The case for John McCain

The Economist ^ | December 6th, 2007 | The Economist

[Tulsa Ramjet]

THERE are all sorts of reasons to be puzzled by the state of today's Republican Party. How did the party of fiscal responsibility become the party of out-of-control spending? How did a party that prided itself on its foreign-policy skills become the author of the fiasco in Iraq? But from the narrow point of view of the election, an even more pressing question arises: how did the Republicans lose their ability to spot star power?

A month before the primaries the Republicans have no idea whom to nominate. Rudy Giuliani? He's ahead in the national polls, but he lags in the early states of Iowa and New Hampshire; and many social conservatives hate him. Mitt Romney? He's ahead in New Hampshire, but he lags in national polls. And what about Mike Huckabee? The latest poll in Iowa shows the preacher from Hope, Arkansas, leading the pack there. No one can predict the outcome with any confidence, since no fewer than five candidates are getting between 10% and 25% of the Republican vote. This confusion is odd for two reasons. The first is that it is the Democrats who are supposed to be the disorganised party. The second is that the Republicans seem intent on ignoring the political star in their ranks. That man is John McCain.

[Tulsa Ramjet]

"Worth another look

So why have so many Republicans written off Mr McCain? There are two reasons—one bad, the other more reasonable. The bad reason is that they worry that he is not really one of them. Mr McCain has broken with Republican orthodoxy on everything from tax cuts to campaign finance to immigration. But look at his record more closely and you discover that he is a Republican in good standing. His fights with his fellow Republicans have been driven by his (usually justified) conviction that they were betraying Republican principles. He opposed Mr Bush's tax cuts because he thought they would create a deficit. He led the charge against pork-barrel spending and lobbyists such as Jack Abramoff because he thought they undermined the principle of small government. Immigration is a genuine problem: he is seriously at odds with the bulk of his party on the issue, though many independents would go with his plan."

Okay, let'em rip.

[NavVet]

Oh, I didn’t realize that McCain was just standing up to the rednecks and rubes when he proposed Amnesty, opposed tax cuts (that have increased revenues), blocked strict constructionist judges, and rewrote the 1st Amendment.

Gee, why didn’t you say so. Of course, If I’m going to vote for someone who always sides with the Democrats, why don’t I just vote for a Democrat.

[Jeff Chandler]

Senator McCain has sabotaged the Republican Party at critical moments for his own gain.

He gave cover to Bill Clinton’s China connection/technology give-away with his ill-advised and catastrophically-timed Campaign Finance Reform.

He has stabbed President Bush in the back at every opportunity.

He has repeatedly opposed tax relief.

He has joined with the Democrats in hamstringing our terrorist interrogators.

He has impugned the character of social conservatives and proponents of secure borders.

He has fought for amnesty and open borders.

He has troubling anger management issues.

And we’re supposed to reconsider him?

[Jeff Chandler]

Oh, yeah, and he carried the Democrats’ water in preempting the Republicans’ ending of the Filibuster of judges.

[digger48]

[padre35]

Actually that was one of his better moves, if we had “lost” the Senate filibuster, the Iraq War would be over right now.

[2ndDivisionVet]

FRED THOMPSON IN 2008!!

[padre35]

Wow, just wow, Tulsa Ramjet, you and Dano1 are men of convictions, between Huck and McCain...

McCAin also lobbies to close down gun shows, and that and his hanky panky about immigration has him on the “Close to Rooty” list.

[NeoCaveman]

While I think he’s been the biggest obstacle in many ways to achieving conservative goals for the last 8 years (bigger than Daschle, bigger than Ried), he is the most electable Republican right now.

If he wins the nomination, I’d support him in the general.

[Jeff Chandler]

if we had “lost” the Senate filibuster, the Iraq War would be over right now.

You are confusing the long standing Senate tradition of Filibusters over bills with the Democrat use of the Filibuster to prevent votes on judicial nominees.

[roaddog727]

No.

No, No and No.

I appreciate his service to this country, but no.

[Mr. Mojo]

How did the party of fiscal responsibility become the party of out-of-control spending?

Didn't happen overnight. Been dealing with this crap in the GOP since Jan. of '89. ...."kinder, gentler, nation." ....."compassionate conservatism.", etc.

[Jeff Chandler]

If he wins the nomination

If he or Rudy (whom I like a great deal) wins the nomination, the air will come out of the Republican Party. There will be so little enthusiasm among the base, the turnout will be too low for victory.

Already the Republican Party is having very serious problems raising money. The reason for this is because the folks who write the checks and man the get-out-the-vote drives have been treated with contempt too many times by the country club Republicans. Nominate a Rhino, and say hello to Madame President.

[padre35]

Really? I’m not doubting you, I thought Rush mentioned that if the change in Senate rules was made, there could be no more filibusters in the Senate?

I could be wrong on this of course.

[Jeff Chandler]

As I understand it, the rules were to be changed on the issue of judicial nominees. I think I heard this on the Hugh Hewitt show. Hewitt is a Constitutional law professor.

[c-b 1]

No thanks. There is no case for John McCain. I know him, he isn’t presidential material.

[NeoCaveman]

If he or Rudy (whom I like a great deal) wins the nomination, the air will come out of the Republican Party. There will be so little enthusiasm among the base, the turnout will be too low for victory.

Have you looked at the internals of the polling of the head to head match ups involving McCain?

He's the only Republican that wins the young, 18-35 year old crowd right now. I know it is totally counterintutive by I can dismiss facts just because I do not understand them...

[padre35]

Minor point really.

[johnthebaptistmoore]

When will Senator McCain make his “speech” about “The Keating Five”? It’s only fair that if Mitt Romney makes a speech about his Mormon faith that Senator McCain should also speak openly about “The Keating Five”. Senator McCain also needs to fully explain about the disastrous aftermath of the ongoing campaign finance reform system which he helped put in place and how it can be successfully fixed to the best of abilities including successfully bringing back free speech. He also needs to fully explain about all of his votes for tax increases instead of voting for tax cuts, and he also needs to fully explain about all of his votes for “amnesty for illegal immigration” legislation where he votes the same way as Senator Ted Kennedy. He also upsets too many conservatives far too often in general on a variety of issues just by being a “maverick politician”.