary in where only Registered Republicans can vote.
Jail Bird also asserts that “Mr. McCain is a sure loser and his “electability” (sic) myth would implode on the spot.” However, according to the most recent polling data in RealClearPolitics.com McCain beats Clinton and Obama, while Romney, along with the rest of the competing Republicans, lose to any Democratic candidate.
Finally, Jail Bird “fails to see how surviving a Vietnamese prison situation, 36 years ago, translates into the presidency.” Accordingly, Rush Limbaugh, who is a college drop out, avoided military service in the Vietnam War, was on welfare, and was indicted on drug charges also fails to see the translation.
Posted by: Major Julian Chase, USAF | February 1st, 2008 at 12:01 am | Report this commentGary is English your first language?
Posted by: Major Julian Chase, USAF | February 1st, 2008 at 12:06 am | Report this commentGary asserts that “if he “Huckabee” wasn’t in the race Mitt would be stomping the unelectable McCain.
However, according to the most recent polling data in RealClearPolitics.com McCain beats Clinton and Obama, while Romney, along with the rest of the competing Republicans, lose to any Democratic candidate.
Moreover, it should be noted that Huckabee’s votes have come from the the evangelical community. A community, that according to a Pew survey “would be less likely to vote for a Mormon candidate for president.” Moroever, evangelicals that take this point of view, “express substantially more negative views of Romney, compared with those who express no such reservations about voting for a Mormon.” And let not forget his dramatic change on abortion. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFMdK0TWtks. McCain has always been pro life, so I surmise that the evangelical vote would have broken his way rather than Romeny’s. But hey I went to college.
Posted by: Major Julian Chase, USAF | February 1st, 2008 at 12:20 am | Report this commentI hope that RSC doesn’t make the mistake of interpreting my comments as implying support for Romney, whom I think would be an atrocious president, because he would continue the Bush legacy of misrule. However, in the “real” world that RSC refers to, the big moneyed interests that put Bush in the White House will do everything in their power to elect Romney, because they loathe McCain, who for them is the next worst thing to Hillary Clinton. Read Robert Novack’s column attacking McCain in the January 31 Washington Post. This hatchet job is only the beginning.
Will Romney’s backing from Mammon outweigh his disadvantages in following Mormon? The unholy Republican alliance of Wall Street plutocrats, bomb crazy neo-cons, torturers, and racist immigrant bashers is so anxious to get rid of McCain that they would line up behind anyone who might be able to take the nomination from him even if they had to nominate a snake-worshiper.
Posted by: algasema | February 1st, 2008 at 3:45 am | Report this commentSorry for my typos in the previous comment. I meant to write “who I think”, not “whom I think”, and I misspelled Robert Novak’s name. Also, I should have made clear that my reference to the unholy Republican alliance means the Republican establishment, not the moderate,independent minded Republicans who respect integrity, which McCain has more of than almost any other Republican I can remember (not that this is saying a great deal).
Posted by: algasema | February 1st, 2008 at 3:56 am | Report this comment“The primaries that McCain has won are those in which independents have been able to vote, as opposed to just rank-and-file GOP.”
Florida is in fact a “closed primary” state; only those registered as members of the respective parties may vote for that party’s candidates. I am now registered as NPA (No Party Affiliation) and could not vote for either a Republican or Democratic candidate.
Posted by: Former Florida Democrat | February 1st, 2008 at 1:07 pm | Report this commentAlgasema:
No need to apologize for your typos; they pale in comparison to your thought process.
I would have thought that we would get better commentators at FT.com. Instead we get comments straight out of extremist websites–left wing and right wing alike.
Sad, terribly sad.
Posted by: Major Julian Chase, USAF | February 1st, 2008 at 6:10 pm | Report this commentTo Major Julian Chase:
I respect your service to our country, but not your resort to name-calling. First, I am not a website, but a person. I do not have a website.
Second, my use of language is purely factual. Few people would disagree with the argument that there has been a big transfer of wealth from the middle class to the rich under Bush 43, and that Wall Street is not only one of his major political bases, as he himself once joked in a speech, but a big beneficiary of his tax, economic and anti-regulatory policies, while the reast of the country suffers.
As for the “bomb crazy neocons”, look at Dick Cheney, who can’t wait to strike at Iran. Ditto for torturers, to whom we might add Attorney General Mukasey, who refuses to call waterboarding torture.
One of the things that many of us in both parties respect so much about John McCain is not only his bravery in resisting torture, but his commitment to eliminating it from use by our government. As a military man, would you want our soldiers to fall into the hands of people who practice what Dick Cheney and his fellow advocates for torture preach? Have you forgotten that McCain had to get a law passed in order to try to stop the Bush administration from torturing prisoners, and that Cheney lobbied vigorously against it?
Anyone who cares about the quality of ft.com comment would do well to think more carefully before engaging in personal attacks against other people who offer opinions, no matter how much one might disgree.
Posted by: algasema | February 1st, 2008 at 7:50 pm | Report this commentWhile I stand by my comments, I still do not seem to be able to avoid typos - as in “reast” instead of “rest”, and “disgree”, instead of “disagree”. My apologies.
Posted by: algasema | February 1st, 2008 at 7:54 pm | Report this commentOne final comment, to explain my use of the term “racist immigrant-bashers”. Show me someone who wants to deport 12 million illegal immigrants and drastically curtail legal immigration, and who does not also believe that Mexican immigrants are all criminals who want to return the Southwest to Mexico, and who does not regard the increase in Latino and Asian immigration as a threat to American “culture”, which is just a code word for white supremacy. Immigration, also, is an issue on which John McCain has shown far more courage, compassion and consistency than any other leading Republican, or even some Democrats.
Posted by: algasema | February 1st, 2008 at 10:24 pm | Report this comment