Wednesday, February 06, 2008

"The Strange GOP Nominating Victory"

Tony Blankley on John McCain being the likely Republican Presidential nominee: "It would be the first time in living memory that a Republican presidential nomination went to a candidate who was not merely opposed by a majority of the party but was actively despised by about half its rank-and-file voters across the country -- and by many, if not most, of its congressional officeholders... He has won fair and square, but he has driven the nomination process askew."

Barring unforeseen Divine Intervention between now and next November, it seems very likely that I will not participate in a Presidential election for the first time since I have been old enough to vote. As Dan Riehl writes, "For now, we may effectively have two Blue parties in America." I voted for the lesser of two evils for California governor when I voted for Schwarzenegger, but -- especially given how poorly it's worked out in California -- I have no intention of offering a liberal Republican the support of my vote.

The insulting commentary of Beltway pundits like Fred Barnes, who asserts that conservatives need to "grow up," shows plainly that many Washingtonians just don't get it. Someone like Barnes is content for any candidate to win as long as he has an "R" next to his name. However, as John McCain will learn, he cannot spend years insulting conservatives and then expect us all to "calm down" and rally to his cause, which he probably expects if only because we have nowhere else to go.

I suspect McCain is in for another surprise, which is that as soon as he secures the nomination, the fawning media will turn on him. The long-suppressed stories about McCain's anger, profanity, and his ego will start turning up in the press regularly, along with concerns about his age and health. We'll start hearing about the Keating Five again, too.

It's going to be strange and rather sad to sit back and watch this unfold in the months to come.

One thing seems certain, whether the President is McCain, Clinton, or Obama, as of 2012 American citizens will have far less freedom and a far greater tax burden.

4 Comments:

Blogger Dana said...

Laura, thank you for your candidness re your vote. I had considered withholding my vote, too, but concluded that for me I simply couldn't not take advantage of this immense privilege we have.

McCain is not ideal and far from what I had hoped to see as POTUS. But it could indeed be worse, far worse, and will be if Hillary or Obama get in. Life as we know it would change in every corner and in every way and not for the better.

To me, I have the confidence in McCain to be consistent in his pro-life stance and determination to not compromise in any way with regard to terrorism and Islamofacism. Those two issues give me an assurance of my vote. I wish his stance on illegal immigration were more representative of conservative views but perhaps pressure from within the conservate base may facilitate a change.

Its a gamble no matter who we vote in - no one is what they appear especially as our elections are more about sound bites, physical appeal, and the shaping of candidates personalities and povs. I'm willing to take a gamble.

5:28 PM  
Blogger Laura said...

Hi Dana,

I really appreciate you sharing your thoughts. I will be closely considering the views of those I respect -- such as yourself -- in coming months, and if it seems appropriate to do so, I would be willing to change my mind about not voting, although at this point I have difficulty envisioning it.

One of my greatest concerns is that I strongly question the level of McCain's pro-life commitment, which seems to be less important to him than squelching free speech (see stories on McCain v. Wisconsin Right to Life).

As a generally optimistic person myself, I appreciate your hopes that McCain will be influenced by pressure from the conservative base, but I fear that once elected he will lean further to the left, where he is more comfortable -- isn't it strange that he seems to take pride in "reaching out" to liberals but not to his own party? -- particularly as I suspect it's strongly possible he may be a one-term lame duck President due to his age and health. In that case he wouldn't need us for reelection.

I certainly agree it's a gamble no matter who we vote for -- Romney for example was hardly a lifelong conservative, but had the advantage of appearing to *want* to be a conservative (grin) -- as much as I have admired President Bush on some issues I have been terribly disappointed by him in other areas, though I retain my overall respect for him as a person and for the dignified way he has conducted himself in office.

As this most unusual election year unfolds, I hope you and others will continue to share your thoughts as they develop.

Best wishes,
Laura

10:12 PM  
Blogger Ugly Naked Guy said...

Laura:

I haven't been by much lately; has there been any discussion of WHY people are voting for McCain? Is there talk that the media has pumped him up and promoted him shamelessly?

1:04 AM  
Blogger Laura said...

Hi, UNG, good to hear from you! Yes, some of the discussion on talk radio and elsewhere has been about the way the front-loading of primaries in states where Democrats and independents can "cross over" and vote for the Republican candidate, combined with the media pumping up McCain's resulting success, have helped lead to his being the Republican front-runner despite the lack of interest from huge segments of the Republican party, whose votes have been split among the other candidates.

Best wishes,
Laura

11:41 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older