All the Wrong Moves: How McCain Blew It on the Bailout

MORE
Wise Guys
This is what can happen when you gamble in politics. Last Wednesday, John McCain “suspended” his campaign – an action that sounded a lot more substantial than it actually was – to return to Washington and insert himself into the Congressional debate over a financial rescue package.
The results, for Mr. McCain and (if most financial experts are to be believed) for the economy, have been ghastly, culminating in the House’s stunning rejection of a compromise plan on Monday, which sent the Dow plummeting and Mr. McCain scrambling to save face.
It’s not that Mr. McCain’s impulse to do something “dramatic” was necessarily wrong. Wall Street’s collapse ensured that the outcome of the presidential race would be determined by economic issues, a significant – perhaps insurmountable – disadvantage for a Republican candidate after eight years of Republican rule. Since there was no changing the subject, Mr. McCain had to convince the public to ignore his party label when considering his economic views.
But if his instinct was right, his execution was badly flawed, starting with his initial demand that last Friday night’s debate be canceled. When Barack Obama refused to go along with this and calmly pointed out that presidents need to be able to deal with more than one headache at a time, public opinion turned against Mr. McCain, who was then forced to reverse himself and participate in the debate. This made it look like he had acted rashly and out of purely political motives.
Worse for Mr. McCain, he simply had no idea what to do after thrusting himself into the negotiations. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson released his initial three-page bailout plan two weekends ago, but as of last Tuesday, Mr. McCain hadn’t even read it. And until last Thursday afternoon, when he finally made his way back to Washington, Congressional leaders from both parties had been busily working toward a compromise plan that built on the Paulson framework – without any input from Mr. McCain.
In fact, just as Mr. McCain touched down in Washington, that bipartisan group announced an apparent agreement on compromise legislation, immediately raising the question of what, exactly, the point was of his visit. If he’d been hoping to come to town and broker a deal – or at least to take credit for brokering one – that notion was shot.
So Mr. McCain spent Thursday afternoon meeting with the House’s G.O.P. leader, John Boehner, while his aides gauged the sentiments of conservative Republican House members, a group that had expressed early opposition to any taxpayer-funded bailout. Maybe it was coincidental (or maybe not), but hours later a revolt from those same conservatives prompted Mr. Boehner, at a White House meeting attended by a mostly silent Mr. McCain, to blow up the deal that had been reached earlier in the day.
Clearly, Mr. McCain was making this up as he went along. But with the House G.O.P. in revolt, at least he still had a chance to play a consequential role. Unfortunately, he still had no idea what he was trying to accomplish. As a result, when he was questioned at Friday night’s debate about the status of the rescue plan, he spoke only in vague generalities – instead of offering a compelling explanation to voters of what he was trying to do for them (and to save them from) in the negotiations.
The pattern endured over the weekend. Mr. McCain quietly returned to Washington and worked the phones, but he was hardly a significant player as the same bipartisan negotiators hammered out a new compromise on Saturday and Sunday – one that passed muster with Mr. Boehner and other top Republicans in the House. To average voters absorbing reports of the compromise, Mr. McCain was essentially invisible.
He was so out of the loop that he had no idea that the compromise faced serious opposition in the House. Expecting that the plan would pass with ease, Mr. McCain sought to cut his losses on Sunday and early Monday by calling the plan flawed but necessary and claiming credit for bringing reluctant House Republicans on board.
“I put my campaign on hold for a couple days last week to fight for a rescue plan that put you and your economic security first,” he declared on Monday.
Hours later, of course, the House voted the plan down, and Mr. McCain was left trying to pin the blame on Mr. Obama and the Democrats for injecting partisanship into the negotiations.
But the issue was long since lost for him. If he was intent on making a show of this, Mr. McCain would have been wiser to simply oppose the idea of a bailout and to try to exploit the considerable populist sentiment against it. No one would have had trouble understanding his position on the bailout, or why he was inserting himself into the discussions in Washington.
Mr. McCain could have helped himself in two different ways on the bailout: Either by brokering a deal or by setting himself up as the public face of outrage at the idea of a bailout. Instead, he sat back while others reached a deal and then offered lukewarm and muted support for it – only to watch it go down in defeat anyway.
The bailout plan may yet be rescued, but Mr. McCain’s effort to score on the issue is lost.




















HEY. JOHN MCCAIN HAS DONE MORE, A LOT MORE MORE, THAN HAS OBAMA TO TRY TO FASHION THIS BAILOUT.
OBAMA HAS BEEN PLAYING "CYA" ON THIS BAILOUT.
TYPICAL OBAMA --- DO NOTHING AND THEREFORE TAKE NO RESPONSIBILITY IF THINGS GO WRONG.
OBAMA KNOWS THAT IF THE BAILOUT DOES WORK, NO ONE WILL QUESTION WHAT HIS ROLE WAS!
.
.
.
DONALD TRUMP --- REMEMBER HIM? ---- TRUMP SAID THAT IF WE DO NOT BAIL OUT WALL STREET ---- OIL WILL FALL TO $25 A BARREL AND THAT WILL GIVE OUR ECONOMY ALL THE STIMULATION IT NEEDS (AND IT WILL BANKRUPT VENEZUELA, RUSSIA AND THE OPEC COUNTRIES). A WIN-WIN FOR AMERICA.
.
Great insight for "The Donald". where can I find a complete transcript of this conversation with Mr. Trump.. I really agree with Mr. Trump "Say no to the Bailout" remember the market will correct itself.
To the previous poster: please tell me what Sen. McCain has contributed to this "bailout" package. I'm rather interested to find out.
Personally, I really don't understand what the role of either candidate was or should have been in the negotiations. Neither has any particular background in economics or finance (unless you count Sen. McCain's experience with Charles Keating), so what exactly were they going to accomplish? Sen. Obama played this one like any smart politician should- he kept his cool and spoke largely in generalities that were difficult to find fault with. He looked and acted like a man that I'd trust with the "button".
Sen. McCain, on the other hand, brashly raced to Washington uninvited after "suspending" his campaign (interesting definition of "suspend"), tried to cowboy his way to the negotiating table, intended to take credit for "brokering" a deal, then blamed Democrats for killing the bill with partisan bickering (despite the fact that GOP House leadership later admitted that they never had the necessary votes to begin with). The thought of this man with his finger on the button now scares the hell out of me.
Granted, the Democrats certainly didn't do much to get this thing passed, with only 60% voting for it, but let's not pretend that John McCain had anything to do with getting this bill passed.
If he couldn't bring his own party together for the good of the country what prayer does he have uniting a deeply divided electorate?
Yah think so? Could ya calm down a bit and provide examples of what Obama DIDN'T do and what McCain DID do?
Whatever McCain DID do, it sure didn't work much, did it? Complete failure, stock market falls.
And if Obama DIDN'T DO ANYTHING, then the whole fiasco is in MCCAIN'S lap, isn't it? Because McCain FOUGHT.
McCain musta fought the wrong battle, or else he was a COMPLETE Lame-O, an UN-playah. No potency at all, can't rise to the occasion, went soft, know whut I mean, Vern?
I mean, that's how it is if you apply logic to the situation, as you soft members of the hard right like to think you do.
I see the House not as having failed to pass the bailout - rather, in one of the few instances where it mattered during the reign of the Bush administration Congress has finally managed to succeed in kicking to the curb a short-fused Bushite boondoggle for corporatism.
Do we even recognize Democracy in action anymore?
And to all of the above cheering for Mr Trump and his $25.xx a barrel oil. That'll only happen if the economy of the world tanks to the point where industry is shut down and everyone is unemployed hence there's no demand for oil. $25 a barrel oil will be the equivalent in 2010 dollars to what it was in 1930.
I don't think it can get any worst for McCBush what a loser!
I don't think it can get any worst for McCBush what a loser!
Check out the interview of "The Donald" on Fox News - http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,430583,00.html .
While McCain's political gamble did not pan out as he had hoped, do not lose sight of the fact that most Americans seem to have voiced an opinion dead-set against any bailout. (In at least one Arizona district, half of the messages to Congress said "No" and the other half said "HELL NO!.") Most of us seem to realize that 1) no bailout Band-Aid is going to work as smoothly as Paulson, Pelosi, Reid & and even Bush & Company tell us it will; 3) Anything that the federal government tries to "fix" under Republicans or Dems will never work and cost what they say it will; and 3) Most of us are apparently willing to hunker down and let the economy work the way it was designed.
As it turns out, there actually were enough votes, Republicans and Democrats to pass the bill on Monday, EXCEPT for that idiot Pelosi who succeeded in pissing off enough Republicans with her little partisan anti-Bush / Republican speech just before the vote. But because the Republicans turned on principle, her own party faithful recognized a bad deal when they saw one and chickened out instead of voting according to their own principles. (Or should I say, voted with their NON-principles.)
Tomorrow the Senate will vote on their version - one that is substantially more "Main Street" (anybody getting sick of hearing the political lemmings play that word out?) friendly than the House version. It looks like the votes are there to approve it - even the two Arizona Senators (McCain and Kyle) will vote for it - unless Senate Majority leader Harry Reid pulls a Pelosi, that is. (Dems just don't seem to know when to shut up, do they?)
Thursday we will know the outcome - the Republican Pelosi protest and Democrat wusses will probably come back on board and life will go on. Of course, life would go on anyway, wouldn't it?
By all means, yes, please don't say anything publicly negative about George Bush. Let's keep that as our little secret. We certainly wouldn't want the Elephants to get their feelings hurt. What a lame excuse for voting against the bailout. The Paulsen bill was GW's answer. It was a hurredly-crafted, bad bill trying to salvage a nation in real economic trouble due to the policies of the worst president in the history of the nation. Blame who you want, it happened on the W watch! No more McSame.
You may have hit the nail on the head. Great post.
The nail on the head comment I posted on Oct. 5th refers to the first posting in this list. Sorry about its positioning.
安川伺服
安川变频器
yaskawa
超高亮液晶电视
DID屏
液晶拼接
大屏幕拼接
乙肝治疗
肝硬化
肝移植
乙肝治疗
肝病治疗
肝衰竭
肝癌治疗
中西医结合肝病医院
北京最好的肝病医院
税务律师
偷税案件
增值税案件
离子风机
离心风机
屋顶风机
排烟风机
轴流风机
射流风机
诱导风机
斜流风机
风机
工业风机
管道风机
上虞风机
隧道风机
离心风机箱
零序电流互感器
剩余电流检测探头
微孔滤膜
壁挂锅炉
联网报警
无线联网报警
honeywell传感器
honeywell防爆开关
honeywell限位开关
honeywell微动开关
honeywell钮子开关
honeywell安全开关
honeywell安全光幕
honeywell超声波传感器
honeywell密封开关
honeywell军用开关
microswitch开关
Lsxa3k
1nt1
914ce
14ce
lsa1a
hmr2003
hmc1021z
szl-wl