Conservatives Should Make Peace With McCain
Senator John McCain entered the presidential race facing a skeptical conservative base.
The list of grievances was long: He voted against the Bush tax cuts; he championed campaign finance reform and the ban on issue ads that are the lifeblood of conservative organizations; he advocated a sweeping, controversial plan for immigration reform; and he wanted to close Guantánamo and considered waterboarding to be torture.
The complaints were personal (too angry), ideological (not conservative enough) or petty and stylistic (too quick to talk about military service).
So the conservative base sought out viable alternatives, suspending concern about Mitt Romney’s reversals on key issues, Fred Thompson’s thin Senate record and laconic campaign style or Rudy Giuliani’s ideological unorthodoxies.
None of those alternatives quite panned out.
Then, to the shock of the conservative intelligentsia and against their stern warnings, Republican voters in Iowa rewarded Mike Huckabee for his brand of populist charm. Mr. Huckabee certainly satisfied the longing of social conservatives for a stalwart defender of their agenda. They were thrilled to have one of their own who could demonstrate that not all evangelicals were strident, negative and castigating.
But the problem is that while evangelicals had found their champion, the rest of the famed Reagan coalition was not amused. In Mr. Huckabee, many movement conservatives saw a popular figure not schooled in, and antagonistic toward, the Club for Growth brand of fiscal conservatism. They also saw a provincial governor with a shaky and naïve view of foreign affairs. Jimmy Carter comparisons abounded.
It was no surprise, then, that Mr. McCain, merely by sticking around, became an attractive prospect once again. He demonstrated resolve under pressure and dispelled concerns that he was too old by outworking his rivals, capping his emphatic revival by winning comfortably in New Hampshire.
If he has not quite won the hearts of conservatives over the course of his comeback, he has almost certainly earned their respect. And he provides a potential way out of the daunting political dilemma the G.O.P. now finds itself in, starting with the much-criticized primary field and leading to the prospect of civil war within the party.
Heading into the Michigan and South Carolina primaries, Mr. Romney has faltered, Mr. Thompson seems to have woken up too late and Mr. Giuliani has never quite made the sale with the base.
Suddenly, the very qualities that the party’s conservatives considered to be Mr. McCain’s biggest faults might be seen in greater perspective. His role as party uniter—irony is grand in politics—might be appreciated.
Certainly on foreign policy and social issues, his conservative credentials pass muster. With a touch of paint here, a dab of Phil Gramm advice there and a few nods to the benefit of tax cuts (always coupled with an enthusiastic cheer for spending restraint), he could turn out to be just the champion they’ve been looking for.
He may have to be.
If the conservative base forgives past indiscretions and makes peace with the man who has often been a thorn in their side, they may yet preserve the famed Reagan coalition that the media now seems so anxious to declare dead.
As Barry Goldwater said, it is a time for choosing.
- Poll
- Obama (D)
- McCain(R)
- Spread
- RCP Average
- 46.5
- 41.7
- Obama +4.8
- Candidate
- Favorable
- Unfavorable
- Spread
- Obama
- 55.7
- 32.7
- +23.0
- McCain
- 52.4
- 34.7
- +17.7
As a conservative with some liberal leanings on social issues, I find McCain totally unacceptable. I would rather see the Democrats take the blame for open borders chaos, restricting free political speech and implementing disastrous policies based on the global warming hoax. Then maybe the conservatives can regroup and find a better candidate in 2012.
Why should conservatives make peace with the McCain/Obama/Clinton ticket? America has had enough of these Senator campers. They go to Washington, get some power, and camp out.
Ms. Rubin - While I find your article to be well written, you are absolutely missing the point when it comes to conservatives. (Conservative - meaning to CONSERVE - in effect - our core beliefs and ideals)
In reference to your quote:
"The complaints (against McCain) were personal (too angry), ideological (not conservative enough) or petty and stylistic (too quick to talk about military service)."
Are you kidding? There is NOTHING personal regarding mainstream conservatives' opposition to Senator McCain's bid for the GOP nomination. As a matter of fact, his fellow candidates, pundits, conservative talk-radio hosts who have questioned his record and oppose his views have ALWAYS prefaced their comments with "I HAVE THE UTMOST RESPECT FOR SENATOR MCCAIN"S SERVICE TO THIS COUNTRY AND, PERSONALLY HAVE NOTHING AGAINST THE MAN" before divulging the facts of his voting record in the Senate.
I also take issue with this quote:
"So the conservative base sought out viable alternatives, suspending concern about Mitt Romney’s reversals on key issues, Fred Thompson’s thin Senate record and laconic campaign style or Rudy Giuliani’s ideological unorthodoxies"
OH PUHLEAAAAAAAAAASE!!!!! We are not seeking viable alternatives - we are seeking a LEADER - someone who embodies all of the qualities that should be evident in a President. DO NOT expect that decision to be taken lightly by conservatives - because we demand more - WE WILL NOT coronate someone without vetting their record. WE WILL NOT back a candidate based upon their media savvy, likeability quotient, sense of humor, or empty rhetoric. We want to know the character of the man/woman - and we want to know WHERE THEY WILL LEAD THIS COUNTRY AND HOW THEY PROPOSE TO GET THERE.
(PS - Romney changed his mind on ONE ISSUE - Abortion -He has always been personally pro-life - but did not feel it necessary for government to interfere in what is an extremely personal and private matter for women. However, as Governor of Massachusetts, he was presented with a bill that requested state funding for the destruction of human embryos for scientific research. This is when, politically, he became a "Pro-life" conservative.)
I challenge all of you (ok - maybe the 3 of you) who happen to read this post to ENGAGE in this election! Get involved - champion your cause (Heck - I"m a conservative in New York - how do you think that flys?) Do your homework - check out the candidates records - and - may the best man (or woman!) win!
God Bless America!!!
Kathleen
Apart from the fact that Romney would be even less successful dealing with Washington than Bush (he is after all "the Bush candidate" for whom Karl Rove is probably already working), he could not beat ANY Democratic ticket.
JT
That was a really intelligent comment and you have no idea what you are talking about. Do you know anything about any of the Republican candidates or are you just another Bush hating liberal?
While I agree that the Republicans are going to have a very tough time winning the general election because of the Democrats (fueled by the media) vitriole against Bush - making a blanket statement that Romney couldn't beat any Democratic ticket is ludicrous. Be careful what you wish for.
Yet another pundit displaying a total lack of understanding as to just how much those of us who ARE the conservative base of the GOP absolutely LOATHE John McCain.
It is not overstating it to say that McCain provokes in me a feeling of visceral digust, and I will NOT support him under ANY circumstances -- not even if it appears that Satan's apostle herself and her minions from the dark side of the force are slouching toward the oval office at an accelerated pace. McCain has defecated all over the Consitution more than once and urinated all over the conservative base of the party WAY too many times, so he has nobody but himself to blame for failing yet again in what will most likely be his final bid for the White House.
Fred Thompson? My 1st choice. Mike Huckabee? My 2nd choice. Mitt Romney? My 3rd choice. Rudy Giuliani? My 4th choice. Ron Paul? Forget it; he's obviously a kook and a wimp. McCain versus Hillary? You may just as well have asked me would I rather have gonorrhea or syphilis. Hell, neither one!
Mitch
Romney is actually the best mind to win the Republican nomination.
McCain is basically winning the 'none of the above' vote because people are afraid of Romney.
MCcain is all over the board. He's been running off that military record long enough. All respect to him, but he's not qualified to be president, mentally. For one, he dumpedhis wife based on a limp she got in a car accident and hooked up with a rich heiress. He's the republican's version of John Kerry. Hence, why Kerry and McCain are such good buddies. MCCain also finished very low in his class.
Romney has the mind to tackle numerous problems and solve them. He's a true leader. I suggest you conservatives take another look. You seriously don't want MCcain in office do you?
Sen. McCain's political decicions following his 2000 defeat by Bush seemed to be more about ticking off Bush than anything else! The problem for McCain is it ticked off half the Base too. Ultimatly it will cost McCain the nomination, and give it to mike Huckabee by default.
Steven E. Chrisco
Bogard, Mo.
schricso@yahoo.com
MC-CAIN THE NEO-CON PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE IN THE AMERICAN CULTURAL WAR
New Hampshire Podhoretz Neo-Cons, who now dominate the news media, very narrowly prevailed over the Ronald Reagan conservatives, 37% to 32%. Does this marginal victory predict the Republican candidacy for Neo-Con McCain, that notorious tyrant who supports amnesty of the 12-20 illegal aliens occupying American, American women sacrificing the lives of their children by abortion, and the non-patriotic sacrifice of the precious wealth and priceless blood of the American People in un-constitutional wars on behalf of notorious Israel; or, does this slim victory predict the Republican firing squad for Neo-Con McCain?
I was taken aback by the tone of the initial piece. Ms. Rubin's columns have the guise of objective analysis, but are clearly wishful thinking for a viable Republican candidate.
Why would "Phil Gramm advice" be a good thing for anyone?
Why would preserving the "famed Reagan coalition" (or corpo-cons, theo-cons and neo-cons) be a good thing? So that the gross inequality of the last 30 years can be perpetuated and increased? So that we can start more reckless wars?
I do think Ms. Rubin is correct that McCain would be the strongest GOP candidate, however.
But, as a Democrat, I am heartened by the comments, and hoping that the venom displayed in them will be enough to stop McCain.
Upper West
YOU make peace with someone who is diametrically opposed to everything you stand for!!!McCain is a R.I.N.O.-Republican In Name Only! His Voting Record, bills he's sponsored, and everything that comes out of his mouth screams Leftist Big Government Socialist!!! The only reason you in the Drive By Media are in love with him is BECAUSE he's so opposed to Conservative values!!!!So F--K all of you who want us to make Peace! This is War!!!!There WILL BE NO MCCAIN!
It's easy. Anybody but McCain. Romney was flipped but at least he flopped in the right direction eventually. Huckabee won't eclipse McCain so his liberal leanings will be stopped. So that leaves voting for McCain -- a certified RINO -- just go ask Arnold. So with two bad options and a third questionable -- if McCain when the nomination then there's no one to vote for.
Let the Dems get the fault for messing the country up even worse. Could you imagine another 4 years of little Bush?