What Will Rush, Hugh Say if McCain Wins?
Certain conservative opinion makers are not pleased.
Rush Limbaugh, Hugh Hewitt, much of the roster at the National Review and many (but certainly not all) of their more conservative talk radio and blogger colleagues are beside themselves at the prospect that one of the Republican contenders they deemed to be “not conservative” might be nominated. As Mike Huckabee won Iowa, John McCain took South Carolina and Fred Thompson bestirred himself to draft a note withdrawing from the race, the fretting has intensified. How could the voters reject their advice?
There are a few explanations the dismayed conservative punditocracy might use to explain their apparent disconnect with Republican voters.
One is that the electorate has not rejected their advice about what constitutes an unacceptable candidate. Voters are simply rejecting the flawed candidates who were poor standard-bearers for conservatism. This scenario seems eminently reasonable given that the pundits’ favored contenders were in fact so terribly hobbled by their own shortcomings.
Mr. Thompson’s ideas were not a problem. His own indifference and lack of organizational prowess were. He had Social Security and national security plans. He unfortunately lacked the energy and the willingness to put up with the indignities of campaigning.
As for Mr. Romney—who may still win, but who has underperformed in the early going—he certainly was a dutiful spokesman for every possible item on the conservative wish list, but perhaps he was a bit too dutiful. His penchant for pandering grew to ludicrous proportions as he not only reversed himself on a long list of policy positions but cooked up a distinctly unconservative proposal for rescuing Michigan’s auto industry just in time for its primary. When he finally reverted to the “real” Mitt Romney—an optimistic businessman with no compunctions about directing an activist government—it was clear that even his newly minted conservative persona was in a Bain-like turnaround.
Who could blame voters for failing to rally to either of these causes?
Another would be that the conservative punditry actually “won.” Mr. McCain has been getting stronger, they would argue, by embracing conservative positions in order to gain the nomination. Mr. McCain confessed that he had learned the lesson about immigration reform, that border control is essential before pursuing any legalization plan for those already here. He promised to retain the Bush tax cuts. He embraced his support of gun rights and touted his pro-life voting record. This, the conservatariat could contend, and not Mr. McCain’s global-warming ruminations or his role in the Gang of 14, is what helped him win.
There is some truth to this. We saw that starting with his South Carolina victory speech; continuing with his Florida ads, Mr. McCain did stress conservative themes and reach out to the base on many of its favored issues. (This explanation does, however, leave open the question as to why the conservative pundits opposed Mr. McCain so vehemently in the first place.)
But it may simply be that the Republican electorate (or at least enough of it to select a nominee) may not be as ideologically pure as the conservative pundits might prefer. Perhaps many Republican voters really do think global warming should be addressed. It could be that lots of Republican voters like tax cuts but want them accompanied by good old-fashioned budget cuts. It may be that when they’re not in the throes of an impassioned immigration debate, many Republican voters wouldn’t mind eventually legalizing millions of immigrants, so long as the border is sealed first. And frankly, G.O.P. primary voters simply may find Mr. McCain’s heretical support for campaign finance reform a lot less significant than personal character traits like honesty, courage and persistence.
Now, nervous pundits may be spared their embarrassment if Mr. Romney can survive Florida and Super Tuesday. However, if he does not, they will have to mull over the choices to explain why their favored sons failed. I suspect that rather than confess that Mr. McCain was not so bad to begin with, or that Republican voters as a whole are less ideologically rigorous than their core listeners and readers, they’ll suggest that the outcome was all due to their endorsees’ personal and tactical shortcomings.
A few may even author rebuttals to their own endorsements. After all, pundits always get the last word.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Another reason that Rush is so unhappy: He reads the match-up polls, knows that McCain is the one GOP candidate who can beat Hillary, thus depriving him of a treasure trove of "feminazi" material (and sponsor dollars) for his talk show over the next four years.
The GOP establishment rallied around a candidate in Romney who doesn't connect with people, perhaps because they don't believe him. When Rush, Sean, and others decided to discredit the accomplishments and distort the record of Mike Huckabee, the base was left with nowhere to go.
There may not be a perfect candidate, but the GOP does well when it nominates a Governor who connects with real people - just ask the Reagan Democrats. But, come to think of it, the establishment didn't want Reagan either.
There is still time to rally around a conservative. Romney and Thompson had their chance and couldn't connect. Prove the pundits wrong: get behind Mike Huckabee.
Even though the pundits don't want to admit it...Mike Huckabee is THE true conservative still standing.
Is now, always has been pro life.
Is now, always has been pro second amendment.
Is now, always has been pro family less government control.
Is now, always has been pro fence and anti-sanctuary city.
Is now, always has been pro Main Street and anti regulation and litigation.
Is now, always has been for lower taxes and pro the Fair Tax (increased productivity, more competitive globally, everyone in the economy participates and abolishment of the IRS)
Is now, always has been the most experienced executive in the race.
Is now, always has been the only candidate with experience running in a Democrat (Clinton) environment.
Is now, always has been the best communicator/connector with the people.
If they would use their heads and not their prejudice (Southern Christian named Huckabee) they would not destroy themselves.
I have been listening to Rush for 18 plus years. Listened to Sean and Laura Ingram and watched Fox News exclusively I don't anymore.
Think about it.
I think it's a media myth that McCain can beat either democrat. Why go liberal light when you can have the real thing.
McCain is a less intelligent Bob Dole and he'll get clubbed in the general.
Republican voters are gravitating towards McCain based on electability. The SC Rep primary debate featured a focus group. I found it very telling that the overwhelming majority of that group stated electability as the key factor in voting for a candidate. The candidate they identified as most electable was McCain. I believe that is carrying over to other elections. One must admit, that this year's presidential field is very weak overall (both parties). Throw out emotion and name reconition and critically anaylze this. It's a weak field. The "most experienced" candiate with relavent experience was Bill Richardson (D). I thought the strongest candidate that could have been fielded was Dem - Mike Warner (former Gov of VA), but he did not run.
As far as talk radio is concerned - don't worry - it will be as strong as ever. Talk radio ratings continue to soar while newspaper, network news, and CNN ratings continue to fall.
Prediction - Hillary vs McCain. McCain wins presidancy (independants and hispanics will make the difference). Dems and Reps will vote straight down party line no matter who's running.
At this point in 1996, public opinion polls indicated that Dole was the guy who could beat Bill Clinton, too.
Republicans win the presidency when they present a clear, stark, unambiguous contrast to their Democrat opponent. This was Ronald Reagan's very simple lesson and gift to the GOP. It's utterly amazing how consistently the party forgets it.
McCain will be slaughtered in November, because the American public would rather elect a real Democrat to the presidency than a fake Republican who would govern like one.
As a former listener to Rush- many years-, and a former constant viewer of Fox News, I am amused at the discomfiture of the "conservative media" lions. They had a conservative, articulate, experienced, candidate- Mike Huckabee- right before their eyes! Their dismissive and insulting deprecation of the former Ark. governor has now produced the prospective nomination of their least favorite candidate- John McCain. Indeed, the base had nowhere to go after Rush, Sean et al finished destroying Mike Huckabee. So we will have McCain and, with magnificent irony, probably have also the dismissed Ark. governor as VP! Take that Rush and Sean, and when the Huck finishes four or eight years as McCain's VP, he'll be odds on for the top job. Get used to it- payback is tough!
I don't think John McCain needs to approval of the neo-cons. As a moderate Republican, I'm rather *glad* he doesn't have it. I love how people like Rush Limbaugh and Tom Delay claim that John McCain is going to destroy the Republican party and sully its reputation. Ironic, much?
McCain is a good man and a good leader and he WILL WIN, much to the dismay of these far-right know-it-alls.
I can't believe I am bearing witness to this.
Let start with Hukabee.
1. The first mission of the federal government is to protect the homeland. Huckabee does not embrace a strong military. If anything he's weaker than Hillary Clinton in this regard.
2. The media will have a field day destroying an evangelical Christian. I can hear the questions on CBS This Morning and All Things Considered now..."So uhh Governer Huckabee tell us about the Garden of Eden...
John McCain
1. Big pals with Hillary Clinton. What does this tell you?
2. Co author of McCain Feingold
3. Pro immigration
4. Can we as conservatives trust this whacko?
My money is on an electable candidate when we eventually take on the Democrats.
McCain vs Hillary? I can't tell the difference between the two of them on social issues.
Huckabee vs Hillary? ..."So uhh Governer Huckabee tell us about the Garden of Eden"...
Clearly the best chances nationally are with Romney. He wasn't my first choice, but he's the only one the Republicans have left.
Ok.
Here is an alternate explanation. These talk radio hosts has constantly insulted the intelligence of their listeners. They assume they can't think for themselves hence needed to be guided on how to process informations. They have self inflated their importance since their pivotal roles in 1994. Now, their relevance is in question.
Rush for example has constantly berated McCain for years. He has lampooned him and castigated him with the same vehemence as the Clintons. If McCain gets the nomination, its empirical proof that his influence has diminished. So what would Rush do if McCain is crowned new GOP leader? Is he going to berate the newly minted leader of his party and conservative movement? Of course not. Rush is a Reagan deciple and he understands the 11th commandment. So he would have no choice but to shut up and grudgingly carry McCain's water. In other words, kiss McCain posterior.
As for Hannity and the rest, they'll take their cue from Rush and do the same. They always do.
Long live president McCain.
I am so sick and tired of These "COnservative talk show hosts (Who until recently I enjoyed listening to on a regualar basis) Calling Mike Huckabee a Liberal. It is very sad the hipocrosy. I am 100% behind Huckabee, and am a Bush supporter. These "Established" Talk radio hosts tear down a candidate like Huckabee for raising the State Sales tax 0.125% to improve the state's park system and natural resources. Whoa.... 0.125% tax hike?! Slow down there Mike! He's GONE CRAZY! Who needs Natural Resources anyway. They tear him down and distort his record. On the very next hand however they will defend George W. Bush until they are blue in the face.
What I submit is this: Under the same standards that they call Gov. Huckabee a Liberal they must also call George W. Bush a Liberal.
- Bush is horrible on Border Security and was pro amnesty.
- Bush has spent a ludicris amount of money during his two terms in office. I understand that most of it is due to the war, but sometimes running a government costs tax payers money, oh but wait that is one of Mike Huckabees "Liberal Excuses, and Rhetoric"
-Bush has grown this government the most since any President since WWII, going directly against "The Government that Governs the Best Governs the Least" One of their favorite qoutes.
I don't think The Honorable George W. Bush is a liberal, and I certainly don't think that of Mike Huckabee either. But the "Washington elite"can't have it both ways. Maybe the pundits on the right ought to go back to being "Fair and Balanced?"
-
"But it may simply be that the Republican electorate (or at least enough of it to select a nominee) may not be as ideologically pure as the conservative pundits might prefer."
"It could be that lots of Republican voters like tax cuts but want them accompanied by good old-fashioned budget cuts"
I'm confused....Out of control budget busting, which is usually accompanied by a healthy K Street greasing of palms, is one of the trademarks of the so called Moderate RINO (read less ideologically pure republicans).
Your stated combination of tax cuts along with, hopefully severe, budget cuts is at the core of what the Reagan Revolution was all about! It is one sure way to divest power from the Federal and return it to the people where it belongs. Reaganism 101. Hardly the doctrine of the moderates McCain covets. That combo is pure hard core Conservatism at its best.
Peggy Noonan is on the money...we are reaping the fruit born by electing a Conservative In Name Only to the W.H.. The much loathed "True" Conservatives must now fish or cut bait. Personally gazing upon what stands as the RNC/GOP today, post Bush's transforming it, one has to wonder if it really is worth saving. McCain, as pres, will be Bush squared and leave what is left of the GOP that might be worthy of attempting to savage a total wreckage.
I find it rather interesting, although not unexpected, that a member of the press would fail to mention the most significant factor in the resurgence of Senator McCain.
I suggest a Lexus/Nexus search regarding favorable media coverage of John McCain compared to any other Republican Candidate.
By their own admission, MS NBC favored the Senator and predicted that most other media outlets would help move him back to front runner status.
Unfortunately, McCain/Finegold places no restrictions on the self proclaimed bias in the national media.
We will see how fast the MSM dumps McCain when their Democrat boyfriend/girlfriend gets back in town.
If McCain wins the GOP nomination...I will vote 3rd party. McCain is a Dem with an 'R' next to his name. Let the Dems win the executive branch and get the blame for screwing up the country. As for Huckabee, I think he is a lying sack of crap. You can't get a straight answer out of him when you ask him a tough question. Giving the Mexican Govt a $1/year lease so they could have a tax payer financed HQ to block deportations of illegal immigrants shows he is not tough on illegals. Ron Paul is great on domestic issues but naive in foreign policy. With McCain and Huckabee being proven liars, I've reluctantly place my hopes on Mitt Romney. I hope he is telling me the truth about how he will conduct the presidency. There are no 'Reagans' in this field.....
Two main differences between the 96 election and this year's.
We are in 2 wars.
There is no incumbent (like Clinton).
The only reason Dole is compared to McCain is age.
If we were fighting a war in 96' then Dole's military service would have been critical.
McCain is conservative on national security, the economy and values.
There will be a clear cut idealogical difference between McCain and the Democratic candidate that should swing in McCain's favor.
The arrogance of conservative talk radio has been rejected - by Republicans!
What has been missed in all this is that Republicans have grown to distain the Conservatives who have hijacked their party!
The rejection of what Rush & the gang want us to do proves that Conservatives are the bi-polar twin of Liberals and neither side will see a happy ending in November. The country - regardless of political affiliation - is tired of the business-as-usual and appears to be longing for someone to govern from the moderate middle.
The bias exhibited on the radio by conserative hosts is disgraceful. As a moderate Republican I resent it and I reject it.
The is Republican, the wind is Conservative.
It is not the other way around!
I think a more relevant question is what will McCain do to talk radio if he wins the presidency. Based on his history, he will not allow their total opposition to him go unpunished. He will want to put them out of business. Can you say 'Fairness Doctrine"? Perhaps something even worse that applies to the internet as well as broadcast?
It's all about integrity and honesty. The conservative party has been hijacked by Republicans who have no fiscal responsibility or conscious. For my conservative brethren who tout Reagan politics, remember he was about fiscal responsibility and spending cuts along with tax cuts.
I don't trust Romney, don't believe Huckabee has the gravitas to lead, and that puts me dancing with John McCain.
Felix, if you want to know the real Willard (Mitt) Romney look at this:
http://massresistance.org/romney/
McCain winning the nomination will indeed, as Rush has said, destroy the Republican party. This is probably more the fault of MSM than anything else, and anyone with half a brain knows that MSM salivates over the idea of JM or MH winning the nomination. Why? 1) It is a guaranteed win in November for the Democratic party(because even if McCain wins they will still have a liberal in the White House) and 2) It proves to them that the majority of the American public is stupid and easily manipulated.
Why don't they just vote for us? I think that this whole 'moving primaries forward' idea has ruined the process. We should have all the primaries on ONE day, no question. Forget liberal bastions that allow people to vote cross-party(would you want a bunch of vegetarians planning a game dinner? I think not), all the MSM hype coverage. McCain will not win in November. The world is going to fall apart and I would rather have it happen under the watch of the Democrats.
If Giuliani backs McCain it will be an interesting Election. There will be four Socialists up for election. Two, Hugo Clinton and Hugo Obama on the Democrat side. Then two, Hugo McCain and Hugo Giuliani in what was the Republican Party. R.I.P.
I normally listen to Laura Ingraham on the way to work and Hugh Hewitt on the way home. I stopped recently because of the consistent invective against McCain. I don't mind that they support Romney, but the harangue against McCain is too much. The primaries are far from over, but it will be interesting to see what they do if McCain wins the nomination. As a moderate Republican, I increasingly fear that the Republican party is leaving me and is becomming the party of the far right with no room for anybody in the middle. It seems that if a candidate or party member doesn't espouse ideology of a nut like Mark Levin, theyare no longer welcome in the Republican party. So much for the big tent.
Why should the choice of McCain as a nominee or election as President effect Rush or Hugh? Honestly, from a conservate view, there are so many targets in Congress, the show material will out live the next generation of conservative talkers. I believe the thing Jennifer is missing is that these two commentators express the basic beliefs of conservatives - and the Republican party is hardly conservative anymore.
It's like calling Hillary a liberal when she is pretty much a Marxists (paraphrased: "I want to take Enron's oil profits and use them to research alternative energy fields") I WANT TO TAKE THEIR PROFITS. - how is this "democratic".
McCain will certainly present a stark choice to true conservatives - myself included. Honestly, there is a dimes worth of difference between the Hillary and McCain.
McCain will do no reaching out. He will see this as acceptance by "the base" of his policies - and he has a snowballs chance in hell of winning next November.
"There will be a clear cut idealogical difference between McCain and the Democratic candidate that should swing in McCain's favor."
While this was true in 2004, how can it be true now, with the majority of Americans wanting to get out of the war, while McCain consistently talks about staying in Iraq and even muses constantly about "other wars" that are coming? It can't be strong to be out of step with 60+% of the American public on arguably the most important single issue of this election.
I forgot to add a fifth point regarding McCain:
5. Will the bulk of the Republican base vote for him? These people are predominantly conservative in nature. not "moderate" whatever THAT is.
Lets say that we face Hillary Clinton in the Presidential election. She is pandering to the left wing kook fringe now that she is running in the Democratic primaries. When she focuses on the National election she will swing right to garner more votes.
What if a "moderate" Democrat ran against a "moderate" Republican?
Again I want you to ask yourselves: "What will be the major difference between Hillary Clinton and her beltway schmooz pal McCain?" The answer will always come back VERY LITTLE if we are honest with ourselves. This might be the first election in history where the Democrat will carry the state of Texas for lack of a conservative turnout. And PARGUYS statement that the national media will dump McCain like a sack of rotton potatos when the race become nationally focused is not off the mark.
1. The base will NOT be energized for McCain
2. The media will treat him well vs Hillary Clinton
3. Whatever your misgivings are about Limbaugh. His instincts are correct about McCain, and he still commands a large audience. You think HE'LL supoport McCain with enthusiasm come November?
Fun to watch the jackals feeding on themselves.
2. The media will NOT treat him well vs Hillary Clinton
In answer to the question posed in the title: Rush will stick to his conservative principles as he always has. What's so hard to figure out about that? When McCain does something he agrees with he'll say so. When not he'll say so. People who never listen to Rush Limbaugh sure have some weird ideas about how he operates. He has opposed quite a few Bush White House initiatives of the past 7 years but I think non-listeners are oblivious to that simple fact. Hugh Hewitt is a strong Mitt Romney supporter and will be upset for a while about McCain winning the nom but will ultimately, grudgingly support whoever the Republican nominee is. Hannity? He's like the guy who comes in the house to fix your washer and starts telling you what Rush said on the radio this morning. Not much insight going on there. The fact that there was no candidate who put all three elements of the Reagan Coalition together is borne out by the fact that the front-runner never gets more than 35% roughly. How that diminishes Rush Limbaugh is hard to imagine. His audience will be #1 in radio whether the next Pres. is Hillary, Obama, McCain, Romney... whatever.
I can't wait for Democrats to win this election (If it comes down to McCain and Clinton, they win no matter who comes out ahead). When they do, I will spend my time developing derangement on every issue, even the ones they are correct on. I will shout that every single one of their policies is a failure, even though I know it's a lie. I will never change my tune, even in the face of empirical evidence. I will do my part to destroy this country, just as they have for the past 7 years. Bring on the civil war.
I,like Rush, am very disappointed that McCain has emerged as the front runner!! McCain is no conservative!! He is pro-Amnesty and supports the Democrats (McCain-Kennedy, McCain-Feingold, McCain-Lieberman). Unfortunately, if he is the Republican nominee, I will have to hold my nose and vote for him. Even though he is bad, he can't be as bad as Hillary or Obama.