Right Nodding (McCain and the base)

National Review ^ | 9-27-05 | Rich Lowry

[Aetius]

I agree that he is untrustworthy. And even if he did make the promises I suggest, I don't think for one second that he would necessarily keep them once he got to nominate a SCOTUS judge.

But the promise to nominate conservative judges who won't legislate from the bench has been a part (to varying degrees) of every GOP Presidential campaign since at least Reagan. The base has believed these promises, and we were duped. We got just two good justices out of five picks, with the current pick, Roberts, remaining a mystery.

I may be crazy, but if McCain the 'tell it like it is maverick' made a similar promise, then I think people would buy it.


And I've thought ever since 2000 that the media's love and adoration for McCain would take serious hit if he were to actually win the nomination. Afterall, its one thing for the media to support a Republican when he's facing off against evil fellow Repulicans, but its another thing entirely when he faces their preferred Democrats. The only question is whether the support and good press would completely evaporate, or if it would hold to a level that for a Republican at least, is good?

And McCain would never be my first pick. There are several potential GOP candidates I'd much prefer.

But if he did win the nomination and he faced off against Hillary, then if I voted I would vote for McCain, and even if I didnt' vote I would pull for McCain in that circumstance. With McCain there would at least be a small chance that good justices would be appointed to the federal bench, whereas with Hillary there is no chance; the Democrats haven't screwed up and picked a good Sup Court justice since JFK's selection of Byron White.

It may seem as though I am fixated on the judiciary at the expense of other issues. To an extent I would agree with that assessment, but on the other hand,since we live under a system of judicial supremacy, I don't think its possible to pay too much attention to it.

[Aetius]

I understand that Racicot wanted to go off into the private sector to provide financial security for his family. You can't blame the guy for that, but he could have beaten Max Baucas and chose not to run, and I think many in the party will remember that if he were to run for President.

I like George Allen, and though I need to read up more on him, my gut reaction to the early stable of possible contenders is to favor him over the rest.

The thing about Rick Perry that worries me is the fear that he would be as bad as Bush on immigration. And there may be a Texas-fatigue factor that would work against him. He should focus on winning relection next year, and then running for Senate if Hutchinson should retire sometime after that.

[LS]

I disagree, only because I think the judge issue will be essentially solved by 2008, and will be a non-issue. Bush will get at least one more pick after the O'Connor pick. That's a majority.

I think McCain's HUGE weakness remains immigration. He is too "open-border." If he were a Tancredo-ite, the nomination would already be his.

[NavySEAL F-16]

McCain is not to be trusted.

[meandog]

McCain will be the strongest performing Republican against Hillary Clinton in early opinion polls; if anything, he is more aggressive on the war on terror than Bush is; he will have a strong theme of returning to a cleaner Republicanism after the ethical lapses of the current congressional majority. And all of this will be wrapped in his appealing thematic mix of patriotism, sacrifice and duty.

I wore my asbestos suit in this morning, anticipating such a posting...so here goes: If McCain were president instead of Bush..
1) Iraq would have been won by now;
2) Incompetent FEMA heads would have never been appointed;
3) We would not be faced with incontrollable deficits;
4) There would be a veto proof Senate for GOP;
5) RATs would be abandoning their Democratic party faster than a priest at a strip club!

[Valpal1]

The repubs who vote in primaries in red states would not buy it.

Primary voters are a small subset of voters and they are both more politically aware and more conservative than registered Republican voters as a whole.

McCain has no chance with them at all. He has pi$$ed on them many times and they have long memories. He is also too old and he looks it, unlike RR.

The leftist media loves him because he stabs the base in the back with predictable reliability, but the truth is, he hasn't enough charm to schmooze the base on the primary circuit, doesn't matter how much journalistic KY jelly the media heaps on him.

[Always Right]

I disagree, only because I think the judge issue will be essentially solved by 2008, and will be a non-issue. Bush will get at least one more pick after the O'Connor pick. That's a majority.

The judge issue is not even close to being solved and certainly not be 2008. Probably the only way Bush gets another pick is if one of the Justices dies, and I don't see that happening soon.

[Yossarian]

McCain ripped the guts out of our 1st Amendment with his "Campaign Finance Reform" bill. Mention someone by name in an ad in a certain time of the year? Don't pass Go & go directly to jail. Prick. As are Bush for signing it and the Supremes for allowing it. - but this thread is about McCain.

I can't imagine a more un-Amercian concept than silencing speech. He should be fought tooth-and-nail in the primaries.

[Always Right]

I wore my asbestos suit in this morning, anticipating such a posting...so here goes: If McCain were president instead of Bush..

I would not bet on too many of those. McCain's biggest problem was he surrounded himself with a bunch of RINO advisors. McCain's lead advisor was the main player convincing Bush Sr. that Souter was a conservative, eventhough he knew otherwise. Considering the company McCain keeps, those predictions would be highly unlikely.

[LS]

McCain would do nothing about the deficit; McCain would do NOTHING different in Iraq; but one thing is true. We'd be overrun by our brown amigos by now, far more than we are. He's a loser.

[LS]

Just watch. Judges will not be an issue by 2008 - - - except as they might be involved in ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION, which will be the issue.

[meandog]

I would not bet on too many of those. McCain's biggest problem was he surrounded himself with a bunch of RINO advisors. McCain's lead advisor was the main player convincing Bush Sr. that Souter was a conservative, eventhough he knew otherwise. Considering the company McCain keeps, those predictions would be highly unlikely.

...You're speaking, of course, of Warren Rudman--one of the most conservative senators to have ever served. Souter was Rudman's deputy when he was Atty. Gen. of N.H., so it's true that he backed Souter's appointment. HOWEVER, Bush the Elder was advised not to nominate him by plenty of other voices (Jesse Helms among them) who viewed Souter as a bit too effeminate (if not outright homosexual) but Bush The Elder went ahead an did so anyway and, THEREFORE, he was at the place where the proverbial buck stops. Although I voted for them 3-out-of-3 times, I wish the Bushes (both Poppy and Shrub) would be a bit more accountable when it came to things they are responsible for--McCain, at least, is!

[Reagan Man]

>>>>This is so important because, if he runs, McCain is probably the front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008. But he’s an odd front-runner, a front-runner whose campaign is almost certainly doomed unless he handles conservatives better than he did in 2000.

Should McCain choose to run for the GOP nomination in 2008, I don't know if he'll get this conservatives support. OTOH. If McCain wins the GOP nomination, I don't see how conservatives can't vote for the mavarick one. What's the alternative? The choices are limited. Pro-choice liberal, centrist, moderate. A third party loser. McCain does have a long way to go to impress conservatives. His rhetoric on pork barrel spending is right on the money. Mccain is pro-military and pro-life. But actions speak louder then words. McCain has to offer more then just media driven platitudes.

[Rembrandt_fan]

You wrote: "If McCain were president instead of Bush..
1) Iraq would have been won by now;
2) Incompetent FEMA heads would have never been appointed;
3) We would not be faced with incontrollable deficits;
4) There would be a veto proof Senate for GOP;
5) RATs would be abandoning their Democratic party faster than a priest at a strip club!"

1) Vagaries of war. Woulda, shoulda, coulda. To say the war would be won by now as an unqualified statement begs the question: 'How?' McCain is a veteran combat pilot; how does that translate to waging war better than the sitting POTUS? Answer: it doesn't. You pulled that one from an alternate universe.

2) Incompetents are appointed to federal positions of responsibility all the time, either as a pattern of corruption and nepotism (Harding) or because the President is a poor judge of character and ability (Grant, Carter). Besides, FEMA is no more poorly run than most federal bureaucracies. The greater fault in lackadaisical hurricane response was carried by the state and local governments in Louisiana.

3) McCain loves taxes. He hates tax cuts. You fight deficits by creating wealth, not by taxing the daylights out of the most capable and productive citizens.

4) Veto-proof Senate? Not sure I understand the statement. Do you mean McCain, because of his supposed moderation, would not have to employ the veto because of his celebrated rapport with the Democrats? Think again. The Dems would turn on him in a heartbeat the moment a President McCain does something even remotely Republican. So would the press.

5) Wishful thinking. The moderate Dems have already migrated to the sunny side. The next general election will be even more polarized than the last.

[John D]

"McCain does not look healthy enough to be President".

He also is not sane, honest or smart enough.

[Always Right]

...You're speaking, of course, of Warren Rudman--one of the most conservative senators to have ever served.

My knowledge of Rudman, admittedly somewhat limited, is he was in fact one of the most liberal GOP Senators of all time. If you can find somewhere that show Rudman was conservative, I would appreciate it. But everything I have seen on the man suggests Rudman and Souter are liberal clones.

[flaglady47]

I don't think anyone knows the *real* John McCain. What appears above the surface makes me not want to have to find out what he tries to keep submerged.

Bingo. You win the prize. This is exactly the problem. McCain has a lot of emotional baggage inside. I can just feel it in some of his reactions. He has axes to grind. I think if Prez he would be a vendetta type who would go after anyone he perceives as his enemy. In spite of that joking, witty exterior, he has a mean streak. He holds grudges, as we all know; his grudge against Bush was overt. I just wouldn't trust this man with his finger on the button. I don't know why, but everytime I think about McCain, I think of Dr. Strangelove.

[Always Right]

He also is not sane, honest or smart enough.

You say that as if those are requirements to be President.

[Dan from Michigan]

If McCain is the nominee, I'll write in myself for president - or vote third party.

I'd rather see Hillary as president than McCain.

[Dan from Michigan]

3. Gun Rights Moderate (Will allow prosecution of companies)

Nyet.
He voted to ban gun shows.